TEMPLE......TO BE OR NOT TO BE....THAT IS MY QUESTION!!!!!

[Kroogz]

Your assumption is that these must be distant because you believe they are yet to be fulfilled. Luke 21 can be easily seen to have happened 1st century. The Roman assault on Jerusalem did employ swords, scattered the people, and trampled the city. So it is 1st century.
Since you linked the verses, you must believe they coincide. And indeed they do. So how should Romans 11 be understood?
Reread the great commission. It is given to the Apostles. THEY are tasked with making disciples of the nations. At this point the world or age will be over. Ok. What's the game plan? Acts...begin in Jerusalem, then Judea, then Samaria, and then the rest. The book of Acts records this. Revelation 2 and 3 confirm it. Churches were in all the known world. The end of the age was come. The time of the Gentiles was fulfilled. Jews did begin responding to the gospel. And all who did were saved.
The audience of Romans, Acts, Luke, Matthew, and Revelation are all 1st century Jews. The application of the teachings have relevance for us today, but must first be understood in the 1st century context. Your explanations are void of this reality.

All the Gospels were written around 70AD up to 100AD.......And not a mention of all these OTHER WORLDLY experiences? And they wrote,"(let the READER understand)." So as to be prepared for what was to come. Why would they want the reader to be prepared for what was to come, after they had witnessed it all being fulfilled?

 

[Cameron143]

Like I said. No one is denying that the Kingdom of God is in Us. What is being denied is His literal Kingdom.

And IMO, it's about as obvious as Canada being north of the United states of America. Canada is physically there, It's not a "spiritual Canada."

Matt 26:29~~ But I say to you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine from now on until that day when I drink it with you, new, in My Father’s kingdom.”

Luke 22:30~~that you may eat and drink at My table in My kingdom, and you will sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.

Canada is real. And the kingdom of God is real in Canada. It exists there in all the believers there. The same is true of every nation. And it affects and judges Canada. How bad do you think Canada would be now if it had no Christians? Every time lawlessness and perversion are pushed back against, it brings with it judgment upon immoral deeds. Ask anyone who is on the manifests of Epstein's flights why they don't want to be exposed...it would bring judgment. What throne would that judgment come from?

 

[Cameron143]

No. There will still be "1000 years" following Christ's "RETURN" to the earth in Rev19; so the part that Rev1:1's "things which must come to pass IN QUICKNESS [NOUN]" speaks only to the future, specific, LIMITED time-period we commonly call the 7-yr Tribulation Period (1:1 / 1:19c / 4:1 [1:1 "SHOW UNTO his servants" [7:3] / "SHOW YOU [John]" 4:1+]), concluding at Christ's return to the earth Rev19; So "the end [singular] of the age [singular]" is FOLLOWED by "the age [singular] to come" (Matt12), earthly-located also (aka the earthly MK age; Rev19:15b speaks of what is "FUTURE" to Rev19's return to the earth, "SHALL [future tense]..." [etc]).

I've asked you a direct question a few times and you have yet to answer. What is God's primary purpose in writing the book of Revelation? Would you mind answering?

 

[Cameron143]

All the Gospels were written around 70AD up to 100AD.......And not a mention of all these OTHER WORLDLY experiences? And they wrote,"(let the READER understand)." So as to be prepared for what was to come. Why would they want the reader to be prepared for what was to come, after they had witnessed it all being fulfilled?

That's a great question. Perhaps the gospels and other NT writings came before your timeline for them.

 

[Mem]

That's a great question. Perhaps the gospels and other NT writings came before your timeline for them.

According to BibleAsk.org, "Eusebius (op. cit. iii. 20. 8, 9) records that John was sent to Patmos by Domitian, and that when those who had been unjustly banished by Domitian were released by his successor, Nerva (A.D. 96–98; see Vol. VI, p. 87), the apostle returned to Ephesus."

 

[douggg]

Are you suggesting that there is a means by which Israel gets saved that isn't through faith?
As far as the timetable of the 1st century, still working that out. But it doesn't really matter what I share. You believe Revelation is about the end of the world and not primarily about the end of a covenant.

Of course Israel will be saved by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ in Revelation 12:10.

I have not said that Revelation 6-19 is about the end of the world, but about events leading up to the return of Jesus to this present world.

The events of Revelation 6-19 cannot be fit into the 1st century.

 

[Kroogz]

Canada is real.

But Israel isn't.

Canada is real. And the kingdom of God is real in Canada. It exists there in all the believers there. The same is true of every nation.

Except for Israel.

 

[cv5]

I've asked you a direct question a few times and you have yet to answer. What is God's primary purpose in writing the book of Revelation? Would you mind answering?

And there it is again. Standard operating procedure.

® "Deny then misdirect." @Cameron143 ®

The good news? Continuation theology getting shot down in flames.

 

[Inquisitor]

And there it is again. Standard operating procedure.

® "Deny then misdirect." @Cameron143 ®

The good news? Continuation theology getting shot down in flames.

Where is the Beautiful Gate in relation to the temple mount?

 

[Cameron143]

According to BibleAsk.org, "Eusebius (op. cit. iii. 20. 8, 9) records that John was sent to Patmos by Domitian, and that when those who had been unjustly banished by Domitian were released by his successor, Nerva (A.D. 96–98; see Vol. VI, p. 87), the apostle returned to Ephesus."

Are you saying the book of Revelation had to be written from Ephesus?

 

[Cameron143]

Of course Israel will be saved by faith in the Lord Jesus Christ in Revelation 12:10.

I have not said that Revelation 6-19 is about the end of the world, but about events leading up to the return of Jesus to this present world.

The events of Revelation 6-19 cannot be fit into the 1st century.

They can. You just disagree with the answer.

 

[Cameron143]

But Israel isn't.


Except for Israel.

Sure Israel is a real nation. But all it's inhabitants don't belong to the kingdom of God.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

I've asked you a direct question a few times and you have yet to answer. What is God's primary purpose in writing the book of Revelation? Would you mind answering?

trying to get direct responses here 😅

 

[Mem]

Are you saying the book of Revelation had to be written from Ephesus?

No, just that revelation is written after the possibility that it could be referring in anyway to the fall of Jerusalem, since it already happened if John was sent to Patmos in later 1st century, 95ad-ish. That is not to say that Domitian might not have been the beast that declared himself God, nor any other Caesar, since it was common practice among them. It's just that... I don't see Rev being fulfilled until we see no more death or pain, which is Jesus' ultimate triumph over Satan who has the power of death.

I think I understand your position, even if I can't come to any complete agreement with it. And I'm really just trying to ascertain whether you believe the resurrection happens all at once or incrementally, individual by individual?

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Are you saying the book of Revelation had to be written from Ephesus?

“I John, who also am your brother, and companion in tribulation, and in the kingdom and patience of Jesus Christ, was in the isle that is called Patmos, for the word of God, and for the testimony of Jesus Christ.”
‭‭Revelation‬ ‭1:9‬ ‭KJV‬‬

 

[Cameron143]

And there it is again. Standard operating procedure.

® "Deny then misdirect." @Cameron143 ®

The good news? Continuation theology getting shot down in flames.

I'm happy to answer his questions, and anyone else's. Should I not receive the same courtesy?
Just as your argument from Romans 11 can be shown false when an entire book and its arguments are taken into account, so too can other arguments from other books be examined. That's why I asked you to break down the arguments Paul is making up to the verses you cited from Romans 11. That's comparing apples with apples. Picking one verse from one book and comparing it with a verse from another book without understanding how each verse fits into the context of their own book is why there are so many different understandings of scripture.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

This is why you need to study Romans. The point of chapter 11 is to show who true Israel is. It is not historical, ethnic Israel that is in view. It is those who are the children of promise through the seed of Abraham. This doesn't apply to all of Israel, but only some. And it also applies to all who are justified by faith. This is the point Paul has been establishing from late in chapter 3 and chapter 4.
All of spiritual Israel is saved in every generation. You don't care for the term...spiritual Israel. Okay. Use whatever term you like...seed of Abraham, children of promise. But neither of those days terms describe the entire Jewish nation. They speak of those who were spiritually bound to God and justified by faith, just as Abraham was.

really good post

 

[cv5]

I'm happy to answer his questions, and anyone else's.

No you are not. And neither are you able.

You will not answer the "UNTIL" question set forth so many times.
You will not answer the "IN THAT DAY" question set forth so many times.

Will not, cannot, then comes the inevitable:

® "Deny then misdirect." @Cameron143 ®

 

[Cameron143]

No, just that revelation is written after the possibility that it could be referring in anyway to the fall of Jerusalem, since it already happened if John was sent to Patmos in later 1st century, 95ad-ish. That is not to say that Domitian might not have been the beast that declared himself God, nor any other Caesar, since it was common practice among them. It's just that... I don't see Rev being fulfilled until we see no more death or pain, which is Jesus' ultimate triumph over Satan who has the power of death.

I think I understand your position, even if I can't come to any complete agreement with it. And I'm really just trying to ascertain whether you believe the resurrection happens all at once or incrementally, individual by individual?

I don't believe Revelation was written after 70 AD. What happened after 70 AD that was imminent?
Another question: what is God's purpose in writing the book of Revelation?
I understand your reticence in believing what I have shared. What was once common understanding has become deluded, especially in America. This is because what is taught currently is widely accepted. But it has only been widely accepted here for a little over a hundred years. It was mainly advanced by Scofield in his Bible. But it would be worth your while to study where his beliefs actually came from. It might just surprise you.

 

[Cameron143]

No you are not. And neither are you able.

You will not answer the "UNTIL" question set forth so many times.
You will not answer the "IN THAT DAY" question set forth so many times.

Will not, cannot, then comes the inevitable:

® "Deny then misdirect." @Cameron143 ®

I'm surprised sometimes by how often what someone is saying of another is actually true of them.