"Not one stone will be left on top of another"

[Tzephanyahu]

1 hour ago, BibleReader said:

Was the temple completely destroyed in 70 C.E. or were there remnants of it still standing centuries later as Eusebius of Caesaria and the pilgrim of Bordeaux seem to indicate? 

Shalom friend,

That's my point - there was no stone left upon another at the place where the Second Temple actually stood.  The "Western Wall" was neither connected to the Temple or part of its outer courtyard.

After the Jewish War that led to the Temple's destruction the remaining Jews were dispersed for many years across the nations.  Upon returning to the land, whether Jew or Gentile, the location of Temple could only be approximated and not pinpointed.  Thankfully today we have the resources to do these things (as that documentary will show you).

But in summary, no, the Second Temple was completely destroyed - no brick was left upon another, and it definitely wasn't observable centuries later.  IT became ruins and then a land ploughed by farmers.

I hope that helps in some way.

Love & Shalom

[Tzephanyahu]

17 minutes ago, Josheb said:

And to bring it back to the original point: there's nothing in the Bible that actually states a third temple will be rebuilt and neither is there anything requiring one to be built in the same location. 

Shalom @Josheb

I agree.  The more I study the matter, the less likely it seems that a third Temple will be built.  

It's not a common opinion, so I'm delighted to read that someone else also has this point of view.

Love & Shalom

[Alive]

25 minutes ago, Josheb said:

So can we justly construe gross digression to be a matter of covenant-breaking?

Should we not also consider the tou a reflection of Romans 13:1?

Yes--in principle, to both.

Authority is something I learned early on with an example of brother Nee...it extends out.

If another individual owns an item, he has authority over that item and I must ask permission to 'touch' it.

This is very simple and yet profound.

[Alive]

17 minutes ago, Roar said:

Keep obfuscating and dancing around the question. 

Shall we not be honest about if we believe in Full Preterism Heresy?

Full Preterism is an eschatological belief system that promotes the idea that all prophecies were fulfilled with the 70 AD destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, including the Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead.

Hope Resurrected: A Refutation of The Heresy: Full Preterism by by Lance Conley (Author), Samuel M. Frost 

This work provides a complete refutation to the growing heresy known as Full Preterism. Full Preterism is an eschatological belief system that promotes the idea that all prophecies were fulfilled with the 70 AD destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, including the Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead. This treatise examines the history of full preterism and analyzes the works of today's most popular full preterist works by Alan Bondar, Max King, Don K. Preston and Edward Stevens. This refutation is a "must-read" for any Christian struggling with the heresies found in this particular brand of eschatology, or anyone considering joining the full preterist movement due to their disillusionment with Futurism/Dispensationalism.

Also view the videos under Biblical Topics, Hyper-Preterism: A Heresy Resurrected & Exposing the Errors of Preterism

 

@Roar I am pretty sure in one of @Josheb's post a while back, he stated that he was a partial preterist--or something to that affect.

[branchesofHim]

2 Peter 3:[1] This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
[2] That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
[3] Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
[4] And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.
[5] For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
[6] Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
[7] But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
[8] But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
[9] The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
[10] But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.
[11] Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness,
[12] Looking for and hasting unto the coming of the day of God, wherein the heavens being on fire shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat?
[13] Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
[14] Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
[15] And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;10:18 AM 7/3/2020

[Alive]

4 minutes ago, Roar said:

I am trying to ascertain both his honesty as to what he believes, is it heresy or not. Is he a wolf in sheep clothing? He refuses to say if he believes the Preterist theology of the idea that all prophecies were fulfilled with the 70 AD destruction of the temple in Jerusalem, including the Second Coming of Christ and the Resurrection of the Dead. He could answer but refuses to.

 

1 minute ago, Roar said:

Why can he not say what he believes or is he afraid if he states it that he might be discredited One can say they are a partial preterist but is that what they are posting and saying there is a great discrepancy there.   

I don't know. Could it be as simple as his obvious and oft stated and desired way--to stay strictly on topic?

Start another thread and perhaps he will join in on topic. Just a thought and I may be way off base.

[Alive]

I split the Nee post into a new Topic called Watchman Nee--I will answer there.

LOL

[Prycejosh1987]

I think that is a literal. The bible is very sophisticated. The temple was destroyed by the Romans years later. If you study any of the books of the bible and analyse the stories you will see that god knows everything and his holy spirit is the author. The message remains the same and i find it very insightful.