Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Skooz
"Well, yeah. But that isn't really the point.

The physical destruction of Herod's Temple is not in the Bible."


True enough the specific description of the physical destruction is not described, yet Christ made Himself the temple, changing the focus of a building being a requirement for a "temple" for Christians.


John 2:13 And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem,

14 And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting:

15 And when He had made a scourge of small cords, He drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changer's money, and overthrew the tables'

16 And said unto them that sold doves, "Take these things hence; make not My Father's house an house of merchandise."

17 And His disciples remembered that it was written "THE zeal of Thine house hath eaten me up."

Note this remembrance is quoting Psalms 69:9, making Psalms part of the New Testament. Got to know what Psalms says to understand what is going on here.

18 Then answered the Jews and said unto Him, "What sign shewest Thou unto us, seeing that Thou doest these things?"

They knew Psalms and other places was being referenced as well.

19 Jesus answered and said unto them, "Destroy this Temple, and in three days I will raise it up."

Christ became the Temple at His death.


22. When therefore He was risen from the dead, His disciples remembered that He had said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said.


Note the disciples believed the scripture ...... the New had not been penned so the disciples believe the OLD which was quoted and made part of the NEW. Got to know the OLD in order to understand the NEW.

Yet when asked by the disciples the signs of His return he describes not one stone left atop another, (a pile of sand) and there are certainly still stone atop another yet to this day. The destruction described was one that would take place at Christ's return.

I can find it Written no where that a third building will be, must be built.
225 posted on 10/12/2004 8:43:38 AM PDT by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies ]


To: Just mythoughts

Exactly.

My point is that some choose to believe that the Gospels were written many years (75-200) after the Crucifixion. The best scholarship points to much earlier dates (35-65 AD).

IF the Gospels or epistles were written at such a late date, it would have been impossible to ignore the destruction of Jerusalem.


226 posted on 10/12/2004 8:48:55 AM PDT by Skooz (Any nation that would elect John Kerry as it's president has forfeited it's right to exist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson