Not every jew.
Only the shouting crowd, the Pharisees, the Judahs....
Mary, peter, josaph.... didn't put Jesus on cross. Peter was weak, but he repented.
Please be accurate with you assumptions and reasoning, if capable.
Replacement theology? Yes or No.
- Thread starter Gideon300
- Start date
-
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.
Only the shouting crowd, the Pharisees, the Judahs....
Mary, peter, josaph.... didn't put Jesus on cross. Peter was weak, but he repented.
Please be accurate with you assumptions and reasoning, if capable.
The Bible indicates that God chose to provide the world salvation by means of Messiah,
and He chose to form Israel as the means of providing Messiah for blessing the world with salvation.
Both choices are part of God's one plan of salvation (Gen. 22:18, Rom. 4:12&16-17),
which was to create one spiritual Israel or body of Christ (Eph. 4:4-6), whose members
include all who believe in Jesus as Lord, whether Gentile or Jew (Rom. 11:25-32, Gal. 3:28, Eph. 2:11-3:6).
Again, political Israel and Gentile nations will be involved with world history until it ends.
Get a grip on actual Biblical reality friend.
[Mat 24:15 NKJV] 15 "Therefore when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place" (whoever reads, let him understand),
[Mar 13:14 NKJV] 14 "So when you see the 'abomination of desolation,' spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing where it ought not" (let the reader understand), "then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains.
Dan 12:11
And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.
[2Th 2:3-4 KJV]
3 Let no man deceive you by any means: for [that day shall not come], except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that ***he*** as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that ***he*** is God.
The passages collectively require a real Jewish sanctuary in Jerusalem, with a functioning sacrificial system, an altar, worshippers, courts, and an inner sanctuary, which is then physically desecrated by the Antichrist and his image.
A literal, futurist reading of Daniel, Matthew 24, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 11–13 requires a physical Jewish Temple in Jerusalem, with functioning sacrifice and worship, which is then desecrated by the Antichrist. The idea that the “abomination of desolation” means Antichrist corrupting the human “body-temple” through transhumanism does not fit the language or context of these passages.
1. Daniel requires a functioning sanctuary and sacrifices
Daniel 9:27 says:Daniel 12:11 likewise speaks of:
The sequence is clear:
Jewish sacrifice exists → sacrifice is stopped → the abomination is set up.
“Sacrifice” and “offering” are ordinary Jewish cultic terms. They naturally require an altar and sanctuary. Nothing in the text suggests genetic modification, implants, AI, or desecration of human bodies.
Daniel 11:31 gives the historical prototype in Antiochus IV Epiphanes:
Antiochus desecrated the physical Jerusalem Temple, stopped Jewish sacrifice, and imposed pagan worship. He therefore provides the prophetic type for the future Antichrist.
R. B. Thieme explicitly treats Antiochus as a foreshadowing of the future Tribulation desecration.
2. Jesus puts the abomination in a physical holy place
Matthew 24:15–16:Notice the physical and geographical language:
- something is standing;
- it is in a holy place;
- people in Judea must immediately flee.
Arnold Fruchtenbaum interprets the phrase as something standing like an image or idol in the Holy Place.
3. Paul says Antichrist sits in the Temple of God
2 Thessalonians 2:3–4 describes the man of sin:The Greek word is naos, normally referring not to the entire Temple complex but to the Temple sanctuary proper, in contrast with hieron, which can describe the broader precincts.
Paul therefore describes an identifiable individual taking his seat in God's sanctuary and claiming divine status.
Yes, Paul can use “temple” metaphorically for the believer's body in 1 Corinthians 6:19, but there he explicitly says:
Likewise John 2:21 explicitly explains:
No such metaphorical explanation appears in 2 Thessalonians 2. Context determines whether naos is literal or figurative.
4. Revelation 11 makes an architectural Temple unavoidable
Revelation 11:1–2 says:The passage distinguishes:
- the Temple;
- the altar;
- the worshippers;
- the outer court;
- the Gentiles;
- the holy city;
- a period of 42 months.
If “Temple” means the human body, then what are the altar, outer court, worshippers, Gentile occupation, and holy city? The interpretation collapses.
5. Revelation 13 identifies the idolatrous element
Revelation 13:14–15 describes the False Prophet ordering mankind to:and giving power to:
Put the passages together:
Daniel: the abomination is set up after sacrifice ceases.
Matthew: it stands in the holy place.
Paul: Antichrist occupies God's sanctuary and claims deity.
Revelation: an image of the Beast is created and worship is demanded.
The natural synthesis is:
Antichrist seizes the Temple → sacrifices cease → he claims deity → the Beast's image is established → compulsory worship follows.
6. Fruchtenbaum's position
Fruchtenbaum expressly connects:- Daniel 9:27;
- Matthew 24:15;
- 2 Thessalonians 2:3–4;
- Revelation 11:1–2.
At the midpoint of the Tribulation, Antichrist takes control of the Temple, enters the sacred sanctuary, proclaims himself God, and institutes the abomination of desolation.
Fruchtenbaum concludes that the Temple must be both:
“standing and functioning”
by the midpoint of the Tribulation.
He allows that it might be built either before the Tribulation or during its first half, but by midweek it must unquestionably exist and be operational.
7. Walvoord reaches the same conclusion
John F. Walvoord reasons that if Daniel predicts Jewish sacrifices being stopped, then:- a Jewish Temple must first exist;
- sacrifices must have been reinstituted.
Thus rebuilding the Temple is not merely speculation. It is a logical requirement of the prophetic text.
8. Thieme is equally explicit
R. B. Thieme teaches that:- the Temple will be rebuilt;
- Jewish ritual will resume;
- the sacrifices will later be prohibited;
- the Beast's image will be placed in the sanctuary;
- worship of the Beast will be enforced.
9. Does the text specifically require the Holy of Holies?
Precision is useful here.Matthew says the abomination stands in the “holy place.”
Paul says Antichrist sits in the naos of God, meaning the Temple sanctuary proper.
Neither passage literally uses the expression “Holy of Holies.”
Nevertheless, Fruchtenbaum, Thieme, and other dispensational interpreters place the climactic act there because Antichrist is claiming God's own place and prerogatives. The Holy of Holies historically represented the supreme locus of God's presence.
Thus the strongest formulation is:
The text explicitly requires Antichrist's desecration of the physical Temple sanctuary; identifying the precise location as the Holy of Holies is a strong contextual inference rather than an explicit phrase in the verse.
10. Antiochus establishes the prophetic pattern
Daniel's earlier fulfillment under Antiochus provides the pattern:physical Jerusalem
→ physical Temple
→ physical altar
→ literal sacrifices
→ sacrifices stopped
→ idolatrous desecration.
The future Antichrist repeats and intensifies the same pattern.
Turning the future fulfillment into transhumanism breaks the deliberate correspondence Daniel establishes.
11. The timing fits across the prophetic books
Daniel 9 places the event at the middle of the seventieth week.Matthew 24 says the abomination triggers the Great Tribulation.
Revelation repeatedly describes the final period as 42 months, or approximately 3½ years.
Thus:
Seven-year period
→ midpoint
→ Temple desecrated
→ sacrifices stopped
→ Antichrist's self-deification
→ final 42 months
→ Second Coming.
Conclusion
The “body-temple through transhumanism” interpretation fails because the prophetic vocabulary is consistently:Jewish, geographical, architectural, sacrificial, and cultic.
Daniel requires real sacrifices that are stopped. Jesus locates the abomination in a holy place in Judea. Paul has the Antichrist physically taking his seat in the naos of God. Revelation describes a Temple, altar, worshippers, outer court, holy city, and Beast image.
The cumulative evidence therefore requires a physical Third Temple in Jerusalem.
One qualification should be maintained: Scripture does not explicitly say Antichrist personally orders its construction because he intends from the beginning to desecrate it. It does, however, require that by the midpoint of Daniel's seventieth week the Temple is standing, functioning, and conducting sacrifices, after which Antichrist seizes and profanes it.
I know you like to repeat this but it really has nothing to do with the subject, which is Replacement Theology and why it is dangerous and harmful.
I have to separate what Scripture actually says from claims that blend spiritual language with biological speculation, because once those get mixed, the text itself is no longer the authority.
When I hear someone say that DNA is “the word of God,” or that editing DNA is “editing Scripture,” or that human bodies are “the two witnesses,” I have to admit plainly: none of that comes from the Bible.
Scripture never equates nucleotides with revelation, never identifies Adam as “water” and Eve as “blood,”
I have to separate what Scripture actually says from claims that move far beyond the text.
When I hear someone say that DNA is “the word of God,” that altering DNA is “editing Scripture,” or that transhumanism is Satan placing himself on the mercy seat, I have to pause—not because the spiritual concern is illegitimate, but because the claims themselves are not grounded in the biblical witness.
Scripture never equates human DNA with the Word, never identifies Adam as “water” and Eve as “blood,” never teaches that our genome is a manifestation of Scripture, and never describes the two witnesses of Revelation as biological components of humanity. When I read Genesis, John, and Revelation closely, I see that the “image of God” is not molecular but relational, vocational, and spiritual; the “Word made flesh” is Christ alone; and the “two witnesses” are prophetic figures, not biological metaphors.
So, I have to say plainly: I cannot affirm claims that Scripture does not teach, even if they arise from a desire to defend God’s holiness or resist deception.
What Scripture does teach is that the body is a vessel for the spirit, that life is in the blood, and that pride, rebellion, and self‑exaltation are Satan’s oldest strategies—but I must anchor those truths in the text itself, not in speculative biology or conspiratorial frameworks.
I honestly wonder if these people have ever opened a Bible. It's stunning. That has to be some kind of racism or hatred, that they would twist Scripture beyond recognition and have people follow their heresy. I never thought people could be this far from the Gospel until I can here to CC. It still surprises me. smh
I use the term "end times" in quotation marks only regrettably.It is the end of the age, not the end times.
And only for convenience sake.
The fact is that the Church Age HAS ALREADY ENDED by the time the Tribulation starts.
And to use the term "the beginning of the Day of the Lord, the age to come, the Millennial reign" (which is precisely where the 70th week of Daniel Tribulation resides dispensationally) is not convenient. And the vast majority of the audience have not the slightest understanding of the fact of this matter.
You do realize that the Day of the Lord begins exactly here. Right?
Rev 5:7
And he came and took the book out of the right hand of him that sat upon the throne.
Rev 6:1
And I saw when the Lamb opened one of the seals, and I heard, as it were the noise of thunder, one of the four beasts saying, Come and see.
Yes, clearly it has been the menace of society. Everyone is like this dispy stuff has ruined our lives. The outrage, I don't know how anyone has survived it.
I think this is the key
Yes everyone can argue about their theology all life long.
But show me where God telling His children to commit sin?
What do you mean?
Do you have any useful and accurate exegesis to offer?
Your "one liners" and trivial sniping do not count as scholarship.
Just to let you know.
I would wager that you never knew that this verse existed.
Isa 14:13
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
There really is no way around the clear statements of Christ Jesus but you keep trying, the question is why do you seek to undermine His words?
This is a complete concoction of your own imagination.
There is no precedent in the OT for the fig tree being a symbol of Israel..that is being read into the text.
As well, in Luke we see it recorded as Jesus saying "look at all the trees."
Jesus was giving a time frame for everything that they would see in that first century... and the starting point in the passage is the destruction of the temple.
Matthew 11:16 (cf. Luke 7:31) “But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the marketplaces and calling to their playmates.”
Matthew 23:36 “Truly, I say to you, all these things will come upon this generation.”
Matthew 12:41 (cf. Luke 11:32) “The men of Nineveh will rise up at the judgment with this generation and condemn it, for they repented at the preaching of Jonah, and behold, something greater than Jonah is here.”
This generation = Jesus contemporaries.
1988 has come an gone, get over it, move on.
I agree with you entirely: there is no Old Testament precedent for the fig tree symbolizing Israel, and Jesus never assigns that meaning in the Gospels. That interpretation is imported from later systems, not drawn from the text.
I quote the words of Christ Jesus they are sufficient for me.
Christ is reigning right now, the Old Covenant Age has been consummated.
This is the real travesty of Darby Dispensationalism you deny Him His rightful place as Victor, King, Lord and Reigning in the spiritual realm, which is just as real as the physical ..rather we still read this nonsense about Satan running the show when Christ Jesus clearly defeated him.
It is the end of the age, not the end times.
I see you believe in the Jewish eschatology rather than the Christian perspective. Or are you referring to the reign of Christ?
Jesus ended the conversation with......heaven and earth shall pass away but my words remain forever
Do you think this was a shock to the Apostles?