Posted on 02/08/2011 7:00:11 AM PST by topcat54
Likewise the prophecy in Zec 10 was also regarding the Nation Israel and the land given to Abraham. The prophecy in Zec 12 is regarding the nation of Israel that did not recognize the Son, that suddenly in that day will.
I am serious that GOD does not check with us to make sure we agree our interpretation to plan his future events.
Does God have in plan a future temple? I would have to say I’m not 100% sure, but I lean toward yes.
When would it occur, timing wise? 2-3000 years after the destruction of the last temple would be a good guess.
So, I am serious that it is a guess.
Now let me ask you -— what do you KNOW vs what are YOU guessing?
Let me ask this — do you think God has abandoned Israel?
I don’t argue with folks who thinks God breaks his promises.
I’m sure that all makes perfect sense to one unschooled in NT theology. But it is not the theology of Jesus, Peter, and Paul.
God has absolutely not abandoned Israel, since both Jews and gentiles are today counted among the true children of Abraham.
Do you believe that God has two separate and distinct “chosen people” today?
True. And it’s also true that God doesn’t tell us one thing and expect us to think something completely different.
Does God have in plan a future temple? I would have to say I’m not 100% sure, but I lean toward yes.
Based on the testimony of the NT as the infallible interpreter of the old, I’m confident in saying there will be no future carnal temple in Jerusalem or anywhere else that is divinely sanctioned.
When would it occur, timing wise? 2-3000 years after the destruction of the last temple would be a good guess.
Since guessing is all you have to go on, I guess that will have to do. Why not 10,000 years, or 10 million? It’s just a guess.
Now let me ask you -— what do you KNOW vs what are YOU guessing?
I avoid guessing when it comes to theology. I suspect it is irritating to God.
Then tell me what Jesus Peter and Paul would say about the following passages.
Zec 12:9 And it shall come to pass in that day, [that] I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem. Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for [his] only [son], and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for [his] firstborn. Zec 12:11 In that day shall there be a great mourning in Jerusalem, as the mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddon.
Lev 26:43 The land also shall be left of them, and shall enjoy her sabbaths, while she lieth desolate without them: and they shall accept of the punishment of their iniquity: because, even because they despised my judgments, and because their soul abhorred my statutes. Lev 26:44 And yet for all that, when they be in the land of their enemies, I will not cast them away, neither will I abhor them, to destroy them utterly, and to break my covenant with them: for I [am] the LORD their God. Lev 26:45 But I will for their sakes remember the covenant of their ancestors, whom I brought forth out of the land of Egypt in the sight of the heathen, that I might be their God: I [am] the LORD.
You are correct, you don't see the point.
A few cnp's from an article, let me know if you are interesting I can post a link.
"Preterists teach that the Book of Revelation is primarily a prophecy about the Roman war against the Jews in Israel that began in a.d. 67 and ended with the destruction of the Temple in a.d. 70. In order for Revelation to be a prediction of the future (Rev. 1:1, 3, 11, 19; 22:6-10, 16, 18-20) and if it was fulfilled by August a.d. 70, then it had to have been written by a.d. 65 or 66 for the preterist interpretation to even be a possibility."
"The futurists interpretation is not dependant upon the date of Revelation since it does not matter when these events take place since they are still future to our own time. However, the date of Revelation is essential to the preterist position and explains why they are so focused upon defending an early date."
That is a picture of the true Jerusalem...the Church.
Zechariah goes on in 13:1 to explicly prophesy about the cleansing from sin and impurity i.e. Christ's death.
The New Testament makes clear that God's people (those with faith...the church in the new age) are the fulfillment of Israel...thus the language of Israel used here. Some Jews were included but not all. The Church is the true Israel.
They would say, look to Jesus Christ (Luke 24:27). It’s not about land, and it’s not about politics. It’s about Christ; the true Israel of God and the true Temple of God. All that old covenant stuff were just types of Christ. If you don’t get that then you don’t understand the Bible.
And the people of God today are counted among that same temple and holy nation.
If anyone defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are. (1 Cor. 3:17)Don’t be trapped by the same errors that trapped the first century Jewish leadership into denying the Messiahship of Jesus Christ. They were looking for the same “land reclamation” solution as modern day futurists. Their Israel was entirely carnal, thinking Rome was their enemy. They wanted carnal redemption. They missed the boat, and were punished in their unbelief.And what agreement has the temple of God with idols? For you are the temple of the living God. As God has said: "I will dwell in them And walk among them. I will be their God, And they shall be My people." (2 Cor. 6:16)
But you are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, His own special people, that you may proclaim the praises of Him who called you out of darkness into His marvelous light; (1 Peter 2:9)
I’m sorry to say that anyone who reads the OT prophets and does not see Jesus Christ is reading them carnally.
The passage then speaks of repentance...if they repented they would be brought back. They did repent and God brought them back in 536 B.C.
Each passage needs to be taken in context. Some are Messianic prophecies...some are prophecies which were fulfilled in history.
Preterists like to misuse Luke 21:20-24 and say that all of Matthew 24 was a prophecy of the Roman conquest in a.d. 70. Dr. Randall Price has noted six major differences between the a.d. 70 Temple and the Temple of the future tribulation period spoken of in Matthew 24. During this time Jesus speaks of a signal event connected with the Temple - its desecration by an abomination which was prophesied by the Prophet Daniel (Matthew 24:15; Mark 13:14). What Temple is being spoken of here by Jesus? Was the Temple that was to be desecrated the same Temple as the one predicted to be destroyed? There are a number of contrasts within this text that indicate that Jesus was talking about two different Temples:
1. The Temple described in Matthew 24:15 is not said to be destroyed, only desecrated (see Revelation 11:2). By contrast, the Temple in Jesus' day (or Matthew 24:2) was to be completely leveled: "not one stone would be left standing on another" (Matthew 24:2; Mark 13:2; Luke 19:44).
2. The Temple's desecration would be a signal for Jews to escape destruction (Matthew 24:16-18), "be saved" (Matthew 24:22) and experience the promised "redemption" (Luke 21:28). By contrast the destruction of the Temple in Matthew 24:2 was a judgment "because you did not recognize the time of your visitation [Messiah' s first advent]" (Luke 19:44b) and resulted in the Temple being level[ed] to the ground and your children [the Jews] within you" (Luke 19:44a).
3. The generation of Jews that are alive at the time that the Temple is desecrated will expect Messiah's coming "immediately after" (Matthew 24:29), and are predicted to not pass away until they have experienced it (Matthew 24:34). By contrast, the generation of Jews who saw the Temple destroyed would pass away and 2,000 years (to date) would pass without redemption.
4. The text Jesus cited concerning the Temple' s desecration, Daniel 9:27, predicts that the one who desecrates this Temple will himself be destroyed. By contrast, those who destroyed the Temple in a.d. 70 (in fulfillment of Jesus' prediction)- the Roman emperor Vespasian and his son Titus - were not destroyed but returned to Rome in triumph carrying vessels from the destroyed Temple.
5. The time "immediately after" (Matthew 24:29) the time of the Temple' s desecration would see Israel's repentance (Matthew 24:30), followed by, as Matthew 23:29 implies, a restoration of the Temple. By contrast, the time following the destruction of the Temple only saw a "hardening" happen "to Israel," which is to last "until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in" (Romans 11:25) - still 2,000 years and counting.
6. For the Temple that is desecrated, the scope is of a worldwide tribulation "coming upon the world" (Luke 21:26; compare Matthew 24:21-22; Mark 13:19-20), a global regathering of the Jewish people "from one end of the sky to the other" (Matthew 24:31; Mark 13:27), and a universal revelation of the Messiah at Israel's rescue (Matthew 24:30-31; Mark 13:26; Luke 21:26-27). This scope accords with the prophesied end-time battle for Jerusalem recorded in Zechariah 12-14, where "all nations of the earth will be gathered against it" (Zechariah 12:3). By contrast the a.d. 70 assault on Jerusalem predicted in Luke 21:20 is by the armies of one empire (Rome). Therefore, if there are two different attacks on Jerusalem, separated by more than 2,000 years, then two distinct Temples are considered in Matthew 24:1-2 and Matthew 24:15.6
The above points demonstrate preterist problems that have no resolution in their attempt to cram still future prophecy into a past mold. Details of Matthew 24 cannot be made to fit into a first century fulfillment. Maranatha!
Hey, dartuser, how you are doing? I’d be happy to take a look at it.
As far as I know, I’m not a preterist in any strict sense except regarding Christ’s Olivet discourse in Matthew 24. I’m pretty sure that’s historically the siege and destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD.
I agree that the futurist view isn’t date dependent, but the futurist hermeneutic can be a little slippery when it comes to going from literal to figurative. Sometimes it seems a little like global warming — if it’s hot it’s proof of GW; if it’s cold it’s proof of GW.
I think the Revelation probably has a late date. My pastor who is a solid futurist, pre-trib rapture man often cites the fact that the Revelation is “doctrinally rich”. We can enhance our understanding of soteriology and sanctification from the Apocalypse. This is why I think the book was written: to encourage believers suffering or about to suffer persecution. When we go through trials we understand that God’s plan continues to be worked out no matter what the outward appearance may be or what kind of temporary victories the forces of antichrist may achieve.
In the sense that persecution and apparent setbacks to the Kingdom are always imminent, John could say “...to show His servants what must quickly take place”.
You forgot the part about needing a “revived Roman Empire” the knock your new-fangled temple down.
Given that your future temple is a figment of the imagination, you can pretty much say what you want in that regard, no? Make anything up, as you folks have been doing for 40-50 years now.
I guess you friend didn’t get the memo. Even dispensationalists admit that Luke 21 is about Rome in AD70. And Matthew 24 is the parallel passage.
Let’s take a look at the rest of this nonsense. This is almost too easy.
1. The Temple described in Matthew 24:15 is not said to be destroyed, only desecrated
What Bible is this guy reading?
And Jesus said to them, "Do you not see all these things? Assuredly, I say to you, not one stone shall be left here upon another, that shall not be thrown down." (v. 2)I guess he can’t figure out “literally” what it all means?
2. The Temple's desecration would be a signal for Jews to escape destruction
Same as we see in Luke 21:20ff. “Flee to the mountains,” etc. AD70 stuff.
3. The generation of Jews that are alive at the time that the Temple is desecrated will expect Messiah's coming "immediately after"
That’s just the dispensational spin. We already know he has comprehension problem with the text.
4. The text Jesus cited concerning the Temple' s desecration, Daniel 9:27,
The parallel passage in Luke 21:20 defines the abomination as being associated with “Jerusalem surrounded by armies.” AD70 stuff.
5. The time "immediately after" (Matthew 24:29) the time of the Temple' s desecration would see Israel's repentance (Matthew 24:30),
Huh?
30 Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.I see mourning because of impending destruction coming upon the land and the people. I do not see repentance. Probably another comprehension issue.
6. For the Temple that is desecrated, the scope is of a worldwide tribulation "coming upon the world" (Luke 21:26;
But Luke 21:26 is about AD70. It’s in the context of verse 24, “And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles until the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” More comprehension issues.
That was the Temple He had just left, not the future on He talked about later in the chapter. The preterists would have you believe that the gospel had already been preached to all the world by 70AD.
Matthew 24:14 And this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached in all the world for a witness unto all nations; and then shall the end come.
Then in verse 15 He begins to talk about what will lead up to the time that the end shall come.
2 Pet 3:3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, 4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
As to whether or not I think there are two different “chosen peoples”.
All i KNOW is that in Revelation, I am told of both the Church, and Israel.
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up. (2 Peter 3:10)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.