Latest News: The Great Trubulation


Pages (11): « First < Previous 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next > Last »
Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same
Author Message
ablebodiedman
Member


Posts: 3,641
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #46
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

e-magine Wrote:
abe, Thank you for pointing out that Danial makes reference to first cent. events, but that it is mainly about what occurs in the final part of the denunciation. That is amazing!
Daniel 8:11-12
And all the way to the Prince of the army it put on great airs, and from him the constant [feature] was taken away, and the established place of his sanctuary was thrown down. 12 And an army itself was gradually given over, together with the constant [feature], because of transgression; and it kept throwing truth to the earth, and it acted and had success.
Pilot, "what is truth"

I am seeing this not as a dual fulfillment, but a continuous one that is nor finished yet.


e-magine,

Yes, Jesus Christ in the Olivet Prophecy gave some clues about what it would be like in the end.

I personally think we are now entering the hour of testing which Jesus Christ said would come.

Revelation 3:9-10
Because you kept the word about my endurance, I will also keep you from the hour of test, which is to come upon the whole inhabited earth, to put a test upon those dwelling on the earth.

Once we understand that it is a test the next step is to identify the necessary steps to prepare for and pass the test.

From what I am observing most people are preparing to stockpile food, gold, silver, and weapons in order to survive what is fast approaching. Survival of the fittest, fight to the death, take no prisoners, no holds barred.

Many of these people claim to be awake!

I think a lot of people, including athiests, are beginning to realize that the future is coming upon the entire world like a trap which is fast closing.


Luke 21:34-36
“But pay attention to yourselves that YOUR hearts never become weighed down with overeating and heavy drinking and anxieties of life, and suddenly that day be instantly upon YOU 35 as a snare. For it will come in upon all those dwelling upon the face of all the earth. 36 Keep awake, then, all the time making supplication that YOU may succeed in escaping all these things that are destined to occur, and in standing before the Son of man.”


I think the "hour of test" will determine and expose the condition of each persons heart.

We will see the real difference between a wicked and righteous person entirely manifested.


Malachi 3:17-4:1
And YOU people will again certainly see [the distinction] between a righteous one and a wicked one, between one serving God and one who has not served him.”4 “For, look! the day is coming that is burning like the furnace, and all the presumptuous ones and all those doing wickedness must become as stubble.


If we are awake, then do we understand what is really required to pass the test?


Think about it!


Daniel 8:19
And he went on to say: “Here I am causing you to know what will occur in the final part of the denunciation, because it is for the appointed time of [the] end.


I think these are the people who pass the hour of testing in the final part of the denunciation:


Revelation 7:14
And he said to me: “These are the ones that come out of the great tribulation, and they have washed their robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.



In Christ


abe


the spiritual man examines all things

Jehovah's Witnesses - The Bible Report
The Unforgivable Sin
04-15-2011 01:31 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Interpretum
This Space For Rent


Posts: 1,839
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #47
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Hi Isomam

Thanks, I just noticed your edits.

I also owe you an apology... yes, I probably came across as a bit "snappy" (or "snippy"?) in my reply to you.

I appreciate this whole issue is "thorny", to say the least.

I actually suspect much of scripture is written somewhat ambiguously. Maybe that's part of the whole "word of God is alive and exerts power" thing.

For example, Revelation could clear things up if it was stamped with a time and date, and got a bit more specific! The fact that it doesn't, suggests to me that it's intention WAS perhaps to create controversy :)

I find it fascinating that people throughout the ages (including us) have found their own meaning of Revelation.

I'm listening to an audio of a book called "Making Haste From Babylon", about the Pilgrims who left for America... and what struck me is that they saw THEMSELVES in prophecy. They viewed their new territory as their Promised Land, while the Old World (in Europe) was in terror over a recent comet and earthquake, which they saw as a sign of God's imminent judgment.

It seems little changes in that respect :)

So I think Revelation was perhaps DELIBERATELY meant to sound universal in scope (and therefore somewhat ambiguous), so that every generation could find its own meaning in it.

Anyway, I suppose all these riddles keeps us from mugging old ladies on the street, eh? :)


My Blog: The Prophetic Word

Latest post: Daniel 9 And The Seventy (70) Weeks - How Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled.
04-15-2011 01:39 PM
Find all posts by this user
ablebodiedman
Member


Posts: 3,641
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #48
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Interpretum Wrote:
Hi Abe
Also, why did Jehovah leave the Temple standing for a further 36 years after it ceased to be holy?

And why did the Jewish Christians continue to obey the Law of Moses? "You behold, brother, how many thousands of believers there are among the Jews; and they are all zealous for the Law." (Acts 21:20)

Why did the Jewish Christians (including Paul himself) continue to go up to the festivals in Jerusalem and at the Temple... if they ceased to be holy in 33AD?

The evidence points to the fact that they ceased to be holy ONLY when Jehovah had them destroyed, in 70AD.


Interpretum,

Good questions.

The temple in Jerusalem had been abandoned by Jesus Christ and a new temple established by his constant sacrifice through the new covenant. The temple which the "prince of the armies" established.

Why would Jewish Christians continue to go to the old abandoned, no longer holy temple between the years 33ad and 66ad?

The simple answer is that they were motivated to give a witness to the Jews in order to convert them to the new temple that "the Prince of the armies" established with his constant sacrifice.

In order to become a part of the new covenant and gain access to the newly established temple, repentance and baptism was required.

That is what they did while visiting the redundant stone temple in Jerusalem.

They saved their Jewish brothers in the old temple by introducing them to the newly established temple, which I think is a very nice thing for God to have allowed. It seems the Christian Jews were with one accord motivated to convert their Jewish brothers to the newly established holy temple.

Acts 2:45-47
And day after day they were in constant attendance at the temple with one accord, and they took their meals in private homes and partook of food with great rejoicing and sincerity of heart, 47 praising God and finding favor with all the people. At the same time Jehovah continued to join to them daily those being saved.


In Christ

abe


the spiritual man examines all things

Jehovah's Witnesses - The Bible Report
The Unforgivable Sin
04-15-2011 02:11 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
ablebodiedman
Member


Posts: 3,641
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #49
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Interpretum Wrote:
Hi Abe

Nice try, but scripture disagrees with you.

"Behold, I send my messenger to prepare the way before me, and the Lord whom you seek will suddenly come to his temple; the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight, behold, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts." (Malachi 3:1 RSV)

This was fulfilled in John the Baptist and Jesus Christ, as Jesus himself testifies:

"This [John the Baptist] is he of whom it is written, 'Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, who shall prepare thy way before thee.' (Matt 11:10)

Was Jesus wrong?

Also John the Baptist himself said...

"You yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not the Christ, but I have been sent before him." (John 3:28)

Also at John's birth...

"And you, child, will be called the prophet of the Most High; for you will go before the Lord to prepare his ways..." (Luke 1:76)

John the Baptist was the "messenger to prepare the way before me", and Jesus Christ was the "messenger of the covenant".

He DID suddenly appear at his Temple:

"And Jesus entered the temple of God and drove out all who sold and bought in the temple, and he overturned the tables of the money-changers and the seats of those who sold pigeons. He said to them, "It is written, 'My house shall be called a house of prayer'; but you make it a den of robbers." (Matt 21:12,13)

By what authority did he have to do this? It's because HE was the messenger of the covenant... it was therefore also HIS TEMPLE!

Indeed, if I am to believe YOU, Jesus' actions here were really POINTLESS, because you're saying this Temple was to be rendered useless in a matter of a few months anyway, so Jesus might as well have not bothered clearing out those money changers!

Jehovah's Temple was also Jesus' Temple, because Jesus was the "messenger of the covenant".


Interpretum,

You are wrong.

The stone Temple in Jerusalem was not established by Jesus Christ.

All the temples which have existed are Jehovahs Temple, including the one that the Prince of the armies, Jesus Christ established.

Luke 2:48-49
But he said to them: “Why did YOU have to go looking for me? Did YOU not know that I must be in the [house] of my Father?”

John 2:16
And he said to those selling the doves: “Take these things away from here! Stop making the house of my Father a house of merchandise!”



The first Stone Temple was established (inaugurated) by Solomon. (not Jesus Christ)


2 Chronicles 7:4-5
And the king and all the people were offering sacrifice before Jehovah. 5 And King Sol´o·mon went on offering the sacrifice of twenty-two thousand cattle and a hundred and twenty thousand sheep. Thus the king and all the people inaugurated the house of the [true] God.




The Christian Temple and new covenant was established (inaugurated) by Jesus Christ, the Prince of the armies using his own sacrificial blood, the constant sacrifice:


Hebrews 10:19-20
Therefore, brothers, since we have boldness for the way of entry into the holy place by the blood of Jesus, 20 which he inaugurated for us as a new and living way through the curtain, that is, his flesh,

The Christian Temple is still Jehovah's Temple.


John 14:1-2
“Do not let YOUR hearts be troubled. Exercise faith in God, exercise faith also in me. 2 In the house of my Father there are many abodes. Otherwise, I would have told YOU, because I am going my way to prepare a place for YOU.


It is the only Temple that Jesus Christ has established.

The Christian Temple which Daniel saw thrown down in his vision:

Daniel 8:11-12
And all the way to the Prince of the army it put on great airs, and from him the constant [feature] was taken away, and the established place of his sanctuary was thrown down. 12 And an army itself was gradually given over, together with the constant [feature], because of transgression; and it kept throwing truth to the earth, and it acted and had success.



The final part of the denunciation is all about the Christian Temple being thrown down.


Daniel 8:19
Here I am causing you to know what will occur in the final part of the denunciation, because it is for the appointed time of [the] end.



In Christ

abe


the spiritual man examines all things

Jehovah's Witnesses - The Bible Report
The Unforgivable Sin
04-15-2011 03:10 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Interpretum
This Space For Rent


Posts: 1,839
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #50
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Hi Abe

ablebodiedman Wrote:
The simple answer is that they were motivated to give a witness to the Jews in order to convert them to the new temple that "the Prince of the armies" established with his constant sacrifice.


Well, this is a good answer... and no doubt this was partly their motivation. However, I'd say the PRIMARY reason was even simpler... it was a REQUIREMENT of the Law.

"And it must occur that the place that Jehovah will choose to have his name reside there is where you will bring all about which I am commanding you, your burnt offerings and your sacrifices, your tenth parts and the contribution of your hand and every choice of your vow offerings that you will vow to Jehovah." (Deuteronomy 12:11)

The apostles said that the Jewish Christians were still "zealous for the Law" (Acts 21:20)... and this was a few DECADES after Christ's death.

So the PRIMARY reason they still went to Jerusalem was because they were zealous for the Law, which required them to do so.

Incidentally, I forgot to mention a scripture I noticed last night. The author of Hebrews says some interesting things about the physical Temple in chapter 9.

For one, he refers to the inner tent as "the Holy Place"...

"For there was constructed a first tent [compartment] in which were the lampstand and also the table and the display of the loaves; and it is called “the Holy Place.” (Heb 9:2)

Note, IT IS CALLED THE HOLY PLACE.

That is my point. Whether it was holy or not, it was CALLED "the holy place". That was its NAME... just as the Vatican is called the Holy See... whether or not we believe it is holy.

The author calling it "the holy place" refutes your argument. It doesn't matter whether the Temple or Jerusalem were actually HOLY or not in 33AD... it was CALLED the holy place, and the holy city.

Now, definitely SOMETHING significant happened in 33AD (other than Jesus' death). The author's comment here is very revealing:

"Thus the holy spirit makes it plain that the way into the holy place had not yet been made manifest while the first tent was standing." (Heb 9:8)

What does he mean, "while the first tent was standing"? Well, the first tent blocked the way into the Most Holy, which only the high priest was to enter once a year. We know that, at Jesus' death, the CURTAIN of the Temple was rent in two.

Thus, Jesus' death did not END the holiness of the Temple... it simply signified the way into the Holy Place was now open... to Jesus!

This, it just hit me, is quite a profound thought. This suggests the Temple did not cease to be holy at his death, but was used to continue the whole drama of his death and resurrection, and entry into the Holy Place of heaven.


My Blog: The Prophetic Word

Latest post: Daniel 9 And The Seventy (70) Weeks - How Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled.
04-15-2011 04:14 PM
Find all posts by this user
e-magine
Disciple of Newness


Posts: 2,488
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #51
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

The way I see it is that Jesus did come to HIS temple in the first cent., but it was a temple "not made with hands". He had already stated to the Pharicies that "your house has been abandoned "
..Danial's "final part of the denunciation" could not have in 70 CE, because Paul's mention of "then they will say, Peace and Security,
and sudden destruction is instantly upon them", did not happen prior to the Roman occupation.
..Further, Paul mentioned this at the same time he wrote about the Lords return and the resurrection of the faithful, all at the same time.1Thes 4:17 footnote, to 5:3.
..Danial at 8:14 says that the "Holy Place" will eventually be brought into its right condition. We cannot expect that to happen to the Jewish stone temple.
..By 66CE., the "constant Feature" had already been removed from the Jewish temple. Jesus did not encourage animal sacrafice. He called for "Mercy, not sacrafice"
..Was there a "discusting thing" installed in the "MOST HOLY" by the Romans? No, they were only interested in destroying it.


avatar:
Henry Ward Beecher-1872 Preacher of Plymouth Church, Brooklyn, in his home later bought by C.H. Russell.
He is looking at the Brooklyn Bridge,,,, is it the way into, or, out of Brooklyn for you?
04-15-2011 09:16 PM
Find all posts by this user
ablebodiedman
Member


Posts: 3,641
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #52
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Interpretum Wrote:
Hi Abe

ablebodiedman Wrote:
The simple answer is that they were motivated to give a witness to the Jews in order to convert them to the new temple that "the Prince of the armies" established with his constant sacrifice.


Well, this is a good answer... and no doubt this was partly their motivation. However, I'd say the PRIMARY reason was even simpler... it was a REQUIREMENT of the Law.


Interpretum,

You are correct, it WAS a requirement of the law.

A requirement which was done away with at the time Jesus Christ was resurrected:

Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the Law, so that everyone exercising faith may have righteousness.

Hebrews 10:5-10
Hence when he comes into the world he says: “‘Sacrifice and offering you did not want, but you prepared a body for me. 6 You did not approve of whole burnt offerings and sin [offering].’ 7 Then I said, ‘Look! I am come (in the roll of the book it is written about me) to do your will, O God.’” 8 After first saying: “You did not want nor did you approve of sacrifices and offerings and whole burnt offerings and sin [offering]”—[sacrifices] that are offered according to the Law— 9 then he actually says: “Look! I am come to do your will.” He does away with what is first that he may establish what is second. 10 By the said “will” we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all time.


Hebrews 8:13
In his saying “a new [covenant]” he has made the former one obsolete.

Colossians 2:13-14
He kindly forgave us all our trespasses 14 and blotted out the handwritten document against us, which consisted of decrees and which was in opposition to us; and He has taken it out of the way by nailing it to the torture stake.

The only worship of any value in the obsolete Jerusalem Temple was converting the Jews (who did not understand that the Jerusalem Temple was now obsolete) to the new holy temple inaugurated (established) by Jesus Christ.

Even after converting to Christianity many Jews still did not quite understand that the old temple and laws were obsolete.

Which is why Paul had to explain it in his letters.

Especially to the Hebrews.


In Christ

abe


the spiritual man examines all things

Jehovah's Witnesses - The Bible Report
The Unforgivable Sin
04-15-2011 09:35 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
ablebodiedman
Member


Posts: 3,641
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #53
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

e-magine Wrote:
..Danial at 8:14 says that the "Holy Place" will eventually be brought into its right condition. We cannot expect that to happen to the Jewish stone temple.


e-magine,

That is a very important discernment!

Daniel 8:13-14
And I got to hear a certain holy one speaking, and another holy one proceeded to say to the particular one who was speaking: “How long will the vision be of the constant [feature] and of the transgression causing desolation, to make both [the] holy place and [the] army things to trample on?” 14 So he said to me: “Until two thousand three hundred evenings [and] mornings; and [the] holy place will certainly be brought into its right condition.

To bring the holy place back to its right condition the disgusting thing would have to be removed and the constant sacrifice restored.

Yes, there are some people who still think the constant sacrifice being restored will be the animal sacrifices.

Is that really the sacrifice that will be restored in the temple established by the Prince of the armies?

Or is it this constant sacrifice which will be restored in the Christian Temple:

Hebrews 10:11-12
But this [man] offered one sacrifice for sins perpetually

Are we really going to need animal sacrifices again to obtain forgiveness of sins after what Jesus Christ has already done for us?

Yes, it is difficult to understand!


Daniel 12:9-11
And he went on to say: “Go, Daniel, because the words are made secret and sealed up until the time of [the] end. 10 Many will cleanse themselves and whiten themselves and will be refined. And the wicked ones will certainly act wickedly, and no wicked ones at all will understand; but the ones having insight will understand.11 “And from the time that the constant [feature] has been removed and there has been a placing of the disgusting thing that is causing desolation, there will be one thousand two hundred and ninety days.



In Christ

abe


the spiritual man examines all things

Jehovah's Witnesses - The Bible Report
The Unforgivable Sin
04-15-2011 09:57 PM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Totaldismay
Member


Posts: 1,661
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #54
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

"Well, this is a good answer... and no doubt this was partly their motivation. However, I'd say the PRIMARY reason was even simpler... it was a REQUIREMENT of the Law."


gal 3:10 All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."

point is if they did this because of law they trampled on Jesus blood.

04-15-2011 10:20 PM
Find all posts by this user
Interpretum
This Space For Rent


Posts: 1,839
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #55
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Hi e-magine

e-magine Wrote:
The way I see it is that Jesus did come to HIS temple in the first cent., but it was a temple "not made with hands". He had already stated to the Pharicies that "your house has been abandoned "


So then... why did Jesus quote from Malachi 4:1 in reference to John the Baptist? Are you saying that Jesus was wrong in his interpretation of scripture?

Quote:
..Danial's "final part of the denunciation" could not have in 70 CE, because Paul's mention of "then they will say, Peace and Security,
and sudden destruction is instantly upon them", did not happen prior to the Roman occupation.


Well... who are THEY... and why will destruction come upon them merely for saying "peace and security"? What is wrong with "peace and security" anyway?

This could have been fulfilled in many ways in the 1st century. For example, when the Jews declared independence from Rome, they started minting coins! They probably believed God was on their side. Yet many of them died on the night the Idumeans were let into Jerusalem. Maybe that was the fulfillment, I don't know exactly.

However, I DO know that people here get very excited whenever these two words ("peace" and "security") are uttered by any mainstream political figure. But if Paul meant it to be fulfilled 2,000 years from when he wrote those words, it's incredibly vague, don't you think?

Quote:
..Further, Paul mentioned this at the same time he wrote about the Lords return and the resurrection of the faithful, all at the same time.1Thes 4:17 footnote, to 5:3.


This is a fair point, but is it possible that all the people who died in Christ, say, before a certain date, got resurrected? Why would God leave Paul and the apostles in the ground of the dust for these 2,000 years?... ESPECIALLY as he expected to meet the Lord in the air within his lifetime! That seems like a rather cruel irony.

Quote:
..Danial at 8:14 says that the "Holy Place" will eventually be brought into its right condition. We cannot expect that to happen to the Jewish stone temple.


Why not? There is an entire BLUEPRINT for another Temple set out in EIGHT PAINSTAKING CHAPTERS of Ezekiel! (Eze 40-48).

I think it's very risky being dogmatic about that, given God himself has inspired the plans for such a Temple in his Holy Word.

Besides, the "holy place" here is more likely to be a reference to Jerusalem. Jerusalem WAS restored to its right condition... i.e. belonging to Israel, exactly 2,300 years from the commencement of that prophecy in 334BC with Alexander's conquest of Persia.

Quote:
..By 66CE., the "constant Feature" had already been removed from the Jewish temple. Jesus did not encourage animal sacrafice. He called for "Mercy, not sacrafice"


Well, Jewish historian Josephus records the daily sacrifice as being removed in 70AD (not in 66AD), and the footnote (by the translators) point out that THIS was the fulfillment of Daniel 11's removing of the constant feature.

In other words, it occurred at the HALF of Daniel's final "week".

Quote:
..Was there a "discusting thing" installed in the "MOST HOLY" by the Romans? No, they were only interested in destroying it.


Actually, they were NOT interested in destroying it. Titus wanted to preserve the Temple, but the fire got out of hand and couldn't be put out.

But Titus didn't need to INSTALL anything. The mere PRESENCE of the Roman standards in the holy place was the disgusting thing, standing where it ought not to. (Mark 13).

Incidentally, Pontius Pilate had attempted to bring these idols into Jerusalem earlier in his career, and it caused a lot of bloodshed. Caesar Caligula (the emperor after Tiberius) also attempted to put his statue in the Temple, and the Jews very nearly went to war over this!

The Roman eagle standards were IDOLS... they were "disgusting things" both to God and to the Jews. When the Roman armies first came against Jerusalem, they brought with them their IDOLS.

This is why they are collectively referred to as "the disgusting thing that causes desolation". The Roman armies carried their idols into Jerusalem, and at the same time, they would be the ones causing its desolation.


My Blog: The Prophetic Word

Latest post: Daniel 9 And The Seventy (70) Weeks - How Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled.
04-15-2011 11:08 PM
Find all posts by this user
Interpretum
This Space For Rent


Posts: 1,839
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #56
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Totaldismay Wrote:
gal 3:10 All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law."

point is if they did this because of law they trampled on Jesus blood.


Not at all, as long as the Jewish Christians did everything written in the book of the Law. The book of Acts shows that they DID do it because of the Law.

Jewish Christians were NOT discharged from the Law! Please read the book of Acts again more carefully. Paul agreed with the council held in Jerusalem (Acts 15) and he AGAIN agreed with them in Acts 21 when he went back to Jerusalem.

I recommend you read Acts 21 carefully. Jewish Christians were under the Law of Moses, Gentiles were not.

It was only after 70AD that they were unable to do "everything written in the book of the Law", since they could not go up to the festivals in Jerusalem.

That is really the point at which it became IMPOSSIBLE for a Jew to do everything in the Law.


My Blog: The Prophetic Word

Latest post: Daniel 9 And The Seventy (70) Weeks - How Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled.
04-15-2011 11:14 PM
Find all posts by this user
Interpretum
This Space For Rent


Posts: 1,839
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #57
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Hi Abe

ablebodiedman Wrote:
Romans 10:4
For Christ is the end of the Law, so that everyone exercising faith may have righteousness.

Well, surely Paul did not mean to CONTRADICT Jesus himself?

"Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfill them." (Matt 5:17)

Did Jesus ABOLISH the Law? No. He came to FULFILL the Law. This is the sense in which "Christ is the end of the Law"... not that he ENDED the Law, but that Christ was the outcome... the fulfillment... of the Law.

[quote]Hebrews 8:13
In his saying “a new [covenant]” he has made the former one obsolete.


I notice you conveniently miss of the remainder of that verse, which contradicts what you are saying. Here it is in full...

"In his saying “a new [covenant]” he has made the former one obsolete. Now that which is made obsolete and growing old is near to vanishing away."

It was NEAR TO vanishing away.

Look... anyway, all this is beside the point.

My point is... and the author of Hebrews verifies this in chapter 10... the various places that were sacred to the Jews were CALLED holy places.

Jerusalem was called the "holy place" or "holy city".

The Temple was called the "holy place".

The outer sanctuary was called the "Holy" and the inner sanctuary was called the "Most Holy".

These NAMES did not change after 33AD.

For example, the inner sanctuary of the Temple did not cease being CALLED the "Most Holy", even IF it was no longer holy after 33AD.

Thus, if Paul(?) calls it the "Most Holy" in Hebrews 10, then the Temple area itself could also be called the "holy place"... whether or not it's actually holy.


My Blog: The Prophetic Word

Latest post: Daniel 9 And The Seventy (70) Weeks - How Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled.
04-15-2011 11:34 PM
Find all posts by this user
Interpretum
This Space For Rent


Posts: 1,839
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #58
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Also, one more perspective on the Law from the brother of Christ, James.

James was the head of the Jerusalem congregation, and wrote his letter to the Jewish Christians.

"James, a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, To the twelve tribes in the Dispersion [Gr. diaspora, Jewish dispersion]: Greeting."

James does not tell his Jewish brothers to abandon the Law. Why not? Because by obeying the essence of the Law ("You shall love your neighbor as yourself"... recorded in the Law itself), they were obeying the Law!

"If you really fulfil the royal law, according to the scripture, "You shall love your neighbor as yourself," you do well. But if you show partiality, you commit sin, and are convicted by the law as transgressors.
For whoever keeps the whole law but fails in one point has become guilty of all of it.
For he who said, "Do not commit adultery," said also, "Do not kill." If you do not commit adultery but do kill, you have become a transgressor of the law.
So speak and so act as those who are to be judged under the law of liberty."


Notice he says, "you are convicted by the law as transgressors". His Jewish brothers were still UNDER the law. It was simply that Jesus pointed to the higher standard, still taught in the law... that "You shall love your neighbor as yourself".

Remember, it is this same James that probably wrote the letter to Gentile Christians, that they were essentially NOT under the law of Moses, except for abstaining from blood, idols, fornication and from things strangled.

However, Paul's later meeting with the apostles in Jerusalem (Acts 21) CLARIFIED that Jewish Christians were STILL under the Law, but Gentiles weren't.

Now, maybe Paul was more correct in recognizing the obsolete nature of the Law covenant... but the point is, to the Jews, the Temple was still holy.

And indeed, one way of showing them that Jesus Christ was the true Messiah, would be to point them to the prophecies of Daniel!

With my viewpoint, the 1st century Jews could be shown...

(1) That Messiah was "cut off" at the RIGHT TIME from the restoration of Jerusalem
(Daniel 9)

(2) That the Leader (Jesus Christ) was "broken" in the reign of Tiberius, who was despised and not honored like his father Augustus (Daniel 11)

Indeed, AFTER the fall of Jerusalem they could be shown a lot more! The book of Daniel would then be an OPENED book for them... because after the Messiah was to be cut off, the city and temple were to be destroyed... and also a king would become godlike and war with them... all of which happened... ummm... coincidentally, to the Jews!

With Abe's viewpoint, the 1st century Jews could be shown NOTHING from the book of Daniel... because apparently, none of it was for them.

And even Jesus maintained this illusion, by quoting from Daniel... giving the Jews false hope by REALLY talking about events 2,000 years from their day.

Sorry, but that makes Gabriel incredibly rude (essentially IGNORING Daniel's prayer about the Jews who were in exile)... and Jesus incredibly deceptive.

Or... it could mean Abe is wrong.

It's a tough choice.


My Blog: The Prophetic Word

Latest post: Daniel 9 And The Seventy (70) Weeks - How Daniel's 70 weeks prophecy was fulfilled.
04-15-2011 11:54 PM
Find all posts by this user
e-magine
Disciple of Newness


Posts: 2,488
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Dec 2006
Status: Offline
Post: #59
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

ITPT,
..I know your you're more the historian then I. When I said that the constant feature was removed before 66CE, I ment that the sacrifices were no longer agreeable to Jehovah, not that no one was still offering them.
..Were the Roman standards really idols? Or, were they more like flags?
I Never understood how fire could destroy a mostly stone edifice, and knock down all the stones as well.

I think its an amazing thing that the events in the 1st cent kicked off the fulfillment of Danial, and that the people alive at the time would think it fulfilled, but 2000 years plus the HS, has given us the insight, like Danial said, to understand that the first cent was only the start and a foreshadowing of whats to happen to the Christian temple in the final part of the days.


avatar:
Henry Ward Beecher-1872 Preacher of Plymouth Church, Brooklyn, in his home later bought by C.H. Russell.
He is looking at the Brooklyn Bridge,,,, is it the way into, or, out of Brooklyn for you?
04-16-2011 12:42 AM
Find all posts by this user
ablebodiedman
Member


Posts: 3,641
Group: Registered Plus
Joined: Apr 2007
Status: Offline
Post: #60
RE: Proof That Matt 24, Mark 13, Luke 13 Are Essentially The Same

Interpretum Wrote:
With Abe's viewpoint, the 1st century Jews could be shown NOTHING from the book of Daniel... because apparently, none of it was for them.

And even Jesus maintained this illusion, by quoting from Daniel... giving the Jews false hope by REALLY talking about events 2,000 years from their day.

Sorry, but that makes Gabriel incredibly rude (essentially IGNORING Daniel's prayer about the Jews who were in exile)... and Jesus incredibly deceptive.

Or... it could mean Abe is wrong.

It's a tough choice.


Interpretum,

The vision Daniel saw was in regard to the temple established by the prince of the armies. The Christian Temple!

It is very evident that Daniel was being shown divine things in regard to Christianity right from the start.

When Daniel wanted to know what would happen to God's people in prayer he was told the truth!

Christians are God's people.

No Jew will be accepted as one of God's people until they give glory to Jesus Christ the prince of the armies.

No one lied to Daniel. He was given a very truthful answer to his prayer.

Gabriel did not ignore his prayer.

He further helped Daniel understand what his visions meant and what to expect in the final part of the denunciation.

The temple established by Jesus Christ will be thrown down.

I am convinced that has already happened in very recent times.

Yes, Daniels vision is coming true now!

and

We are getting very close to the end of the 70 weeks when Jesus Christ will return and terminate the transgressions and bring in righteousness to times indefinite.

Matthew 13:42-43
At that time the righteous ones will shine as brightly as the sun in the kingdom of their Father. Let him that has ears listen.


I believe that is when the holy place established by the prince of the armies will be brought into its right condition.

Which now brings us to Daniel Chapter 7:


Daniel 7:27
“‘And the kingdom and the rulership and the grandeur of the kingdoms under all the heavens were given to the people who are the holy ones of the Supreme One. Their kingdom is an indefinitely lasting kingdom, and all the rulerships will serve and obey even them.’



In Christ

abe


the spiritual man examines all things

Jehovah's Witnesses - The Bible Report
The Unforgivable Sin
04-16-2011 02:46 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Pages (11): « First < Previous 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 Next > Last »

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites

Forum Jump: