ScoFe "No. Solomons Temple has not been rebuilt and that is essential to fullfilment of end-time prophecy. The Tribulation will not start until thats been done."
See, your mum is one of those who happens to not agree with me. to her this is an end of time prophecy, but even as she believe it, this mess still doesn't fit the description in Revelations completely.
The temple, in other scriptures:
Mt 26:61 and said, "This man stated, `I am able to destroy the temple of God and to rebuild it in three days.' "
Mt 27:40 and saying, "You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days, save Yourself! If You are the Son of God, come down from the cross."
Mr 15:29 Those passing by were hurling abuse at Him, wagging their heads, and saying, "Ha! You who are going to destroy the temple and rebuild it in three days
What did Christ DO in three days? His death burial and ressurection.
Mt 21:42 Jesus said to them, "Have you never read in the scriptures: "The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone; this was the Lord's doing, and it is amazing in our eyes'? 21:43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people that produces the fruits of the kingdom. 21:44 The one who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; and it will crush anyone on whom it falls."21:45 When the chief priests and the Pharisees heard his parables, they realized that he was speaking about them.
44 holds true to the stone that crushes the feet of Iron and Clay in Daniel, the supposed end of time prophecy, the 4th kingdom being destroyed by a stone not cut with hands.
As to MELCHIZEDEK, Christ was made a priest of God after the likeness of this priest which was BEFORE the LEVITICAL PRIESTHOOD...and Christ is this high priest. (can find him in the OT, as well).
www.abovetopsecret.com...
Post Number: 512599 (this was one of the most rediculous arguments I've been pulled into...)
This would mean that the rebuilding of the temple is the foundation of the church. Simple enough, and of course, it would be called Solomon's temple--that was the first one built.
specialasianX Just sounds like fundamental christianclinging on to hope for the apocalypse... if it happend it happens, if not it wont. Keep in mind though, those nutty christians back around 1000AD predicted the world would end then... obviously it didnt...
That's stereotypical...I AM a FUNDAMENTALIST...one who believes in the fundamentals or first/basic tennants of the faith...
Two "bible experts" peanut gallery: a little too much toungue in cheek... said no, this is not it, from two different directions--me, I don't think there is a true end of times prophecy, and the other doesn't see this as fulfilling the most improtant part...
As for most of the "paranoid panickers," I don't think all of these are christian...now some of it is, but this generalization is WRONG. It's insulting to my basic intelligence...
Let come what comes...I wasn't promised one more breath, so what's an asteroid or two going to do to break or fulfil my life? If it's my time to go, I'm gone...
Genya
A note of warning. The Jews used to copy the sacred texts meticulously, count the letters, several times, if they did not match up with the original document by count(to the jot and tiddle), it was burned. When they had a satisfactory copy of the script, they'd burn the original, as is tradition, so you'd have no clue how old which documents actually ARE until you look at the timeframe of the "story" and other historical facts. In this way, Daniel may be as old as Ezekiel...and Isaiah is probably the same age...I like how much they say that this and that MUST have been written at THIS AND THAT TIME because THAT'S the oldest document. You look at the history of the text, what the traditions of the people writing were--like the jews burning old copies before they faded to useless. those date are just as early as the fragments have been dated back to, so far...
Now, the Books of Ezekiel and Isiah know this one...that's talking about prophecies between which of the 5 times the jews were in captivity (EGYPT--when they grew up there and were enslaved from their point of prominence within the society--not likely, more after Nebuchadezzer? Nebuchadezzer is the first of 4 captivities where the Israelites came back to their own. Remember these books have chapters and verses, people who don't post where they got the info are less credible. Some of the prophecies were already fulfilled, (if not ALL), and you can't tell which one he's quoting or misquoting. I know more than quite a few have to deal with the time between the 1st and 2nd captivity, and most others have to do with the comming of christ...
First Enoch, and Daniel looking at the FACT that Daniel was written as if they were under the domain of Nebuchadezzer, it also mentions the prophecy of weeks in a manner that clearly deals with the comming of Christ. I posted this already, as to which chapter to read... as to the book of Enosh, if it's one of the books added in by one Pope 300 years after Bible was put together, and was originally kept out because ofa belief that it was not real--probably written in aramaic. the old testament was written in hebrew, except for part of Daniel, and I think, Esther...both were nearly thrown out because they were not in Hebrew.
Now,
63 BCE Romans capture Jerusalem With the capture of Jerusalem, the Romans make Judea an outpost of their empire. Their oppressive rule makes Rome the locus of evil in apocalyptic literature until the conversion of Emperor Constantine in the early 4th century A.D.and that's where most prophicies end, right there, because the Roman empire spilt after Constantine into the Holy Roman Empire and the Byzantine empire, was no longer the world domination it was, lost it's strength, anyway, most have to do with the comming of christ and how christianity destroyed much of the earlier ways of thinking...
Revelation: as I stated earlier, it was talking about what had already happened, and was happening then...you forget that they talk about the Antichrist being HERE in 1st and 2nd John.
135, A.D. when Jerusalem was finally made into rubble, yet again...part of the prophecies...
From there on it goes into the mundane, bring up a few "Is the end here?" things, but this is not proof of these texts being apcolyptic in nature, when it's after the point where this was already done.
[Edited on 20-5-2004 by jlc163]
The only reason I did that was because I know how easy it is to misunderstand people. I read the other post where you originally had it
posted,and you followed what I stated, but I know people. If I came across too strong, that was not my intention...that's why I have the disclaimer
in my signature. It's cool to post things that talk about the scriptures, but some are so generalised, you can't refute them withoutpulling out a
Strong's Exaustive Concordance--something most people won't ever figure out how to use...sigh. We have people on this site that just don't check
it all out, and, I'm sorry, we're not all geniuses--and I've known some REALLY IGNORANT geniuses in my time. In unfamilir fields, simplifying
often leaves out steps in logic that confuse and wind up FAILING the audience you are intending to reach. Take math, for instance: teachers, when
they are teaching, especially in college, only show how to work a problem once, in only one way, expecting thier students to keep up. Knew a woman
who couldn't pass math because she told herself she couldn't. Also, people don't get things in the first stating of it. Scripture is so redundant
that it someimes drives me up the wll to study it. Most people here know little to nothing about the bible, and some want to keep it that way...fine,
but when we leave out steps, we fail the audience. Really, you had a good post, but it was not a thourough enough source, but timeline, with no real
practical way to reference it, that's all... 
