Timeline for The resurrection & Deut 13 - If a prophet says "Let us worship another god" - Do NOT follow him, even if he gives a sign/miracle
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
9 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nov 21 at 3:00 | comment | added | Mike Borden | @wmasse I would hope they would be impacted by the sheer weight of millennia of silence. It is ridiculous to conclude (PhD or not) that the Gospels were written after the temple was destroyed and yet that destruction is not mentioned. In fact, not mentioned is putting it softly. According to Matthew 24:1 Jesus' conversation of chapter 23 and the prediction of the temples destruction occurred at the temple. The "learned folk" are accusing the Gospels of fabricating lies (if the temple was already gone) because to accept what they say is death to self. | |
| Nov 21 at 2:50 | comment | added | Mike Borden | @AviAvraham The first tabernacle was after the pattern of heavenly things shown to Moses. The second was an embellished copy of the first. The third was the body of the Messiah, the temple made without hands. He went into the heavenly reality (not the earthly copy) with his own blood and made permanent atonement. That is why the earthly temple is gone: That way is shut. Christianity might say that God uses Islam to keep the Temple Mount buried. | |
| Nov 20 at 19:55 | comment | added | Avi Avraham | This argument is very, very specious. The fact that the 2nd Temple was destroyed no more points to Christianity being true than it points to Islam. In fact, Islam can one up Christianity here and claim that the presence of a mosque on the Temple Mount today means that Mohammeds revelation is the truth | |
| Nov 20 at 16:51 | comment | added | Avi Avraham | @wmasse the promised third temple and the messiah offering sacrifices there for his own sins counters Mike Borden's points about the now destroyed 2nd temple | |
| Nov 20 at 16:23 | comment | added | wmasse | @AviAvraham The traditional Christian interpretation is that it's a metaphor, and there's good reason to think it is, because it's kind of hard to reconcile with Christianity otherwise. | |
| Nov 20 at 16:22 | comment | added | wmasse | The Temple being destroyed is not specific enough to prove anything more than a lucky guess. Also the Phds (and Jews) say the Gospels were written after the Temple was destroyed. Do you actually think Jews would listen to that argument? | |
| Nov 20 at 16:03 | comment | added | Avi Avraham | Ezekiel 46 promises a third temple | |
| Nov 20 at 14:59 | comment | added | Nigel J | Up-voted +1. The ark, also, as well as the temple. They shall say no more, The ark of the covenant of the LORD: neither shall it come to mind: neither shall they remember it; neither shall they visit it; neither shall that be done any more. Jermiah 3:16. Within that framework itself (the first covenant) was an admission that it was temporary, waiting for the Promised Seed to come. Malachi 3:1,2 also. The Messenger of the (Everlasting) Covenant would be the Lord himself, preceded by 'Elijah' John. All is plain. Nothing is obscure. | |
| Nov 20 at 14:43 | history | answered | Mike Borden | CC BY-SA 4.0 |