Quote:
Originally Posted by Esaias
Before the destruction of the Temple, God was already dwelling in people's hearts. Therefore the destruction of the Temple was not a necessary requirement for God to establish the new covenant temple of the church.
But let's say you are right about the idea that "because the Jews could not offer animal sacrifices anymore, with the destruction of the temple" therefore it marked the end of the old covenant. So what happens if, say, they rebuild a temple and start offering animal sacrifices once again? You can say "God won't recognise them" but He wasn't recognising them to begin with according to Hebrews. That is, "the blood of bulls and goats can never take away sins".
But if what you are saying is correct, then a re-establishment of animal sacrifices in Jerusalem at the temple location would necessitate a re-instatement of the old covenant.
One thing I am not understanding though the is the fascination with AD 70. "It became in full fledge with the destruction of the temple and the city of Jerusalem". It seems like, in your view, AD 70 is the big main centerpoint around which everything revolves rather than the death and resurrection of Christ. At least that is how it is coming across to me. Dispies have as the big main centerpoint the Jews and the creation of the state of Israel in 1948. You seem to have as your main centerpoint the destruction of Judea in 70 AD.
Furthermore, it looks to me like you have settled on that date and event as the centerpiece, and then you subsequently stuff everything in to that date and say "the date was sure, therefore XYZ or ABC must have occurred (somehow, invisibly if necessary) at that time." I'm going to be honest, this is not meant to be snarky, but honestly, that sounds to me no different than the JWs and their "Jesus came back in 1914" thing, or the SDA's and their "Jesus began the Judgment in 1845" thing. Just pointing out how it is coming across to me.
|
No It would not, as what man does outside of Gods will does not please God. I they were to build another temple God would not recognize it. The people that call themselves Jews today are just another nation as our we.
The children of Abraham today and forever are those of us of faith in Jesus never to will he go back to the old covenant.
Gal 3:7.. Therefore know that those of faith, these are the sons of Abraham...
Gal 3:14.. so that the blessing of Abraham might be to the nations in Jesus Christ, and that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith...
Gal 3:29.. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed and heirs according to the promise.
If we are Abrahams seed in Christ then who are those that call themselves Jews today? No one.
Heb 8:13.. In that He says, A new covenant, He has made the first one old. Now that which decays and becomes old is ready to vanish away...
Why does Paul say the Old covenant was ready to pass away? Meaning It was still around when Paul wrote Hebrews. Because they were still offering sacrifices in Jerusalem as long as the temple still stood.
Jesus said, "this generation shall not pass till all these things come to pass.
Mat 24:34.. Truly I say to you, This generation shall not pass until all these things are fulfilled...
What generation and what things? The generation that would see those things that he prophesied, namely the temple being destroyed and the great tribulation. That happened in 70ad.
No place in scripture does it talk about a third temple being built. The temple that John speaks of is the one that was still standing in Jerusalem when he wrote Revelation.
There is much more that I could say but I think this is the jist of what I now believe.
And not I don't believe there is a coming Mark of the Beast.
Threaded Mode
