Will The Temple Be Rebuilt?

[Full Quiver]

My question is that if all this took place in or around 70AD then why did John write it down/prophecy years later while on Patmos?

[RamboPreacher]

there are some that believe that John's writing of the book of Revelation can be dated as early as 70 or so.

[beckrl]

there are some that believe that John's writing of the book of Revelation can be dated as early as 70 or so.

The key being some, believe. Most would agree some time around 95-96 in the reign of Domitian. One reason is for John being at Patmos, but in Asia where is seven churches and most are in good heath. If in fact it was in some years before 70AD in the reign of Nero the church would most likey not being so heathy. The chuches appear to been in existence for a number of years.

[Gerald Creasy]

Let see if I can be more clearer, The timeframe:

If I get you correctly you refuse to see anything that happened between the sacrificall death of Christ and the Destruction of Jerusalem and the temple to be the fulfillment of Matthew 24. You do so using some type of time calculation.

But if you use that time calculation you have a host of questions you just cant ignore. Namely the questions I have asked here:

You then ignore the prophecy of of the 1290 days from the end of the daily to the abomination, in which Jesus said, to them to flee at that very moment they see the abomination standing in the holy place. The prophecy of Daniel 12:11

If as you claim the abomination is the continued animal sacrifice of the Jews, when Jesus by his sacrifice on the cross brought an end to the daily sacrifices.

Then one would have to account for the 1290 days of daniels prophecy which in a time frame is percisie. As you claim if this was fulfilled by Jesus per the prophecy you would be assuming that the abomination was set up at his deaf.
My question would be why did Jesus tell his discples to flee to the mountains after his deaf?

I understand your question now. My apologies for my confusion.

As you will remember I said I believe there was a spiritual and physical fulfilment.

If you will study the seige of Jerusalem you will find that it was not destroyed quickly but that the troops laid seige for over three years before they finally destroyed the city.
During that time there was much fighting between the Zealots and various other factions of Jews EVEN FIGHTING AND SPILLING BLOOD in the sanctuary.
There was NO FOOD OR ANIMALS FOR FOOD -not to mention a sacrifice- so much so that even Jewish nobel women were cooking their own children.

This accounts for the time period you mention---my confusion accounted for my previous attempts to answer.

Jesus goes on to tell them that "For THEN shall be great tribulation such as was not since the beginning of the world to THIS time, no , nor ever be"

Look what God said to Jerusalem Before their Babylonian Captivity:

Eze 5:9 And I will do among you what I have never done, and the like of which I will never do again, because of all your abominations.

Or howabout in punishment to Egypt:

Exd 11:6 Then there shall be a great cry throughout all the land of Egypt, such as was not like it [before], nor shall be like it again.

Will Egypt be exempted from the Great Tribulation cause God told them they'd never have reason to cry so greatly again?

Obviously if Ex 11:6 and Ez 5:9 are literally true, then any following trouble can not exceed them. If Matt 24:21 is literally true then it invalidates Exs 11:6 and Ex 5:9.

If Matt 24:21 is literally true then there HAS TO BE LESS THAN 8 people to survive, It HAS to be a tragedy that has not existed since the beginning of the world. When the flood came all of humanity was wiped out except eight people. Since The Great Tribulation will be the worst the world has ever seen the end survival rate HAS to be less than 8 or it wont be the worst thing the World has known.

The Point is that "such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be." HAS to be prophetic hyperbole else the Bible contradicts itself.

Remember Jesus were given an answer to three questions, not one.

That, I believe is a roughshod assumption. I think it is ONE question because it immediately sprang to their mind when he told of the destruction of the temple.

They could NOT of had in mind HIS SECOND COMING...did they even know he was going to leave yet? As late as his arrest in the garden they still did not understand an Idea of a "Second coming" They barely grasped that he had to die!!!!!

And why would they ask about the end of the Planet when he talked about the destruction of the temple? Why would the two be tied together in their minds that that would be the first thing out of their mouths?

If you run the word for world in "end of the world" you see that it is equally translated "period of time" or Age.

The destruction of the temple could only come at the end of the Jewish age....and it DID!

[Gerald Creasy]

My question is that if all this took place in or around 70AD then why did John write it down/prophecy years later while on Patmos?

Not all of Revelations was fulfilled in AD 70. Only parts ---regardless of the date of writing.

[beckrl]

As you will remember I said I believe there was a spiritual and physical fulfilment.

I guess that is what had me confused, both an spiritual and physical fulfilment.

If you will study the seige of Jerusalem you will find that it was not destroyed quickly but that the troops laid seige for over three years before they finally destroyed the city.

So you take the account of Cestius Gallus in 66AD his besieged of the city. He was severely attacked in his retreat and suffered great casualties. I would not say that it was underseige for an complete three years that is the reason Titus came to Jerusalem to regain the control back.

There was NO FOOD OR ANIMALS FOR FOOD -not to mention a sacrifice- so much so that even Jewish nobel women were cooking their own children

I have study it a little and the woman's name you refer to is Mary beyond Jordon of the village Bethezub, and it was her son that she killed for food. This happen on the siege by Titus.

They could NOT of had in mind HIS SECOND COMING...did they even know he was going to leave yet? As late as his arrest in the garden they still did not understand an Idea of a "Second coming" They barely grasped that he had to die!!!!!

I believe one of thier questions to Jesus were " what is the sign of your coming" in reference to what he said in Matthew 23:39

For I say unto you, Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord

It maybe that they understood that he was leaving and would not return unitl you shall say....he that cometh... They may have wanted to know when would that be or at less the sign of that time.

Will Egypt be exempted from the Great Tribulation cause God told them they'd never have reason to cry so greatly again?

Daniel 11:42-45 tells that Egypt will not escape, but will that be to the determined end, I don't think so, for Daniel 12:10 tells that many shall be purifed , and made white. I take that Daniel and Jesus prophecied this time of trouble to the Jews of Jerusalem.

[Brian]

My question is that if all this took place in or around 70AD then why did John write it down/prophecy years later while on Patmos?

Not all of Revelations was fulfilled in AD 70. Only parts ---regardless of the date of writing.

Gerald, can you say what part was fulfilled according to your understanding? If you say "not all of Revelations.........only parts", what parts are you referring to? I mean you do in fact proclaim that all of us who believe in the "future return" of Christ are deceived, don't you?

Can you give an explanation for 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17? Did the dead in Christ already rise to meet the rest of the believers in the air?

Now if you are saying that Jesus "came" in judgment upon Jerusalem in 70ad then fine, I can see that.
"Matthew 24:30 speaks of His presence in Jerusalem's judgment. He authorized it, and brought it to pass. (Isa. 19:1)"
"Similar language is used to describe His coming in judgment against the powers persecuting the saints in Revelation 1:7 (Rev. 19:11-21). None of these "comings" of the Lord prevent a future coming of Christ in bodily form at the end of time!" http://www.bibleanswer.com/ad70_1.htm

The days we currently live in are in fact the "last days". If the last days took place in 70ad then what "time" are we living in now? Are these eternal times? What dispensation are we currently in?
I asked this question before and I believe you said that you were still in the learning process and didn't really have an answer. I don't fault you for that but if that is the case then how can you be so definitive in your believe that the last days happened in 70 ad?

Acts 1:9-11 says that Jesus will return in the "same manner that he left". Are you suggesting that Christ returned on a cloud in bodily form in 70ad?
Gerald, if you could, please read over that link above and tell me what you think. I am sure you have read similar sites but could you take 5 minutes and read through it and tell me what you think? Thanks.

[pastorables]

SURELY even YOU, Pastor Ables, have to have sense enough that this raises some very serious concerns about your Eschatological Belief system.

There is safety in a multitude of counselors. There are much more learned men of God who have believed and taught the futurist doctrine - and even still do.

I simply do my best to walk in His light to the best of my ability.

pa

[JohnDB]

My question is that if all this took place in or around 70AD then why did John write it down/prophecy years later while on Patmos?

There is the line of belief that John wrote "The Revealing" while Jerusalem and the Temple was under siege by the Roman Empire's army and many in the Christian Community had many questions that needed to be answered...Jerusalem was the center of Christianity up to this point with the Temple and all of that....now with the known prophesies stated by Jesus people wondered what was going to come next...

Are we to be as sheep for the slaughter?

John was given this revealing of future times...and it reads like Daniel did to your devout Jew when it was written....no one wanted to believe it contained horrible future events concerning their country's future...but it did.

In the same exact fashion Revelations is about believers...not non-believers. Non believers don't have a care as to what is written there...except as a point of amusement.

[Gerald Creasy]

beckrl I am getting lost in all the quotes unquotes tag so I'll try to answer briefly.

The child eating thing was not the one you mentioned and your summary of the seige of Jerusalem is different that what I have read, most of which comes from Josephus and some from Tacitus I think.
There was a rebuff and drawback but there was also a lengthy seige.

One interesting thing was they crucified so many Jews during this time that they Nailed bodies on top of one another on a single cross (no tribulation there though...glad they were spared the GREAT tribulation).

I dont think you have considered fully my answer to the other questions you have posed: the idea that the question was threefold or the Biblical precedence for prophetic hyperbole.

[Gerald Creasy]

Gerald, can you say what part was fulfilled according to your understanding? If you say "not all of Revelations.........only parts", what parts are you referring to? I mean you do in fact proclaim that all of us who believe in the "future return" of Christ are deceived, don't you?

NO! I believe Christ will Come, there will be an end to sin, there will be a ressurrection.

Can you give an explanation for 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17? Did the dead in Christ already rise to meet the rest of the believers in the air?

Now if you are saying that Jesus "came" in judgment upon Jerusalem in 70ad then fine, I can see that.
"Matthew 24:30 speaks of His presence in Jerusalem's judgment. He authorized it, and brought it to pass. (Isa. 19:1)"
"Similar language is used to describe His coming in judgment against the powers persecuting the saints in Revelation 1:7 (Rev. 19:11-21). None of these "comings" of the Lord prevent a future coming of Christ in bodily form at the end of time!" http://www.bibleanswer.com/ad70_1.htm

I see that Matthew 24 is a coming of Judgement on Jerusalem in the Same way that the churches in the first part of Revelations were warned that he would COME to them and remove their candlesticks if they didnt straighten up.
When he warned those churches was he warning them with The Rapture??
NO! He was warning he would come to dispense judgement.

The days we currently live in are in fact the "last days". If the last days took place in 70ad then what "time" are we living in now? Are these eternal times? What dispensation are we currently in?
I asked this question before and I believe you said that you were still in the learning process and didn't really have an answer. I don't fault you for that but if that is the case then how can you be so definitive in your believe that the last days happened in 70 ad?

The question has to be asked "the last days of what"

Futurism has a reputation of being the LITERAL interpretation of Eschatology and the Bible but you will quickly notice that ALMOST EVERY "time" reference whether it is "soon" "quickly" "shorly" or "last days" are stretched into thousands and thousands of years.

If I read "last days" literally then the lat days LITERALLY were at the time of Christ.

So return to the original question: What was in it's Last Days after the Crucifixion??

Was it the Last days of the Sacrifical System?
Why, Yes! Yes it was!
Was it the last days of Going to a human High priest? The last days of God being associated with a temple and having to go there?
Yes! In those last days he poured out his spirit on ALL.

Those who proclaim that we are in the last days NOW and the earth will be destroyed ignore scripture:

Psa 78:69 And he built his sanctuary like high [palaces], like the earth which he hath established for ever.

Psa 104:5 [Who] laid the foundations of the earth, [that] it should not be removed for ever.

Ecc 1:4 [One] generation passeth away, and [another] generation cometh: but the earth abideth for ever.

If the Earth is Forever How then will it be destroyed?
WATCH HOW QUICKLY the "Literal" futurist will discount these passages.

Acts 1:9-11 says that Jesus will return in the "same manner that he left". Are you suggesting that Christ returned on a cloud in bodily form in 70ad?
Gerald, if you could, please read over that link above and tell me what you think. I am sure you have read similar sites but could you take 5 minutes and read through it and tell me what you think? Thanks.

I believe that the coming of Judgement upon Israel was a coming in judgement in which through God sovereinty (the use of the Roman forces) Jerusalem and the temple were destroyed.

While Josephus is not Bible and I use him for historical things only he DOES describe some heavenly figures appearing in the clouds over Jerusalem at it's destruction.

However, I believe Acts 1:9-11 refers to his final end all coming.

I shall try to take the time to consult your link.

[Gerald Creasy]

There is safety in a multitude of counselors. There are much more learned men of God who have believed and taught the futurist doctrine - and even still do.

pa

This is the excuse of the intellectually lazy. Get out your li-berry card and do some searching. Your "multitude" of "learned men" follow the ideas originated by ONE man John Nelson Darby.


And just how far do you take that maxim anyway?

I saw a multitude of counselors on tv last night, there were thousands of them goosestepping to the tune of one deluded man.

(Gosh there IS a similarity. Now the Jews are the Master Race. And Christians must do everything to see they all get to Israel -by railcar, plane or boat---so they can be slaughtered in piles AGAIN....this time by The Beast.)

[JohnDB]

I am going to agree with you that Darby followers don't know they are darby followers.

Meaning that there is no pre trib rapture.

but the series of books was a nice read...

[pastorables]

Get out your li-berry card and do some searching. Your "multitude" of "learned men" follow the ideas originated by ONE man John Nelson Darby.

John Nelson Darby is the father of a "secret rapture" doctrine, i.e., "two second comings"... This is not what I believe.

Biblical scholars prior to Darby taught and preached that the believers would endure the tribulation of the end times and be carried away just prior to the time of "God's wrath" being unleashed. My understanding of Eschatology would be more in line with these prior scholars, men like Martin Luther and John Wesley.

pa

[bibleguy]

Several mis-interpretations are being discussed on this thread.

1) The 70th week of Daniel.

Dispensationalist doctrine separates that last 7 years from the first 483, and moves them to our time. In Daniel, he names 70 weeks and divides them up thus: 7 weeks, 62 weeks and 1 week. He doesn't describe the first 49 years at all. Then he talks about the 62, and say that when they are finished "Messiah shall be cut off but not for himself." This is an apparent refernce to Christ's death. What of the first 7 weeks? Well, Israel was in bondage for not keeping the 7th year sabbath. They had missed it 70 times from the time they had sovereign rule of the land, and God had forgiven them "70 times 7," but was determined to let the land have her sabbaths. So he put them in bondage. They knew why they were in bondage. Upon restoration to the land, the first 7 weeks would have given them one Jubile cycle to prove that they had learned their lesson and would faithfully keep the sabbath of the 7th year.

Now, the 70th week is separated because of mis-interpreting the terms. Here is where the confusion comes: "And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate..."

So the common teaching is that some "anti-christ" will make a 7-year pact with Israel that he breaks after 3.5 years. But what covenant would he be talking about? Is there a covenant mentioned Daniel? Daniel 11:28-30 mentions "the holy covenant." Why do we automatically assume that Dan. 9:27 is referring to some unholy covenant?

We have a 7 year period after Jesus' death, resurrection and ascension into heaven during which God dealt with the Jewish early church, and after which God sent Peter and Paul to bring the gospel to the Gentiles.

He who shall confirm what covenant for one week? If it is broken in the middle, then it was confirmed for a week. No, God confirmed the holy covenant with the early church saints for one week (Compare to the marriage week of Mid-Eastern custom Gen. 29:27.)

So what happened in about the middle of the 1st 7 years of the church? Acts chaps. 3, 4 and5 describe the great miracle at the Beautiful Gate, and the attack against the disciples by the priests and ensuing events. "Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophets no harm." This is when God rejected the daily sacrifice made at the Temple -- God caused those sacrifices to cease [to be accepted before Him]. Now, the offering of the Apostles had replaced the natural sacrifice. The saints brought their offerings not to the temple storehouse, but rather to the Apostles' feet. And the Apostles were "daily in the temple" because the daily sacrifice had to be offered, just not the one that had been offered according to the law, because God had caused the ministry of the Levites to be invalid, and replaced by the "priesthood" of the ministry of the Church.

The abomination of desolation is another subject. I'll post it separately.