Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 78

Thread: Question

  1. #16
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,814
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question

    Thanks everyone for you post but here is another question

    Even if a future antichrist desecrates a future temple why would it even matter to God as God has-no need for a future temple or a sin sacrifice?

  2. #17
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,626

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    Yes I am aware of those verses but what I was asking is why isn't it mentioned in Revelation? Would that really be missing in Revelation If Revelation is literal and in our future?
    My answer was that if Paul didn't mean a *literal temple,* then certainly a literal temple would not be mentioned in Revelation. In other words, if Paul fully understood that the old temple would be permanently destroyed, then the temple he indicated Antichrist would sit in would be something else--perhaps in a place of presumed authority in God's heavenly temple? Then Revelation would never mention it.

    On the same token, if this was some other corrupt Jewish temple that Antichrist will sit in, maybe it wasn't mentioned in Revelation because it is not a legitimate temple of God, built like Solomon's temple? But I should think a temple would be mentioned in Revelation if a real temple is to be built for Antichrist to sit in?

  3. #18
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    13,920
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    If the events of Revelation are in our future then why doesn’t it mention a future antichrist desecrating a future temple?

    Isn't it supposed to be a major end time event?
    It's not something the NT speaks about. The closest is Christ saying the AoD will stand in the holy place but that can mean something other than the holy place in a Jewish temple...it can mean standing in Jerusalem.

    Barnes:

    Standing in the holy place - Mark says, standing where it ought not,” meaning the same thing. All Jerusalem was esteemed “holy,” Mat_4:5.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

  4. #19
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Pacific NW, USA
    Posts
    10,626

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    Thanks everyone for you post but here is another question

    Even if a future antichrist desecrates a future temple why would it even matter to God as God has-no need for a future temple or a sin sacrifice?
    Well, that's my whole argument against a future temple being built for Israel. I'm not a Dispensationalist, and I don't believe Israel will restore animal sacrifice.

    The point appears to be that Antichrist assumes a position of deity. A "temple" may just be a metaphor indicating Antichrist's assumed position of divine authority. If it is a literal temple, I doubt it would be a temple of restored animal sacrifices. I don't believe Antichrist will ever sanction sacrifices to God.

  5. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,814
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    My answer was that if Paul didn't mean a *literal temple,* then certainly a literal temple would not be mentioned in Revelation. In other words, if Paul fully understood that the old temple would be permanently destroyed, then the temple he indicated Antichrist would sit in would be something else--perhaps in a place of presumed authority in God's heavenly temple? Then Revelation would never mention it.

    On the same token, if this was some other corrupt Jewish temple that Antichrist will sit in, maybe it wasn't mentioned in Revelation because it is not a legitimate temple of God, built like Solomon's temple? But I should think a temple would be mentioned in Revelation if a real temple is to be built for Antichrist to sit in?
    Yes I agree if one was to be built then it would be mentioned in revelation

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    My answer was that if Paul didn't mean a *literal temple,* then certainly a literal temple would not be mentioned in Revelation. In other words, if Paul fully understood that the old temple would be permanently destroyed, then the temple he indicated Antichrist would sit in would be something else--perhaps in a place of presumed authority in God's heavenly temple? Then Revelation would never mention it.

    On the same token, if this was some other corrupt Jewish temple that Antichrist will sit in, maybe it wasn't mentioned in Revelation because it is not a legitimate temple of God, built like Solomon's temple? But I should think a temple would be mentioned in Revelation if a real temple is to be built for Antichrist to sit in?
    Yes I agree if one was to be built then it would be mentioned in revelation

  6. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,814
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by ewq1938 View Post
    It's not something the NT speaks about. The closest is Christ saying the AoD will stand in the holy place but that can mean something other than the holy place in a Jewish temple...it can mean standing in Jerusalem.

    Barnes:

    Standing in the holy place - Mark says, standing where it ought not,” meaning the same thing. All Jerusalem was esteemed “holy,” Mat_4:5.
    Yes but I don’t think that you believe another temple will be built which I agree with you

    Quote Originally Posted by ewq1938 View Post
    It's not something the NT speaks about. The closest is Christ saying the AoD will stand in the holy place but that can mean something other than the holy place in a Jewish temple...it can mean standing in Jerusalem.

    Barnes:

    Standing in the holy place - Mark says, standing where it ought not,” meaning the same thing. All Jerusalem was esteemed “holy,” Mat_4:5.
    Yes but I don’t think that you believe another temple will be built which I agree with you

  7. #22
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,814
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by randyk View Post
    Well, that's my whole argument against a future temple being built for Israel. I'm not a Dispensationalist, and I don't believe Israel will restore animal sacrifice.

    The point appears to be that Antichrist assumes a position of deity. A "temple" may just be a metaphor indicating Antichrist's assumed position of divine authority. If it is a literal temple, I doubt it would be a temple of restored animal sacrifices. I don't believe Antichrist will ever sanction sacrifices to God.
    Yes I don’t believe another temple will be built built either but if the Jews do build one it won’t be Gods temple

  8. #23
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    4,819
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    But there isn’t any mention of an abomination or desecration of the temple in 2 Thessalonians 2 either
    Marty,

    I think your misunderstanding the abomination of desolation. It appears you believe there would have to be a physical desecration of the temple for such an event. However the abomination does not make the temple itself desolate or is a desecration to the temple. The abomination which is the little horn claiming to be God inside the temple causes desolation to the world and it's inhabitants not to the temple.

    It appears that your view based on a flawed rendering of Dan 9 wherein you interpret the one who makes it desolate as the evil one when in fact the one making it desolate is God. Thus the verse should be understood as follows.

    27 And he (GOD) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he (GOD) shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations (BY AC) he (GOD) shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

    In addition, the little horn is claiming to be God thus why would he destroy the very temple in which he uses to do so and deceive the world...….

  9. #24
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    4,819
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    Thanks everyone for you post but here is another question

    Even if a future antichrist desecrates a future temple why would it even matter to God
    Leaving the need for the temple for God's purpose aside, of course it would still matter to God as the AC is successful claiming to be God and will deceive many. Now he would need a temple [of God] for such a purpose to be successful. So regardless if God needs a temple or not it works for the AC.

    God has no need for a future temple or a sin sacrifice?
    This fact of fiction may not have any bearing to those upon the earth in this time. What do they know? What they see is that there is a guy performing miracles who is claiming to be God from the temple/city of God with great power and might. Will it matter to them if there is a temple needed for the KOG or not? Doubtful, again it works for the AC..

  10. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Kansas City
    Posts
    4,819
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    Yes I don’t believe another temple will be built built either but if the Jews do build one it won’t be Gods temple
    How does one claim to be God without a temple? And how does one claim to be God not in God's temple.

    If one tried to claim God from the white house, kremlin, tenniman square, Vatican, or the street corner the guy would easily be a known fraud.

    But what if someone actually claim to be God from within a temple OF GOD and after fire enters the building it starts speaking aka replicate audible voice from God.

  11. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,814
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by ross3421 View Post
    Marty,

    I think your misunderstanding the abomination of desolation. It appears you believe there would have to be a physical desecration of the temple for such an event. However the abomination does not make the temple itself desolate or is a desecration to the temple. The abomination which is the little horn claiming to be God inside the temple causes desolation to the world and it's inhabitants not to the temple.

    It appears that your view based on a flawed rendering of Dan 9 wherein you interpret the one who makes it desolate as the evil one when in fact the one making it desolate is God. Thus the verse should be understood as follows.

    27 And he (GOD) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he (GOD) shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations (BY AC) he (GOD) shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

    In addition, the little horn is claiming to be God thus why would he destroy the very temple in which he uses to do so and deceive the world...….
    I see what you are saying but I Actually I think the one from Daniel 9 and the little horn was Antiochus Epiphanes

    ALS many claimed to be God even without Gods temple

  12. #27
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    Pitt Meadows b.c.
    Posts
    4,814
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by Walls View Post
    It is a major end-time event and well documented. Let us examine Revelation 13:1-7:

    1 "And I stood upon the sand of the sea, and saw a beast rise up out of the sea, having seven heads and ten horns, and upon his horns ten crowns, and upon his heads the name of blasphemy.
    2 And the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.
    3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
    4 And they worshipped the dragon which gave power unto the beast: and they worshipped the beast, saying, Who is like unto the beast? who is able to make war with him?
    5 And there was given unto him a mouth speaking great things and blasphemies; and power was given unto him to continue forty and two months.
    6 And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven.
    7 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."


    Verse 1. Israel are the "sand of the sea" (Gen.22:17). While they were autonomous and a nation they were "sand of the sea shore" - separate from the nations who are called the "sea" in prophecy (Ezek.26:3). But since 70 AD they are overwhelmed by the "sea", but still, in their diaspora, have remained separate and not joined the sea. Therefore, John views the vision from Israel's point of view. All this will take place in Israel.
    Verse 1. The Beast rises from the sea. If the sea is the nations then the Beast is a Gentile. This is in harmony with Daniel 9. He is a FUTURE "Prince" of the "people" who destroyed the Temple and Jerusalem in 70 AD - a Roman.
    Verse 1. Ten horns are ten kings who give the beast their authority (Rev.17:12). They stand in agreement with the Beast that he should blaspheme - that is, claim that he is deity and above Jehovah
    Verse 2. Satan's "Seat" is shown in Luke Chapter 4:5-6. He is a usurper and presently has power over all the kingdoms of the earth. He promised all these kingdoms to the king who would worship him. Christ refuses. The Beast does not.
    Verse 3. The Beast died and is raised from the dead. He can claim immortality - the first king able to do so. Death ends all kings' rule, but now this king seems to be for ever. "The beast that thou sawest was, and is not; and shall ascend out of the bottomless pit, and go into perdition: and they that dwell on the earth shall wonder, whose names were not written in the book of life from the foundation of the world, when they behold the beast that was, and is not, and yet is" (Revelation 17:8).
    Verse 4. In resurrection the Beast cannot die again (Lk.20:35-36). He is seemingly invincible. Coupled with this is all Satan's power. Who can stand against this man?
    Verse 5. The power comes from God (Dan.4:17). Men have heard the gospel of Christ for 2,000 years, yet they reject Him. Now God tests men. He allows another man from the grave to take the Seat in the Temple in Jerusalem. But this man is not Jehovah's emissary. He is Lucifer's. What will men do? If they have rejected Christ Who never harmed anybody, surely men will reject this man? But no! Sadly, they embrace him and this is the final rejection of Christ by both Jew and Gentile alike. God's anger overflows and the Great Tribulation starts.
    Verse 5. But an imposter will not last. God sets the boundaries for this imposter. He may only have rule 42 months or 1260 days or a time, times and half a time - 3˝ years.
    Verse 6. The Beast blasphemes "the Tabernacle of God". Any Temple built in Jerusalem is God's. It is the "City of the Great King" - not a Roman. By occupying this "Tabernacle" the Beast blasphemes (2nd Thess.2:4).
    Verse 6. Who dwells in heaven that could possibly be blasphemed? Only Jehovah and Jesus. Jehovah is a the "Everlasting" and the "Almighty", and Jesus is not only Man but God. Jehovah has designated the God-Man Jesus as king in Jerusalem over all the earth. The Beast, by taking the authority over Israel, Jerusalem, the earth, all kindreds and tongues, and the Temple, is a blasphemer.
    Verse 7. In Matthew 24 our Lord Jesus predicted that a "House" with His "Servants" in it would be broken up (Matt.24:39-51) because the servants would not "watch". This "broken house" has two parts - those who are "taken", and those who are "left". These Two Companies of the House of Gd's servants are seen -
    1. One in Revelation 14:1-5, who are "redeemed from the earth" and stand in the same place as the 24 Elders (Heaven). These are overcomers and sing. They have been "kept from the hour of trial" (Rev.3:10)
    2. One is Revelation 7:9-17, who must pass through the Great Tribulation. They had "dirty garments" that needed washing. They weep and must be consoled. They were "LEFT" on the earth and the Beast made war on them and overcame them.


    The Beast taking up residence in a future Temple in Jerusalem is THE EVENT for men's fate:
    • Israel will embrace him (Dan.9:27) and God pours out "Jacob's Trouble on them
    • The Gentile will bow to him and God pours out the Great Tribulation on men
    • The slothful Christian is "LEFT" and is "overcome by the Beast
    • The Overcoming Christian are "TAKEN as a friend ("paralambano" - Gk) and stand before the Son of Man in the sky

    A future Temple in Jerusalem is no problem. It is a well known fact that all the materials are ready - and have been for years. It can be erected in a matter of months. The problem is (i) finding true Levites to serve. The records were destroyed in 70 AD and it is almost not possible to discern who are Levites and who is the High Priest. (ii) The politics of erecting a Temple next to Al Aqsa on Moriah. These problems are easily solved by the Beast who as "ALL power over ALL men" and would not care one bit about having true Levites serving him.
    Don’t you think that the beast dying and coming back to life is giving Satan the same power as God as only God can raise the dead and has power over death?

  13. #28
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    13,920
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    Don’t you think that the beast dying and coming back to life is giving Satan the same power as God as only God can raise the dead and has power over death?
    The beast does not die and then come back to life. What is written is one of the heads/mountains of this beast/empire received a wound that would have been deadly but was healed before it died. It's only part of the beast that is wounded and that one part did not die and come back to life. It was wounded and healed and it's all concerning a mountain not a person. Always stick to the actual text!

    Rev 13:3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.
    James 4:10 Humble yourselves in the sight of the Lord, and he shall lift you up.

  14. #29
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,774

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    We have very different views of revelation but there is no mention of the word temple in revelation 13 again if it is mentioned in Matthew and Daniel why not revelation? I mean really would the word temple and a desecration of that temple really be missed in revelation if it is such a major event?
    It would depend on your understanding of Revelation 13:6. "And he opened his mouth in blasphemy against God, to blaspheme his name, and his tabernacle, and them that dwell in heaven." The Greek is "Skčnč", an interesting choice. Moses made the Tabernacle after the pattern of the heavenly Tabernacle, so we have to choose which "Tabernacle" is meant in this verse. Does John speak of an earthly "Habitation" or the heavenly? The choice is easy as far as I can see. The root for "Skčnč" is "cloth", which a tent is made of. The Tabernacle of the Wilderness was made from cloth to make it moveable. The Tabernacle of heaven is permanent. So although the next phrase addresses heaven, I judge the Tabernacle of Revelation 13:6 to be the earthly "habitation". The Tabernacle of the Wilderness, and both the "Tabernacle" of Solomon and Zerubbabel, proved to be "re-moveable". They were all destroyed. The Temple, or "habitation" that the Beast desecrates will also be "re-moved", most probably by the earthquake the hits Jerusalem (Rev.11.13). Emmanuel - Jesus Christ, will not ever enter this Temple. His "Habitation" when He returns will be the Temple of Ezekiel.

    As to why the word for "Temple" is not used in this respect in the Book of Revelation, I cannot speak for God for He alone chooses His Words. But if Daniel, Matthew and Paul had already established it, I would not repeat it. The Book of Revelation is built on the rest of the Bible. Those who study Revelation without a good knowledge of the rest of the Bible will be hard pressed to understand it.

  15. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    5,774

    Re: Question

    Quote Originally Posted by marty fox View Post
    Thanks everyone for you post but here is another question

    Even if a future antichrist desecrates a future temple why would it even matter to God as God has-no need for a future temple or a sin sacrifice?
    When our Lord Jesus returns He will physically live somewhere. Since He is Emmanuel - "God with us", His habitation will be the "House of God". I dare say that this "Habitation" is a vital part of the picture. For extremely important reasons, our Lord Jesus could not live in any Temple yet made by Israel. His death and resurrection changed things forever. Ezekiel's Temple reflects these changes.

    The Beast, to be taken seriously as a deity, must live in a Temple. But he is restricted because Israel live in the Old Testament since they still wait for their Messiah. Thus, the Temple that the Beast desecrates will not reflect the changes that our Lord Jesus' Work did. Matthew 24:15 says that the Beast will occupy the "Holy Place". If we take the understanding of Hebrews that this is the Holy of Holies (Heb.9:12, 25), one can immediately see that it is an Old Testament effigy. Christ's death caused God to rent the Veil and so the Holy of Holies under Christ's regime will include the preceding room with the Shewbread Altar, Lampstand and the Altar of Incense. Ezekiel's Temple reflects these changes whiles any Temple built by Israel will not. So the Beast will occupy an out-of-date Temple.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 5 users browsing this thread. (2 members and 3 guests)

  1. Shimatoree66,
  2. marty fox

Similar Threads

  1. Question?
    By bondservant4him in forum Young Adults Fellowship
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: Jan 18th 2010, 08:01 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •