Marilyn C Posted July 17, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 30 Topic Count: 266 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 13,204 Content Per Day: 3.49 Reputation: 8,497 Days Won: 12 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/06/1947 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 Hi Shiloh 357 & all, Don`t choke on your popcorn now Spock. I think we must all be looking at different Bibles & concordances. For example Matthew 24: 1 Jesus & His disciples are looking at the Temple buildings, the ones that would be torn down. `Jesus came out from the temple (hieron) & was going away when His disciples came to point out the temple buildings (heiron) to Him.` Clearly the Temple that was where Solomon built & clearly all the buildings. Then we have the Apostle Paul saying - `the man of lawlessness...who opposes & exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple (naos) of God displaying himself as being God.` (2 Thess. 2: 3 & 4) Now my Strong`s Concordance tells me that - `heiron,` means a sacred place ie. the entire precincts of the temple, while `naos,` means to dwell, a fane, a shrine, temple. Obviously not used for describing where Solomon`s temple was. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigger398 Posted July 17, 2014 Group: Diamond Member Followers: 6 Topic Count: 562 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 2,074 Content Per Day: 0.31 Reputation: 648 Days Won: 2 Joined: 11/01/2005 Status: Offline Birthday: 05/31/1966 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Is that the temple that um supposed to be built and the anti christ supposed to take over. Is that the one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marilyn C Posted July 17, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 30 Topic Count: 266 Topics Per Day: 0.07 Content Count: 13,204 Content Per Day: 3.49 Reputation: 8,497 Days Won: 12 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 10/06/1947 Author Share Posted July 17, 2014 Hi tigger398, Yes that is what I believe. This temple that is now Jerusalem`s temple will be where the `abomination of desolation` will be - the Anti-Christ displaying himself as God in Jerusalem`s temple. (Naos) The site of Solomon`s temple (Heiron) & then the second temple by Nehemiah (& added to by Herod) is on the Mount of Moriah. This is where the Dome of the Rock is, so that is not going to be destroyed any time soon. I`m sure the Muslims would have something to say about that. The third temple to be built on that special site, will, I believe be built in the Millennium after Christ returns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest shiloh357 Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Hi Shiloh 357 & all, Don`t choke on your popcorn now Spock. I think we must all be looking at different Bibles & concordances. For example Matthew 24: 1 Jesus & His disciples are looking at the Temple buildings, the ones that would be torn down. `Jesus came out from the temple (hieron) & was going away when His disciples came to point out the temple buildings (heiron) to Him.` Clearly the Temple that was where Solomon built & clearly all the buildings. Then we have the Apostle Paul saying - `the man of lawlessness...who opposes & exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple (naos) of God displaying himself as being God.` (2 Thess. 2: 3 & 4) Now my Strong`s Concordance tells me that - `heiron,` means a sacred place ie. the entire precincts of the temple, while `naos,` means to dwell, a fane, a shrine, temple. Obviously not used for describing where Solomon`s temple was. Sorry, but just citing Strong's concordance doesn't cover it. You evidently don't know how to use Strong's Concordance, nor do you understand basic principles of hermeneutics. Heiron refers to the inner sancturary of the temple located on the temple mount and is used that way in the following passages (Mat. 4:5; 12:5,6; 21:12,14,15,23; 24:1; 26:55; Mark 11:11,15,16,27; 12:35; 13:1,3; 14:49; Luke 2:27,37,46; 4:9; 18:10; 19:45,47; 20:1; 21:5,37,38; 22:52,53; 24:53; John 2:14,15; 5:14; 7:14,28; 8:2,20,59; 10:23; 11:56; 18:20; Acts 2:46; 3:1,2,3,8,10; 4:1; 5:20,21,24,25,42; 19:27; 21:26,27,28,29,30; 22:17; 24:6,12,18; 25:8; 26:21; 1Co. 9:13) Now the word Naos when referring to a physical temple, is always referencing the temple on Moriah and that is proven by the following passages: (Mat. 23:16,17,21,35; 26:61; 27:5,40,51; Mark 14:58; 15:29,38; Luke 1:9,21,22; 23:45; John 2:19,20,21; Acts 7:48; 17:24; 19:24; 2Th. 2:4; Rev. 3:12; 7:15; 11:1,2,19; 14:15,17; 15:5,6,8; 16:1,17; 21:22) The ONLY times that Naos is not used in reference to the Moriah temple is when it is spiritualized to refer to the believer in Jesus: (1Co. 3:16,17; 6:19; 2Co. 6:16; Eph. 2:21) Marilyn, your claim is simply not tenable. There is NO place in Scripture that would allow you to place the physical, end times temple anywhere but in Jerusalem. There is no way rabbinic Judaism would sanction a temple anywhere but on the temple mount. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 So, when did Israel return to the Old Covenant? When did the sacrifces for sin begin. Where are the Red calves without blemish? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 17, 2014 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Hi Shiloh 357 & all, Don`t choke on your popcorn now Spock. I think we must all be looking at different Bibles & concordances. For example Matthew 24: 1 Jesus & His disciples are looking at the Temple buildings, the ones that would be torn down. `Jesus came out from the temple (hieron) & was going away when His disciples came to point out the temple buildings (heiron) to Him.` Clearly the Temple that was where Solomon built & clearly all the buildings. Then we have the Apostle Paul saying - `the man of lawlessness...who opposes & exalts himself above every so-called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple (naos) of God displaying himself as being God.` (2 Thess. 2: 3 & 4) Now my Strong`s Concordance tells me that - `heiron,` means a sacred place ie. the entire precincts of the temple, while `naos,` means to dwell, a fane, a shrine, temple. Obviously not used for describing where Solomon`s temple was. Sorry, but just citing Strong's concordance doesn't cover it. You evidently don't know how to use Strong's Concordance, nor do you understand basic principles of hermeneutics. Heiron refers to the inner sancturary of the temple located on the temple mount and is used that way in the following passages (Mat. 4:5; 12:5,6; 21:12,14,15,23; 24:1; 26:55; Mark 11:11,15,16,27; 12:35; 13:1,3; 14:49; Luke 2:27,37,46; 4:9; 18:10; 19:45,47; 20:1; 21:5,37,38; 22:52,53; 24:53; John 2:14,15; 5:14; 7:14,28; 8:2,20,59; 10:23; 11:56; 18:20; Acts 2:46; 3:1,2,3,8,10; 4:1; 5:20,21,24,25,42; 19:27; 21:26,27,28,29,30; 22:17; 24:6,12,18; 25:8; 26:21; 1Co. 9:13) Now the word Naos when referring to a physical temple, is always referencing the temple on Moriah and that is proven by the following passages: (Mat. 23:16,17,21,35; 26:61; 27:5,40,51; Mark 14:58; 15:29,38; Luke 1:9,21,22; 23:45; John 2:19,20,21; Acts 7:48; 17:24; 19:24; 2Th. 2:4; Rev. 3:12; 7:15; 11:1,2,19; 14:15,17; 15:5,6,8; 16:1,17; 21:22) The ONLY times that Naos is not used in reference to the Moriah temple is when it is spiritualized to refer to the believer in Jesus: (1Co. 3:16,17; 6:19; 2Co. 6:16; Eph. 2:21) Marilyn, your claim is simply not tenable. There is NO place in Scripture that would allow you to place the physical, end times temple anywhere but in Jerusalem. There is no way rabbinic Judaism would sanction a temple anywhere but on the temple mount. When did the Arab world allow the building of the Temple on the Temple Mound? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Qnts2 Posted July 17, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 3 Topic Count: 20 Topics Per Day: 0.00 Content Count: 2,875 Content Per Day: 0.71 Reputation: 1,336 Days Won: 9 Joined: 03/13/2013 Status: Offline Share Posted July 17, 2014 We know that on the temple Mount that the first temple by Solomon was built. Then later after that had been torn down the second temple was built by Nehemiah & others. Now from scripture (Ezekiel) we are told that there will be a third temple built on this very spot, the Temple Mount. Now every reference to all three temples on this site was a translation of the Greek word `Hieron.` Any temple erected elsewhere was invariably from the Greek word `Naos.` This word is frequently rendered `meeting place,` `dwelling` or `Synagogue.` Now people believe that this temple on Mount Moriah has to be built before the Lord returns because of the `abomination` in the Holy Place that the Lord & the Apostle Paul spoke of in Matt. 24: 15 & 2 Thess. 2: 4. But that is incorrect & has caused much confusion. it is the word `Naos,` (temple elsewhere) that is used for the temple that the Anti-Christ will set up the abomination. And this temple has already been built. On August 1982 in the presence of the prime Minister, Menachem Begin, Members of Cabinet & other notables, the Jerusalem great Synagogue was dedicated. it is situated in King George Street, & is constructed from the same local stone as was Solomon`s Temple. The central feature is a high tower containing five magnificent stain-glass windows, topped by two tablets of stone, bearing the ten Commandments. In the interior, marble has been used extensively, especially for the Ark situated beneath the stained-glass windows. This, I believe is the Holy Place which will be desecrated by the `Abomination` referred to by Jesus. The Temple referred to by the Apostle Paul is Built! Solomon`s Temple, sacred Place is referred to as `Hieron,` as in John 10: 23 - Jesus was walking in the temple (hieron) in the portico of Solomon.` Whereas the Apostle Paul uses the Greek word `Naos,` when referring to the abomination set up in the temple at Jerusalem but not at the Mount Moriah site. `(the anti - Christ) who opposes & exalts himself above every so called god or object of worship, so that he takes his seat in the temple (Naos) of God, displaying himself as being God.` (2 Thess 2: 4) There is one issue though. A meeting place like a synagogue, is just that, a meeting place. The building itself is not holy. The cabinet which contains the Torah and other writings is considered Holy, only because it contains the Torah. You can defile the Torah but not the meeting place. The view of the Torah as holy is Jewish tradition. Anything which contains the Name of God is considered to require special handling and is considered 'holy'. A synagogue is not considered holy as God's presence is not in a synagogue, and a synagogue is not a biblical command. In scripture, the Temple was referred to as the Holy Place. I do not believe any synagogues were ever considered to be a holy place in the NT. That term was reserved for the Temple. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
other one Posted July 17, 2014 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 29 Topic Count: 597 Topics Per Day: 0.08 Content Count: 56,117 Content Per Day: 7.56 Reputation: 27,851 Days Won: 271 Joined: 12/29/2003 Status: Offline Share Posted July 17, 2014 can Gods presences ever be in the temple until Jesus returns..... I don't think I've ever pondered that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted July 17, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 2.00 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted July 17, 2014 can Gods presences ever be in the temple until Jesus returns..... I don't think I've ever pondered that. Is not God's presence always on the site of the Temple? That's why nobody has ever been permitted to build any other place of worship to false gods on that very spot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OakWood Posted July 17, 2014 Group: Royal Member Followers: 7 Topic Count: 867 Topics Per Day: 0.24 Content Count: 7,331 Content Per Day: 2.00 Reputation: 2,860 Days Won: 31 Joined: 04/09/2014 Status: Offline Birthday: 04/28/1964 Share Posted July 17, 2014 Hi tigger398, Yes that is what I believe. This temple that is now Jerusalem`s temple will be where the `abomination of desolation` will be - the Anti-Christ displaying himself as God in Jerusalem`s temple. (Naos) The site of Solomon`s temple (Heiron) & then the second temple by Nehemiah (& added to by Herod) is on the Mount of Moriah. This is where the Dome of the Rock is, so that is not going to be destroyed any time soon. I`m sure the Muslims would have something to say about that. The third temple to be built on that special site, will, I believe be built in the Millennium after Christ returns. The Dome of the Rock is not on the spot of the Temple. It stands where the court of the Gentiles was. The spot where the Temple stood is free and has plenty of room to build the Third Temple regardless of whether the mosque is there or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts