When Will the Third Temple Be Built

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

How can that be when not every person on earth has a television?

I guess the third worlders miss out on the event, not too many Hatians are sitting down watching television right now let alone electrcity.

I see this eschatology is Americancentric.

In Jesus name

Brother Benincasa

www.OnTimeJournal.com

Now I can see how you have missed the boat. You probably do not think the end time stuff has anything to do with the USA. You probaably do not not think the eagle of Rev. 12 is talking about the good old US of A. No wonder you don't seem to get it. You probably think it was for those to whom it was addressed too. Whew! Such logic. Imagine that, Revelation was a letter written to those that recieved it and it was in fact a letter to them for them back then and not to a future country (USA) that knows it is all about them.
I could go on but I am pretty much just
(heavy on sarcasm)

[Evang.Benincasa]

Originally Posted by Bowas

Now I can see how you have missed the boat. You probably do not think the end time stuff has anything to do with the USA. You probaably do not not think the eagle of Rev. 12 is talking about the good old US of A. No wonder you don't seem to get it. You probably think it was for those to whom it was addressed too. Whew! Such logic. Imagine that, Revelation was a letter written to those that recieved it and it was in fact a letter to them for them back then and not to a future country (USA) that knows it is all about them.
(heavy on sarcasm)

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Evang.Benincasa

And they say all I do is look for a fight? Good grief.

I just LOVE talking to you, Benny. I think we're becoming best friends!

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by mfblume

My point was not to prove they are either future or not, but to show the basis people use to demand they're future is faulty. Since these details were taken at face value, and since such literal events never occurred, literalists have always used that as their basis to say Rev. is future. I just showed that is faulty reasoning. And this removes the grounds saying that these things did not yet occur. It makes us realize we have to look for some other proof they did not occur. And the fact is they could very well have been fulfilled when we realize we did not have to look for literal fulfillments. This brings on an entirely whole new approach to interpreting Revelation. I think my series of posts PROVED THAT.

Hardly anyone ever wants to do this, but the BEST way to discuss views on Revelation is to discuss the MANNER OF INTERPRETATION rather than the interpretations themselves.




No problem. But that was not my point in bringing up Zech 4. The point was WHY does Rev 11 point us to Zech 4?


I agree. Not my point, though.



I agree. However, since Rev 11 makes references to Joshua and Zerubbabel in Zech 4 and also Moses and Elijah in Exodus and Kings, we know it is error to pawn it off as easy as saying they have to be Moses and Elijah. So why would Moses, Elijah, Zerubbabel and Joshua be implied in this prophecy? These are the questions we must ask and use in determining their identities. I only ask you why you do not deal with those facts in your assessments. And if you can realize we have to deal with them, and that they somehow are showing us the truth of the prophecy's understanding, then you may also consider that your own viewpoint has been offbase.

I will say this. If you intend to try to learn what purpose Moses, Elijah, Zerubbabel and Joshua the high priest have in this prophecy, and seek to come up with an explanation, you will find people think you are off the wall, too, since they never stopped to consider such details. And without considering these details, you'll get the popular idea, since most people do not bother to deal with the entire prophecy.

My strongest point is all the AT HAND references in Revelation coupled with the overwhelming point that Rev 11 predicted the exact time it took Rome to besiege Jerusalem. We work from the easiest parts to understand and interpret the harder parts.

I know that the spirit and power of Elijah rested on John the Baptist. Could it be speaking of the spirit and power of Moses and Elijah resting on the church as a whole? What we see is the church militant in the two witnesses and the church's persecution and revival.

Thoughts?

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Aquila

I know that the spirit and power of Elijah rested on John the Baptist. Could it be speaking of the spirit and power of Moses and Elijah resting on the church as a whole? What we see is the church militant in the two witnesses and the church's persecution and revival.

Thoughts?

That could very well be it!

When I said the two witnesses were SPIRIT AND TRUTH, I meant that through the church's ministry SPIRIT AND TRUTH worked, and we are not meant to take this as two individual human beings. When Jerusalem was under siege for 42 months, the church was absent, so the SPIRIT AND TRUTH ministering through the church was dead, so to speak. The 42 months and the 3.5 days are synonymous in this prophecy. 42 months saw the siege occur as the Gentile power of the world, ROME, trampled the city, and the 3.5 days the 2 witnesses lay dead are the same 42 months or 3.5 years. With the church fled to Pella, since they took Matt 24's directions for them to flee when Rome came to the city, the witnesses were dead in the city.

[mfblume]

What is interesting about Revelation 11 and the reference to THE two olive trees in Zechariah 4, is that Joshua the High Priest and Zerubbabel the governor were the two witnesses WHO RESTORED THE TEMPLE after Babylonian exile. And Revelation shows a TEMPLE portraying God's people whom the Gentiles (Roman armies) cannot touch since the church fled the city, and the OUTER COURT standing for the entire city Jerusalem.

John is not shown a literal temple. The temple he sees is SYMBOLIC of the people of God. Notice that IT IS MEASURED. Measuring something always occurred to indicate ownership in the Bible. And the outer court is NOT measured. The reason given for not measuring it is that it is given to the GENTILES TO TREAD THE CITY DOWN. So, the outer court represents THAT WHICH IS NOT GOD'S PROPERTY, the city of Jerusalem who rejected Christ. Just as the temple had a COURT OF THE GENTILES, in this vision the outer court represents the territory the GENTILES FORCES are allowed to destroy at God's permission. But the actual TEMPLE, that stands for the CHURCH, is measured and off limits to the Roman armies.

Can we see that the lack of measuring the outer court to allow the Gentiles to tread Jerusalem under for 42 months shows us that the temple and outer court in the vision was not an actual temple, but a symbolic one of the two distinctions of Church and Jerusalem?

It's as though the vision is saying that THERE IS A NEW TEMPLE that is RESTORED in the sense Zerubbabel and Joshua restored one after the exile from Babylon. I think that is why the reference in Rev is made to Zech 4, the time when the two men restored the temple. The PHYSICAL temple in the first century was no longer the Temple of God. The true temple is the church.

[berkeley]

Someone commented about the "eagle". Isn't the correct interpretation "vulture" in the stead of "eagle?" Hmm... that would change a lot, no?

[Dedicated Mind]

preterism has no effect on the facts on the ground.

http://signsofthelastdays.com/archiv...-of-the-temple

[TK Burk]

Originally Posted by Dedicated Mind

preterism has no effect on the facts on the ground.

http://signsofthelastdays.com/archiv...-of-the-temple

Quoted from the above link's article:

So when will this Temple be built?

According to Glick, it will depend on when the Messiah shows up.....

''It could well be tomorrow, but it might be another 100 years, or even 400 years.''

Wow, it says that Temple will be built as soon as the "Messiah shows up"...oh wait...didn't the true Messiah already show up a couple thousand years ago? And didn't He say His visitation would include the building of the true Temple for God? And wasn't that Temple said to be created from men and women, rather than from bricks and mortar? I guess this true Temple is why there is no scriptures or need for a new manmade Temple to ever be built again.

[Scott Hutchinson]

If the records were destroyed,when the temple was destroyed at the siege of Jerusalem,how could anyone trace their lineage to see if they qualify to be a priest,cause you can't have the temple without the priesthood ?