As it was in the days of Noah

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by truejew

 

Rubble lying a hundred yards away from where the actual temple was . .

The prophecy of Jesus was that not one stone would remain upon another.

Originally posted by jmdewey60

this proves to you that somehow the temple is still alive and well?

Not currently well, but will be rebuilt. This time mystery babylon will completely fall.

Originally posted by jmdewey60

So what is your point and don't direct me to some crazy blog?

The only thing I have directed you to is a study on a website by a minister with a doctorate degree.

reply to post by truejew

The prophecy of Jesus was that not one stone would remain upon another.

So you are saying that, that this jumble of stones lying in a heap at the foot of the retaining wall for the plaza around the temple site is in fact the last vestige of the slightly still intact temple.
That is just grasping at straws and you may not realize it but you are on the slippery slope leading you away from Jesus and the New Testament and next probably you will be going around denying the name of Jesus and using some Syrian variant of Joshua instead.

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by truejew

 

So you are saying that, that this jumble of stones lying in a heap at the foot of the retaining wall for the plaza around the temple site is in fact the last vestige of the slightly still intact temple.

Not one stone upon another is the prophecy.

Originally posted by jmdewey60

That is just grasping at straws and you may not realize it but you are on the slippery slope leading you away from Jesus and the New Testament and next probably you will be going around denying the name of Jesus and using some Syrian variant of Joshua instead.

All of that just because I believe that the prophecy of Jesus will be fulfilled in full. Have you even read my posts where I defend the name of Jesus against the names Yahweh, Jehovah, Jahshua, Yah, Jah, Iah, and Lah?

reply to post by truejew

Have you even read my posts where I defend the name of Jesus against the names Yahweh, Jehovah, Jahshua, Yah, Jah, Iah, and Lah?

No I don't remember seeing any of those. I don't read every thread and try to limit the number of threads I participate in. My goal is not to end discussion or run everyone off and I realize I put out a lot of negative comments.
You seem to go to some off-the-wall blogs, from the one you posted a link to that I went to.
In my opinion, what is going on is a heresy for everyone with the main goal to have people fully abandon Christianity as we knew it from before the advent of Dispensationalism by Darby in the 1800's, to where Christianity is of no special significance and the important thing is blood members of the tribe of Judah who are the fulfillment of old Testament prophecy. That completely undermines the finished work of Jesus as the Redeemer, and instead looks ahead to another to appear to be acceptable to the desires of the same people who crucified Jesus. They wanted someone who would give them political domination over the nations of the earth, where the vision of Jesus was gathering all to himself as the congregation of God in his name, which we now call the church.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by Prezbo369
Oh dear is that pesky insecure biblical god going to slaughter everyone.............again?

It/he/she's one of those "do as I say, not as I do" guys huh?

He is going to stop us from slaughtering ourselves....... again.

So your gods going to stop us killing ourselves......by killing us..........genius!

The fact that in your mind and in the minds of folk like you, that this all makes sense, is utterly fascinating tbh

But while fascinating, its also tragic and a little bit worrying. We all have to live in this world together and our beliefs can determine our behaviour, and ultimately I would prefer it if everyone engaged their critical thinking skills a little more (some more than others).

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by truejew

 

You seem to go to some off-the-wall blogs,

What is off-the-wall about that website?

reply to post by truejew


It rained with hit and miss showers here, this OP makes no sense. I'm not going to deny we're in the time of sorrows, i can prove that by Revelation 17, i don't need rain. Now when it doesn't rain anywhere on earth for 3.5 years, then you have something to be amazed at.

Originally posted by truejew

Originally posted by sk0rpi0n
reply to post by truejew

 

Your username is "truejew" and you have a jewish symbol as your avatar.
Yet, you speak of Christian themes such as the "tribulation" and base your thread title off Matthew 24:37.

Whats up with that?

Jesus is King of the Jews. The Church is built upon the Jewish 12 apostles. Christianity is a Jewish religion. When Gentiles convert, they become Jews by faith.

The idea that the Church is gentile was started by the Catholic Church.

edit on 17-8-2012 by truejew because: (no reason given)

edit on 17-8-2012 by truejew because: (no reason given)

I agree with this whole heartedly. Muslim do not know it but this is why the Quran calls jews and christians the "people of the book". Gentiles cease being gentiles when they accept Christ as Savior and Messiah, they are adopted into the House of Israel. Christians are really messianic jews, but most of them do not know it...yet, but that has begun to end. I think this is what the Restoration is for.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

I agree with this whole heartedly. Muslim do not know it but this is why the Quran calls jews and christians the "people of the book". Gentiles cease being gentiles when they accept Christ as Savior and Messiah, they are adopted into the House of Israel. Christians are really messianic jews, but most of them do not know it...yet, but that has begun to end. I think this is what the Restoration is for.

Jews and Christians are "people of the book" because muslims acknowledge that they follow a scripture that came God.

The first christians who followed Jesus were law abiding Jews who "upgraded" by receiving the messiah. They did not suddenly discard their religion. They were basically Jews who were pro-Jesus.

As for Gentiles accepting Jesus as savior and messiah.... there is a genuine problem. Because
a) Jesus never went around converting gentiles, in fact he instructed his followers to avoid gentile towns.
b) Paul was the one who went around converting gentiles... on his own.

So should a gentile who accepts Jesus and becomes Christian also start living by the "law"?
Going by Jesus.... probably yes, though he didn't exactly make any statement

.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

Christians are really messianic jews, but most of them do not know it...yet, but that has begun to end.

I don't know how you came across this knowledge but Christians know the Bible and it says:

There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus.
Galatians 3:28

Here there is no Greek or Jew, circumcised or uncircumcised, barbarian, Scythian, slave or free, but Christ is all, and is in all.
Colossians 3:11

For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,
Romans 10:12

So how is "this ending", that Christians don't "know" this?
"messianic jews" are looking for a messiah and Christians have one already sitting on David's throne of which he (in the Psalms) prophesied and which Jesus affirmed.
I think if Paul meant that everyone is now a Jew by being in Jesus, he would have said so. Instead he is saying that distinction is irrelevant. You seem to be of the opinion that we need to bring that back into relevancy, thus reversing the work of Jesus and the Apostles and the church over so many centuries.

reply to post by lonewolf19792000

I'm not going to deny we're in the time of sorrows, i can prove that by Revelation 17 . . .

Do you mean the "time of sorrows" of Matthew 24? If so, that already happened, ushering in the age of Christ.
If you have "proof", you should start a thread or if you have a short answer give it here.

reply to post by jmdewey60


Those Scriptures are saying that a persons natural race does not matter in the Church. That is because we are all Jewish by faith.

"28For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: 29But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God." (Romans 2:28-29 KJV)

reply to post by truejew

That is because we are all Jewish by faith.

Interesting how you don't have a verse for that.
What you do quote is Paul saying it does you no good to be a Jew knowing the Law if you don't keep it. His point is that the true circumcision is not the outward physical but of the heart. This was being said to build up his evidence to make his case for not circumcising gentiles who become Christians.
The church is the new Israel.
Technically, "the Jews" were the returnees from the Babylonian captivity who were the aristocracy and thought they were the divine saviors (which was what Paul was referring to).

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by lonewolf19792000

 

I'm not going to deny we're in the time of sorrows, i can prove that by Revelation 17 . . .

Do you mean the "time of sorrows" of Matthew 24? If so, that already happened, ushering in the age of Christ.
If you have "proof", you should start a thread or if you have a short answer give it here.

edit on 20-8-2012 by jmdewey60 because: add Bible quote: "For the creation eagerly waits for the revelation of the sons of God." Romans 8:19

I already did a while ago.

Originally posted by truejew
reply to post by jmdewey60

 

Those Scriptures are saying that a persons natural race does not matter in the Church. That is because we are all Jewish by faith.

It seemed to matter to the church a great deal, otherwise they wouldn't have adopted and enforced these canons.

CANON XXXVII.

IT is not lawful to receive portions sent from the feasts of Jews or heretics, nor to feast together with them.


CANON XXXVIII.

IT is not lawful to receive unleavened bread from the Jews, nor to be partakers of their impiety.

Is "Jewish" a race or a faith?

Originally posted by jmdewey60
reply to post by truejew

 

What you do quote is Paul saying it does you no good to be a Jew knowing the Law if you don't keep it.

Paul says those who have outward circumcision only, are not true Jews. Those who have circumcision of the heart, are true Jews.

Originally posted by jmdewey60

The church is the new Israel.

That is what I've been saying.

reply to post by windword


The Church is not the Catholic Church.

reply to post by truejew


Is the "church" a building, a corporation or a state of mind?

reply to post by truejew

Paul says those who have outward circumcision only, are not true Jews. Those who have circumcision of the heart, are true Jews.

Paul never says anyone is a "true Jew", in those words.
It may have the word "true" in a couple of the most interpretive of the translations but the word in the Greek text is describing what is evident by observation.
It is conditional and in the negative, and says who is not a Jew, getting at what his behavior is as revealing what type of person he is.
You seem to be pulling a few words out of context and rearranging them to create your own custom verse to back up something you had already decided on, based on probably listening to some "ear tingling" talk.
Paul describes in Philippians 3 his Jewish bona fide's and says he counts them all as lost, exchanging that for being a follower of Christ.

prayers and thanks...Always