The Temple Of God

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.

preacher4truth

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2016
5,976
218
63
#22
How many meanings do you see in the passage?
Pure subjectivism.

I see two clear meanings,
And you're incorrect.

Next, someone will come along and "prove" 12 different meanings and show that this really referred to the WTC's in NY, not just His body or the temple building. Their arguments would be just as valid as yours because, as yours, their's would be based purely on their subjective argument.

And no, your wresting here of the Greek doesn't prove your case, you are forcing your meaning onto the text.

because the Pharisees clearly understood
The Pharisees clearly misunderstood. That is the bottom line of it all.
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
6,564
210
48
#23
Sorry. Another typo correction because of my many typo errors:
That is the cause you highlight in red "and for this [email protected]

snd you leave it out

but the cause is that those who heard the truth and did not believe it, are thosevti whom a strong delusion will come that they will not have a chance to believe the TRITH but will believe the lie


therefore when the temple is rebuilt, they will see NOTHING wrong with it being built


snd that sir is a physical earthly structural temple
That "cause" which you highlight in red in the verse 2 Thessalonians 2:

"and for this cause"

That cause is spoken of and yet you leave it out?

The cause is that those who heard the truth and did not believe it, are those to whom a strong delusion will come...that they will not have a second chance to believe the TRUTH but will believe the lie


therefore when the temple is rebuilt, they will see NOTHING wrong with it being built

And that sir is a physical earthly structural temple
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
8,527
227
63
64
Texas
#24
Confused...don't know what you are trying to say.
Sorry, I misread your post. But no. Jesus did not make a statement with two meanings. The statement given by John is quite deliberate as to the exact meaning of Jesus statement and it leaves no room for a double meaning. "But He was speaking of the temple of His body." There no ambiguity in the meaning given by John.
 
Last edited:

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
5,503
410
83
#25
Sorry, I misread your post. But no. Jesus did not make a statement with two meanings. The statement given by John is quite deliberate as to the exact meaning of Jesus statement and it leaves no room for a double meaning. "But He was speaking of the temple of His body."
Correct. Christ made many enigmatic statements, and this was one of them. And this had nothing to do with the actual temple standing in Jerusalem, since it would be destroyed later on by the Romans. Therefore a third temple will be built in the near future and then the prophecy of 2 Thess 2 will be fulfilled. And after the second coming of Christ, a fourth temple (as described in Ezekiel) will be built as a genuine temple of God.
 

J7

Banned
Apr 2, 2017
1,915
13
0
#26
You simply are not understanding the passage.

Jesus spoke first to the Pharisees.

He said that they would destroy the temple.

This they duly did, as according to Josephus, it was the Jews who started the fires that led to the burning down of the temple.

Hence:

Luke 12:49
I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?


He then states that he will rebuild the temple in three days.

That is the conversation with the Pharisees.



Then at a later point he explains to the disciples that his words are also metaphorical.

Jhn 2:22

When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them;


What had he said to them?

He had explained to them that the temple represented his body and his resurrection.

Does that invalidate the first meaning. NO!!! Jesus never refuted the Pharisees understanding. He simply explained a second meaning to his words in private to the disciples. How do we know it was in private? Because it is not covered in the description of the encounter.

How clear do I need to make this?

And I do not resort to personal abuse, snarkiness, and general tut-tutting, which really does you no favours.
 
Last edited:

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
6,564
210
48
#27
You simply are not understanding the passage.

Jesus spoke first to the Pharisees.

He said that they would destroy the temple.

This they duly did, as according to Josephus, it was the Jews who started the fires that led to the burning down of the temple.

Hence:

Luke 12:49
I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?


He then states that he will rebuild the temple in three days.

That is the conversation with the Pharisees.



Then at a later point he explains to the disciples that his words are also metaphorical.

Jhn 2:22

When therefore he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this unto them;


What had he said to them?

He had explained to them that the temple represented his body and his resurrection.

Does that invalidate the first meaning. NO!!!

How clear do I need to make this?

And I do not resort to personal abuse, snarkiness, and general tut-tutting, which really does you no favours.
please understand the tone of the discussion between JESUS and the pharisees

They did NOT believe who HE claimed HIMSELF to be

if they had (as Peter later said) they wouldn't have killed the author of LIFE/the LORD of GLORY!
 
Last edited:

J7

Banned
Apr 2, 2017
1,915
13
0
#28
I initially said that God is involved in the deception, which somehow sounds wrong.

God sends 'energeia plane', which means something along the lines of

'an error which shows itself in action, sent through God's superhuman power.'

So Paul does seem to be saying that God gets some people to think in a wrong way, in order that they should believe a lie.
 
Last edited:

preacher4truth

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2016
5,976
218
63
#29
'an error which shows itself in action, sent through God's superhuman power.'

Goodness sake...people please look at the above.

j7, you're incorrect concerning the given passage on raising the temple.

And you're in grave error with the above statement.

God does not have superhuman power. Just think about that for a moment. See your grave error here?

And you're talking to others about being deceived?

Your error above is at best heterodox, and at worst utter heresy.

You need to retract that immediately if not sooner.
 

J7

Banned
Apr 2, 2017
1,915
13
0
#30
lol. Who are you trying to fool?

This is what Strong's says, take it up with them

energeia




  1. in the NT used only of superhuman power, whether of God or of the Devil
 

preacher4truth

Senior Member
Dec 28, 2016
5,976
218
63
#31
lol. Who are you trying to fool?

This is what Strong's says, take it up with them

energeia




  1. in the NT used only of superhuman power, whether of God or of the Devil
Strongs is, *gasp* incorrect. Just like you.

Now, who are you trying to fool?

It is utterly nonsensical that God would have superhuman power. It's a misnomer.
 

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
6,564
210
48
#32
I initially said that God is involved in the deception, which somehow sounds wrong.

God sends 'energeia plane', which means something along the lines of

'an error which shows itself in action, sent through God's superhuman power.'

So Paul does seem to be saying that God gets some people to think in a wrong way, in order that they should believe a lie.
HE is taken out of the way
the "hedge" is removed


thats what happebs
and because HE is taken out of the way, because HE hides His face (temporarily) from Jacobs struggles, HE "allows"...HE "lets" and dies not hold back egat HE had held back by HIS everyday grace upon all men (believer and unbeliever alike)

then truth and love will be cast down and people will "forget" and will be deceived and will do things that should not be done and will be
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
5,612
121
63
#33
This causes a lot of debate. A physical building, or the human body?

I have always seen it is a physical temple.

2 Thessalonians 2 needs very careful reading.

God in some way is involved in the deception

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

Now this is quite heavy stuff if you think about. Paul starts off by telling the Church not to let any man deceive us, but then tells us that God is involved in the deception!

The deception then that God sends is not a human being, as Paul has said not to let a human being deceive you.

Personally I believe that the deception God sends is the very temple itself, which is why Paul calls it the 'Temple of God', when of course it is no such thing, it is the temple of Satan.

Revelation 21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

The temple as that seen is used in parables to represent that not seen the faith principle. The parable hides the spiritual meaning from the lost as those who do walk by sight..called the evil generation . Those who require a sign before they can believe.

The use of the temple was temporal until the time of refomation. Its purpose was to preach the the suffering of Christ through the use of ceremonial laws beforehand and the glory to follow (the promised opening of the grave of the ten time thousands of Old testament saints who were held in a temporal place until the time of refomation.

This occurred when Christ said it is finished . The representative unseen glory was the earthquake and the darkening of the Sun . The angels in heaven witnessed the event as they entered the Holy City the heavenly new Jerusalem (Zion) as the prepared bride of Christ, the church.

The present as that seen the temporal, served as a metaphor in that parable as a figure to represent the true temple. Christ in us, as Christ with us (Emanuel) . Not Christ is us.

The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing:Which was a figure for the "time then present", in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the "time of reformation."Heb 9:8

We who live in bodies of death are not the temple of God . We have the treasure of that temple in us but are never to assume it could be us .

When the viel was rent the bricks or gates or what ever was in view vanished .

Some worshiped the existing stones as idols and make not one stone left upon another as that which determines it useless had come to a end. 70 AD.

I look at it from when the veil was rent, the last days began .

It seems that disclosing a reformation and to what it accomplished and discussing its work is something many stay away from . Not just the Jews who do turn bricks called the wailing wall into another veil, in idol, worship putting their hope in that seen...
 
Last edited:

miknik5

Senior Member
Jun 2, 2016
6,564
210
48
#34
lol. Who are you trying to fool?

This is what Strong's says, take it up with them

energeia




  1. in the NT used only of superhuman power, whether of God or of the Devil
When HE who holds all things back by HIS POWER is taken out of the way,,,all things that held will no longer gold


look into job's individual struggles and you will see individually what will be fully poured out upon all


why?

brcause the "hedge" (of GOD's protection) will be removed....temporarily

Then it will be made manifest those who did not have a love for the TRUTH from those who will understand and will wait
 

oldhermit

Senior Member
Jul 28, 2012
8,527
227
63
64
Texas
#35
How many meanings do you see in the passage?

I see two clear meanings, because the Pharisees clearly understood Jesus to be speaking about the physical temple, whilst the disciples understood Jesus to be speaking about his body.

So, we have two distinct meanings at play.

Now John introduces the word 'de', which has a range of meanings, including: on the other hand, moreover, furthermore, on top of this.

So 'de' and 'but' are clearly not words that transliterate perfectly, far from it, 'de' has a whole range of meanings not covered by the English 'but'.

Now, Koine is a context driven language, so given that John has presented two competing meanings, a literal and a metaphorical one, it stands to reason that 'on top of this' would be the correct translation of 'de' here, to show the metaphorical meaning being added to the literal.

You can argue all you want, but you won't be right. Why not pray first, and then engage?
I think the older I get the less patience I have with this kind of absurd nonsense. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about so I think I will just leave it with you from here on.
 
May 11, 2014
936
39
0
#36
Both options are certainly viable.
There are two words used for temple in the Scriptures. We are also called the temple of God.

Peter also calls the Church the temple of God and tells us to be built like living stones.
 

posthuman

Senior Member
Jul 31, 2013
18,153
816
113
#37
Three days is prophetically three thousand years.
on what basis??

if you're thinking 2 Peter 3:8 is a unit-conversion equation, you're wrong. don't feel bad though, apparently quite a lot of people seem to have been taught the same bogosity.
have a look at Psalm 90:4 -- which is what Peter is quoting -- and you see that the same 1,000 years is compared both to a day and to a period of about 4 hours.
Peter's not giving us a mathematical equation to convert God-time to human-time. He's illustrating ((as the psalmist also does)) that the Eternal One is very patient, and being unconstrained, doesn't view time in the same appetent way we do.

anyhow understanding that He rose on the third day, it's very clear that Christ wasn't being ambiguous about the passage of time here.
 

J7

Banned
Apr 2, 2017
1,915
13
0
#38
On the basis that the bible tells me so?

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

on what basis??

if you're thinking 2 Peter 3:8 is a unit-conversion equation, you're wrong. don't feel bad though, apparently quite a lot of people seem to have been taught the same bogosity.
have a look at Psalm 90:4 -- which is what Peter is quoting -- and you see that the same 1,000 years is compared both to a day and to a period of about 4 hours.
Peter's not giving us a mathematical equation to convert God-time to human-time. He's illustrating ((as the psalmist also does)) that the Eternal One is very patient, and being unconstrained, doesn't view time in the same appetent way we do.

anyhow understanding that He rose on the third day, it's very clear that Christ wasn't being ambiguous about the passage of time here.
 

J7

Banned
Apr 2, 2017
1,915
13
0
#39
Better that way or it could get personal

I think the older I get the less patience I have with this kind of absurd nonsense. You have absolutely no idea what you are talking about so I think I will just leave it with you from here on.
 

notmyown

Senior Member
May 26, 2016
3,430
254
0
#40
on what basis??

if you're thinking 2 Peter 3:8 is a unit-conversion equation, you're wrong. don't feel bad though, apparently quite a lot of people seem to have been taught the same bogosity.
have a look at Psalm 90:4 -- which is what Peter is quoting -- and you see that the same 1,000 years is compared both to a day and to a period of about 4 hours.
Peter's not giving us a mathematical equation to convert God-time to human-time. He's illustrating ((as the psalmist also does)) that the Eternal One is very patient, and being unconstrained, doesn't view time in the same appetent way we do.

anyhow understanding that He rose on the third day, it's very clear that Christ wasn't being ambiguous about the passage of time here.
bonus points for appetent. ;)

in case anyone is wondering, it has a cognate in the English word appetite.