NoHype
Member
Because of how your post was worded more as an implication instead of a question.
Tribulation
- Thread starter B-A-C
- Start date
Because of how your post was worded more as an implication instead of a question.
NoHype
Member
As regards a future third temple in Jerusalem for the end prior to Christ's coming, that is... the plan in Jerusalem, and has been for a long time by the orthodox religious Jews. And those orthodox group of Jews have the materials ready to build it. But something is holding them back that must be settled in that area, and with the nations. But with the arrival of the Antichrist there, that will change. So Zech.6 could just as easily mean the temple is built under the authority and reign of Christ. But just before His coming the Antichrist will mimic our Lord Jesus Christ in that.
For 2 Thess.2:4 to occur, and the "abomination of desolation" event for the end which Jesus quoted from Daniel, the Antichrist must fulfill that. Thus Hippolytus and other Christian brethren of his era had to have understood this from God's Word since he implied that is what the Antichrist will do, and how the Jews in Jerusalem will be deceived.
For 2 Thess.2:4 to occur, and the "abomination of desolation" event for the end which Jesus quoted from Daniel, the Antichrist must fulfill that. Thus Hippolytus and other Christian brethren of his era had to have understood this from God's Word since he implied that is what the Antichrist will do, and how the Jews in Jerusalem will be deceived.
Travis
Active
I've spent too much of my time looking into these kinds of things in the past, but I still don't really know where I fall on it all. One thing though, wouldn't building a physical temple and offering animal sacrifices there be an abomination in and of itself? I'm not sure if a third temple will or not be built during or before the great tribulation. But, I'm pretty sure it would be offensive, any way you cut it, to God if one ever is built. Is that a reasonable statement?
Strypes
Member
I think so. Kinda like trampling the blood of Jesus underfoot.
God is outside of time as we know it. He knows the end from the beginning. We only see segments. Kinda like watching a parade. We only see one float or band or crazy clowns riding in tiny cars at a time. But God sees the whole thing at once. Sorta like if we were on top of a building and looking down on the parade with bionic eyes.
God already knows that this third temple will be built and what is going to happen there. Some would say He would approve of it but I think because God can take what the enemy intends for evil and turn it around for our good, that is what He will do with this too.
Speaking of the Temple...
I am sorry B-A-C but you are misinformed. Solomon built the first and most glorious temple. It was destroyed in 586 BC by Nebuchadnezzar. It was rebuilt by Zerubbabel who was appointed Governor by King Darius I of Persia.
Not so much tradition but historical. Antiochus Ephiphanes III did trash the second temple and when Judah Maccabees and his band of rebels took the temple back from the Greeks, they had to purify it and a miracle happened. It is the point of origin of Hanukkah, The Jewish Festival of Lights, also known as the Feast of Dedication.
To my knowledge there is only one Jewish Festival that occurs during Winter. That festival is Hanukkah/Festival of Lights/Feast of Dedication.
What happened was...
When the Maccabees were cleaning up the temple after the Greeks had defiled it, they found only one vile of oil for the lamp/menorah that was unopened. The lamp had to burn for eight days for the Dedication and there was only enough oil for one day. And it would take eight days to prepare more oil. It was special oil. Had to be done a particular way. The amazing thing is the lamp never went out. It stayed lit the entire time. How awesome is that!
Jesus was in Jerusalem for the Feast of Dedication. One of the passages you posted above (John 10) tells us so.
"John 10:22 At that time the Feast of Dedication took place at Jerusalem. It was winter, 23 and Jesus was walking in the temple, in the colonnade of Solomon. 24 So the Jews gathered around him and said to him, “How long will you keep us in suspense? If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.” 25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father's name bear witness about me, 26 but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. 27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. 28 I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father's hand. 30 I and the Father are one.”
When King Herod (Herod the Great/ Herod I) expanded the Temple platform in the first century BC, he constructed a covered colonnade around the entire perimeter. The colonnade on the eastern wall was commonly called “Solomon’s Porch”
"Herod's Temple" is a renovation/expansion of Zerubbabel's temple (The second temple). It was bigger than Solomon's Temple but no where near as grand.
I am in agreement. In considering the Passage in Zechariah 6, I do not believe that it is saying that The Anti-Christ/False Prophet are the "them both"
Zechariah 6:13 "It is he who shall build the temple of the Lord and shall bear royal honor, and shall sit and rule on his throne. And there shall be a priest on his throne, and the counsel of peace shall be between them both."
Zechariah was a prophet at the time of the Babylonian Exile. Zerubbabel led the first group of Jews who returned from the Babylonian Captivity in the first year of Cyrus, King of Persia. The date is thought to have been between 538 and 520 BC. In all of the accounts in the Hebrew Bible that mention Zerubbabel, he is always associated with the high priest who returned with him, Joshua (Jeshua) son of Jozadak (Jehozadak). Together, these two men led the first wave of Jewish returnees from exile and began to rebuild the Temple .
Ezra 5:Now the prophets, Haggai and Zechariah the son of Iddo, prophesied to the Jews who were in Judah and Jerusalem, in the name of the God of Israel who was over them. 2 Then Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel and Jeshua the son of Jozadak arose and began to rebuild the house of God that is in Jerusalem, and the prophets of God were with them, supporting them.
I am trying to think of something persnickety to say to NoHype, but he didn't even acknowledge that I said that he might be right. He is wrong, but that is beside the point.
Last edited:
NoHype
Member
It is a reasonable statement only IF... you understand that temple with sacrifices again would NOT... be an abomination to the deceived Jews who will support it and the coming Antichrist, i.e., those who will wrongly believe he is The Messiah.
Who today would want us Christians to support the orthodox unbelieving Jews' building of another temple in Jerusalem? (And there are Christian denominations that are avidly supporting it today).
Moreover, how can someone claim to be a Christian, and not be aware that the orthodox Jews do NOT believe Jesus of Nazareth is The Christ-Messiah, nor that He died on the cross as the Perfect Sacrifice for one and all time??? Surely you guys know that difference between a believer on Christ Jesus and them. Because of that difference, the orthodox unbelieving Jews still believe they are under the Old Covenant, which requires animal sacrifices, and the temple. This is why orthodox Jewish groups like the Land of Israel and Temple Mount Faithful have for years now been collecting the materials, making implements required for temple worship (even putting them on display in Jerusalem), and holding animal sacrifices at areas outside the Temple Mount.
Strypes
Member
Actually The Second Temple was totally destroyed by The Romans in 70 AD. Parts of the Wailing Wall are remnants of the ancient wall that surrounded the Jewish Temple's courtyard. The Wailing Wall/Western Wall is one of the most sacred sites of the Jewish faith second only to the Temple Mount itself.
Strypes
Member
NoHype,
Travis' statement is reasonable period.
"temple with sacrifices again would NOT... be an abomination to the deceived Jews" Oh Snap! I agree with you on this point.
I think the "Great Delusion" has already begun. How else could Obama get the Nobel Peace Prize, be elected to a second term as President, and The Israelis be condemned in the news as the "Bad Guys" for defending their right to exist.
For Matthew 24:15 to come true, the temple must be rebuilt. It is beneficial for both the Jew and Christian that the temple be rebuilt, as this signals the rise of anti-Christ and return of Christ. The Jews will be able to offer sacrifices initially, then the antiChrist will take over, and that will be the abomination.
Last edited:
NoHype
Member
If we look at it from the perspective of the New Covenant, any animal sacrifices anywhere today is an abomination, but with another temple in Jerusalem, even more so, for that is to deny Christ Jesus as the one Perfect Sacrifice. That in itself is enough to warrant any and all believers on Christ Jesus to not partake in those things by the Jews in Jerusalem. It would be like the Christian placing theirself back into the bondage of the Old Covenant and rejecting the New Covenant.
tulsa 2011
Member
The dispensationalist fable is that their one man political and military dictator "anti-Christ" will arise at the beginning of their tribuilation period. But I John 2: 18 says there were many anti-Christs existing when John wrote, talking about religious people who reject Christ and his doctrines, and by rejecting his basic doctrines he is also rejected and replaced by another Jesus. "But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
4. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." II Corinthians 11: 3-4
A super political-military dictator as a one man anti-Christ confuses John's definition of anti-Christ, which is the spirit of anti-Christ (I John 4: 3). Hitler was an example of such a super political-military dictator in the modern time line and was the leader of the Daniel 7: 6 leopard empire, which arose after the Cross, following the lion and bear empires, and coming a little before the Daniel 7: 7 terrible fourth beast empire, the national security state allied with the Little Horn nation. Hitler was given help in rising to power by the financial elite, the big bankers, but as a super political-military dictator, he became independent of his big banker handlers and the West allied with the Soviet Union defeated the leopard empire and Hitler.
For several decades now what Daniel 11 calls the King of the North, the industrial nations of the north, the NATO nations, now including Germany and Japan, but not Russia, have had control over the political-military leaders of the nations of that northern alliance, based upon usury banking, nuclear capability, and technology. Obama, for example, looks like a political-military dictator in some ways, but he is just a manager for the big bankers. He is like the manager of a store of a huge chain, who serves the larger corporation, is put into power by the corporation and can be gotten rid of by them when he is no longer useful for their purposes. And he is replaced by another manager. This pattern is likely to continue. Which means there will not be an independent super political-military dictator like Hitler on the scene as long as the King of the North (not one man) holds power, and even when the decline of society and culture in an age of almost no morality and a time of mass deception reaches an extreme, the King of the North may still hold power. "He" has power through control of money and banking. The King of the North not only controls the money, but "he" has advanced technology and know how which "he" uses to dumb down the people and control them in ways superior to those of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, though "he" got some of that know-how from them.
Now, the November 2014 election results put the Republicans in control of both houses of Congress. The Neocons are back.
Transformational Marxism remains part of the Left, and is associated with the Democratic Party, though bigger than it. There is its counterpart on the Right, allied with the Republicans, which is the Neoconservative Movement. The Neocons have not used American psychology as much as the Transformational Marxists of the Frankfurt School and the Neocons remain more politically oriented. But they claim to be conservatives though they have a history of being Marxists.
The Neocons are more overtly supportive of the Nation of Israel and of Zionism. This means that there is an agreement between the Neocons and the dispensationalists on the nation of Israel being the Israel of God. To some extent this may mean that politically in America the dispensationalists are back in the saddle and may ride again politically. Those who are in the saddle and may ride are the multitude, now in false Christian doctrines. There is the organization Christians United For Israel which has been around for some time. But the Neocons tend to start wars, sometimes in support of Israel. And this possibility of nuclear war may be part of the tribulation, along with fearful outbreaks of deadly infectious disease. etc.
The history of neoconservatism goes back to a small group of young intellectuals who attended City College of New York in the mid-to late 1930's, which included Irving Kristol, Daniel Bell, Irving Howe, Nathan Glazer and later, Daniel Patrick Moynihan. The City College of New York Leftist intellectuals started out as Trotskyites, but later on they became social engineers who operate from the Right rather than from the Left as did the members of the Frankfurt School and their American change agent allies like Carl Rogers, A.H. Maslow, Irvin Yalom, and Normon O. Brown.
4. For if he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." II Corinthians 11: 3-4
A super political-military dictator as a one man anti-Christ confuses John's definition of anti-Christ, which is the spirit of anti-Christ (I John 4: 3). Hitler was an example of such a super political-military dictator in the modern time line and was the leader of the Daniel 7: 6 leopard empire, which arose after the Cross, following the lion and bear empires, and coming a little before the Daniel 7: 7 terrible fourth beast empire, the national security state allied with the Little Horn nation. Hitler was given help in rising to power by the financial elite, the big bankers, but as a super political-military dictator, he became independent of his big banker handlers and the West allied with the Soviet Union defeated the leopard empire and Hitler.
For several decades now what Daniel 11 calls the King of the North, the industrial nations of the north, the NATO nations, now including Germany and Japan, but not Russia, have had control over the political-military leaders of the nations of that northern alliance, based upon usury banking, nuclear capability, and technology. Obama, for example, looks like a political-military dictator in some ways, but he is just a manager for the big bankers. He is like the manager of a store of a huge chain, who serves the larger corporation, is put into power by the corporation and can be gotten rid of by them when he is no longer useful for their purposes. And he is replaced by another manager. This pattern is likely to continue. Which means there will not be an independent super political-military dictator like Hitler on the scene as long as the King of the North (not one man) holds power, and even when the decline of society and culture in an age of almost no morality and a time of mass deception reaches an extreme, the King of the North may still hold power. "He" has power through control of money and banking. The King of the North not only controls the money, but "he" has advanced technology and know how which "he" uses to dumb down the people and control them in ways superior to those of the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, though "he" got some of that know-how from them.
Now, the November 2014 election results put the Republicans in control of both houses of Congress. The Neocons are back.
Transformational Marxism remains part of the Left, and is associated with the Democratic Party, though bigger than it. There is its counterpart on the Right, allied with the Republicans, which is the Neoconservative Movement. The Neocons have not used American psychology as much as the Transformational Marxists of the Frankfurt School and the Neocons remain more politically oriented. But they claim to be conservatives though they have a history of being Marxists.
The Neocons are more overtly supportive of the Nation of Israel and of Zionism. This means that there is an agreement between the Neocons and the dispensationalists on the nation of Israel being the Israel of God. To some extent this may mean that politically in America the dispensationalists are back in the saddle and may ride again politically. Those who are in the saddle and may ride are the multitude, now in false Christian doctrines. There is the organization Christians United For Israel which has been around for some time. But the Neocons tend to start wars, sometimes in support of Israel. And this possibility of nuclear war may be part of the tribulation, along with fearful outbreaks of deadly infectious disease. etc.
The history of neoconservatism goes back to a small group of young intellectuals who attended City College of New York in the mid-to late 1930's, which included Irving Kristol, Daniel Bell, Irving Howe, Nathan Glazer and later, Daniel Patrick Moynihan. The City College of New York Leftist intellectuals started out as Trotskyites, but later on they became social engineers who operate from the Right rather than from the Left as did the members of the Frankfurt School and their American change agent allies like Carl Rogers, A.H. Maslow, Irvin Yalom, and Normon O. Brown.
Last edited:
B-A-C
Loyal
I suppose this depends on perspective.
Before David was born we see Eli in the temple of the Lord ( 1 Sam 1:9; )
Also the Israelites built a tent-like temple in Exod 27-29;
B-A-C
Loyal
Rev 13:18; Here is wisdom. Let him who has understanding calculate the number of the beast, for the number is that of a man; and his number is six hundred and sixty-six.
2 Thes 2:3; Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,
2 Thes 2:4; who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.
Virtually all scriptures in the Bible speak of the beast as "a man" rather than a group or idea or even a theology.
In fact the verses that talk about the beast usually mention him with other people. (as opposed to all these people together being the beast)
Rev 19:19; And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies assembled to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army.
Rev 19:20; And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone.
We see in the verse above that those who worship the beast aren't the beast themselves.
The word antichrist is mentioned 4 times in the Bible. All in 1st and 2nd John.
1 Jn 2:18; 1 Jn 2:22; 1 Jn 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Of course John is also who wrote Revelation.
The phrase "spirit of the antichrist" only appears once in the Bible.
1 Jn 4:3; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
In 1 Jn 4:4; and 1 Jn 4:5; it speaks of the spirit of the antichrist as "them as "they".
No where in the Bible does it say "worship them", or "receive their mark". Any reference to the beast is always singular. As he, himself, or him.
If the spirit of the antichrist was in the world at the time 1st John was written,this likely is not the same being as whoever the beast might be.
As far as a spirit that confesses Jesus isn't from God or didn't come in the flesh, yes that spirit has existed since the time of John the revelator.
I suppose you might say atheists worship the idea that Jesus isn't from God. (they might disagree with you).
But worshiping an idea is different from worshiping a man.
It's possible the beast could be a corporate/government machine, but even corporations and governments have leaders.
2 Thes 2:3; Let no one in any way deceive you, for it will not come unless the apostasy comes first, and the man of lawlessness is revealed, the son of destruction,
2 Thes 2:4; who opposes and exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple of God, displaying himself as being God.
Virtually all scriptures in the Bible speak of the beast as "a man" rather than a group or idea or even a theology.
In fact the verses that talk about the beast usually mention him with other people. (as opposed to all these people together being the beast)
Rev 19:19; And I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies assembled to make war against Him who sat on the horse and against His army.
Rev 19:20; And the beast was seized, and with him the false prophet who performed the signs in his presence, by which he deceived those who had received the mark of the beast and those who worshiped his image; these two were thrown alive into the lake of fire which burns with brimstone.
We see in the verse above that those who worship the beast aren't the beast themselves.
The word antichrist is mentioned 4 times in the Bible. All in 1st and 2nd John.
1 Jn 2:18; 1 Jn 2:22; 1 Jn 4:3; 2 Jn 1:7; Of course John is also who wrote Revelation.
The phrase "spirit of the antichrist" only appears once in the Bible.
1 Jn 4:3; and every spirit that does not confess Jesus is not from God; this is the spirit of the antichrist, of which you have heard that it is coming, and now it is already in the world.
In 1 Jn 4:4; and 1 Jn 4:5; it speaks of the spirit of the antichrist as "them as "they".
No where in the Bible does it say "worship them", or "receive their mark". Any reference to the beast is always singular. As he, himself, or him.
If the spirit of the antichrist was in the world at the time 1st John was written,this likely is not the same being as whoever the beast might be.
As far as a spirit that confesses Jesus isn't from God or didn't come in the flesh, yes that spirit has existed since the time of John the revelator.
I suppose you might say atheists worship the idea that Jesus isn't from God. (they might disagree with you).
But worshiping an idea is different from worshiping a man.
It's possible the beast could be a corporate/government machine, but even corporations and governments have leaders.
Last edited:
NoHype
Member
You are misinformed. The understanding about a singular Antichrist coming to sit in the temple in Jerusalem and play God is a New Testament teaching that the early 1st and 2nd century Church fathers understood, long before Darby, et al came up with the Dispensatiionalist doctrines of men.
So you're equating the interpretation of a singular Antichrist being a Dispensationalist fable is falsehood.
Moreover, in 1 John 2:18, there are TWO applications of the word "antichrist" that Apostle John proclaimed. The first phrase of that verse is about a singular Antichrist entity that John said they had already heard would come. So when and where did they first hear about him? The "many antichrists" phrase he mentioned in the later phrase is about the Antichrist's workers, or servants.
In order to deny those phrases as written one would have to try and re-write English grammar. That's what makes men's doctrines that there is no singular coming Antichrist very silly, because it totally gets away from even the grammar of the text, and away from the prophecies about the coming false one our Lord gave in many other Scriptures, INCLUDING Apostle Paul in that 2 Cor.11 chapter about the "another Jesus" matter.