KFC,

Glad you asked these questions.

The whole point of this discussion is whether or not a future (21st century or on) rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple is Scriptural. You say it is; I say it is not.

The Jerusalem Temple may well be rebuilt....I'll take your word for it...I have no problem with that whatsoever.

We've already discussed that if the Temple is rebuilt it will be a work by man for man and it will be a work in vain. The one great attempt to rebuild the Temple that utterly failed was when Julian the Apostate 361-363 AD undertook the work with unlimited money, and the aid of thousands of Jewish men.

What's the difference this time? CHRIST.

With Christ everything changed for everyone...the Jewish people included...they are to belong to the New and Eternal Covenant in the Blood of Jesus Christ. St. Paul taught infallibly that Christ is the "seed" of Abraham and so whoever is incorportaed into Him that is into His Mystical Body the Church, by means of baptism inherits the promise God made to Abraham and becomes a member of God's covenant people.

I keep telling you God is not a God of confusion..there cannot be dual Covenants in existence at the same time that His people are worship Him under.  Nor is there one covenant with dual stages of development. It isn't and can't be.

Those who believe in Christ are not engrafted in to "the people of the flesh" of the defunct nation of Old Isreal, but rather into Christ Himself, who again, is the seed of Abraham and the perfection of the Abrahamic Covenant. In the New and Eternal Covenant people includes all nations and peoples who follow CHrist.

The Temple was always the work of man. G-d doesn't need a temple. Man does.

And scripture says that the Messiah will return the cities of Israel into their former state. For Jerusalem, that includes the Temple. How could it not?

It's not really in vain because it will help to bring about the end of time.  It's all part of the plan to usher in the end.  This will be the last abomination coming from mankind and it's when God himself comes down and says "enough!"  Just like he did in Sodom and just like he did in Noah's day.  The cup of God's wrath will be overflowing and as HE is a patient God this will be some overflowed cup. 

I agree with you on this one Lula. 

"Defunct nation"?

We have survived several attempted and executed genocides and our new state has survived several wars of extermination.

Can you name another nation as functioning as the people of Israel?

(But then I am talking to someone who believes she speaks for G-d...)

By "defunct nation of Old Israel" I'm speaking strictly in the theological religious sense. 

Which is irrelevant since it cannot be tested or falsified.

But don't you think that for a Christian, or anyone for that matter, to speak for Jesus is presumptuous?

Look at the guy who made the video "A View From the Cross". The video is clearly meant to show the world from Jesus' perspective, with commentary from Jesus' point of view.

Now, I don't believe that Jesus is G-d or even a prophet. So for me the only being that means to me what Jesus means to Christians is G-d Himself. And maybe it is a difference between the Jewish and the Christian religions, but I would _never_ make a video from the point of view of G-d (unless it is clearly meant as a joke) and I would _never_ assume that I speak for G-d. In fact it wouldn't even have occured to me. It's not a matter of thinking about it and resisting because it would be wrong, instead it's something I couldn't even fathom doing.

G-d is just too great and I can neither speak for Him nor think like Him and I cannot even understand Him or describe Him in any terms other than say what He is not. A mouse. A man. A physical being. A non-physical being. A father. A son. He is really none of these things.

So you can go on about details based on your faith that say things about my people and my religion that we cannot perceive and you cannot demonstrate. But the basic fact remains that we still regard G-d as our G-d and see ourselves as His people. And the reason I don't presume to speak for Him is just a symptom of this truth which will remain forever and outlive any religion and certainly any man who pretends to speak for G-d.

LULA POSTS 137

 re: the highlighted, Leauki posts: 142

kfc posts: 142

KFC, Here is your post showing both verses:

Note the differences between KFC's translation and the Douay Rheims of Daniel 9: 26-27!!!

26 "And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain; and the people that shall deny Him shall not be His. And a people with their leader that shall come; shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war, the appointed desolation."

27 "And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week, and in the half of the week the victim and the sacrifice shall fail. And there shall be in the temple the abominaton of desolation. and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation, and to the end."

Rapturists and Millennialists believe verse 26 was fulfilled in 70AD......and then there is this time gap........2,000 year and going .........verse 27 is in the future and centers on ethnic Israel rebuilding the Jerusalem Temple and the coming of the Messias who will set up His earthly Messianic Kingdom and rule over it for 1,000 years. This falsification of the kingdom is called Millenarianism which the CC has rejected....see the Catechism of the CC # 676. 

Again, almost all of the Church Fathers have taught that verses 26 and 27 have been fulfilled...that Daniel's 70th week ended no later than 70AD. Daniel asks God for a timeline leading up to the Messiah's coming Kingdom and God reveals it to him. St.Jerome said, "None of the prophets has spoken so clearly concerning Christ....he set forth the very time at which He would come...stated the actual number of years involved, and announced beforehand the clearest signs." Scripture reveals Christ founded the kingdom of God during His First Advent. Since the kingdom has been established, the logical response is to look for it...the only Church that claims to be Christ's Kingdom is the Catholic Church.

So what do verses 26-27 mean?

Verse 26 "And after sixty-two weeks Christ shall be slain; and the people that shall deny Him shall not be His. And a people with their leader that shall come; shall destroy the city and the sanctuary: and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war, the appointed desolation."

"And a people with their leader" is the Romans under Titus, the head of the Roman legions who finished destroying  Jerusalem and the Temple in 70AD.

But the Romans under Titus weren't the only ones who destroyed the city. The Jews did at which Daniel only hinted. Jesus had warned the Jewish leaders that the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple was the direct result of His being cut off which they helped orchestrate. Read St.Luke 19:41-44. The Messias is the focus of the vision and the prince is Christ. The people of the prince were His own people, the Jewish people, they destroy the city.

The Jewish historian, Josephus was an eyewitness to the Jewish Roman War in 67AD. He wrote the "Wars of the Jews". He basically said the Jews destroyed themselves becasue of the abominations they performed. He tells that there were 3 warring factions within the walls of Jerusalem that caused devestation before the Romans ever entered the city. Jewish tradition claims there was food for 21 years,but the warring factions burned one another's stores of grain initiating a severe famine.  He writes, "The Jews of Jerusalem "never suffered anything that was worse from the Romans than they made each other suffer. They overthrew the city themselves."

Daniel links the war over Jerusalem to the time of 'the end"...67-70AD. This destruction occurs at the end of the seventy sevens (70 weeks) and is that period after which the Messias has come and set up His kingdom, the Church.    

v. 27 is about the strong covenant, sacrifice and judgment.

27 "And he shall confirm the covenant with many, in one week, and in the half of the week the victim and the sacrifice shall fail. And there shall be in the temple the abominaton of desolation. and the desolation shall continue even to the consummation, and to the end."

Some background........Daniel's 70th week begins with the Incarnation (the Birth of Christ) around 4BC and spans 7 decades to 67-70AD. During that time is the time of convenantal transition (from the Old Covenant Judaism to the New Covenent Christianity of which the Church Fathers write.   

"and He shall confirm the covenant with many",  means that "He" is Christ and Christ shall confirm the covenant...which is the New Covenant in His Blood and it's everlasting. Isaias spoke of this 55:3; Ezek. 37:26; Jeremias 31:31; 33.

"in one week, and in the half of the week"  means Christ preached 3 years and a half

" the victim and the sacrifice shall fail" means that halfway through the last week of seven decades the Christ caused the animal sacrifices of the Old Covenant to cease by sacrificing Himself to usher in a strong, new and everlasting Covenant in His Blood.  By Christ's Sacrifice on the Cross abolished all the Old Covenant sacrifices.

 And the last part of verse 27, "And there shall be in the temple the abominaton of desolation" means the Romans under Titus fulfilled this last part. First, the foreign army on Jewish soil was considered an abomination. The Romans practiced idolatry and they marched behind the ensign of an unclean bird, the eagle. Josephus writes, "They brought their ensigns to the Temple and set them over against its eastern gate; and their they did offer sacrifices to them." The Romans made the city desolate by tearing the Temple down to the very last stone. In the summer of 66 Jerusalem halted the daily sacrifices for Nero and this starrted the 42 month war between the Jews and the Romans.

We already discussed this.

For me, only the Hebrew version counts. And we have already seen that KFC's translations are closer to the original Hebrew than yours. We have even seen that for the Greek Christian Bible. I checked it myself re "priest" vs "elder".

We sure have noted the differences in translations. And yes, the Protestant translations are indeed closer to yours....yours being the Jamnian Palestinian canon, a completely new version of Jewish Scripture omitting some books entirely and rewriting others by the Rabbis of Jamnia in 90AD.  

The ancient Hebrew sacred Books and writings were translated into the Septuagint in 200BC by 70 Jewish scholars. That's when the standard canon of 46 Books of the Jewish Scripture was set. The Septuagint was used universally by Jews right up through the time of Christ.  

The Jamnian Palestinian version is profoundly different from the original text of the Septuagint whiich was the Old Testament for Old Israel and has always been the Old Testment for the Church.  

Oh yes, the Septuagint and the Jamnian Palestinaian are profoundly different.

I don't know what you mean by "standard canon", but there are several standards, depending on tribe and religion.

I have no idea whether those parts of the "Hebrew" Bible written in Ge'ez and acknowledges by the Israel tribe of Dan and Ethiopian Christians are the word of G-d or not. Perhaps they are, the word of G-d _to_ the tribe of Dan.

NO IT DOESN"T.  It tells us right in Daniel when it commences.  God said CLEARLY to Daniel:

"Seventy weeks are determined for YOUR people and for YOUR holy city......know therefore and understand that from the going forth of the command to restore and build Jerusalem until the Messiah the Prince, there shall be seven weeks and sixty two weeks......."

so there you have it.  It commences with the command to build Jerusalem AFTER the captivity.  It has nothing to do with the birth of Jesus.  Show me where it says that?   You're making stuff up Lula...or following someone who is.  The only thing you've got right here is the birth probably was 4 B.C. 

The 70 weeks clearly start with the rebuilding of Jerusalem and goes 69 weeks.  It's very clear.  Show me here where I've got it wrong Lula.  62+7=69. 

one week is seven years Lula.  Where does seven years fit into Christ's ministry?  Again, you're trying to make a square peg fit into a round hole.  It doesn't fit.  There are NO seven decades mentioned anywhere.  Where are you getting that?  Seventy sevens is NOT seven decades.  It's 490 years. Seven decades is 70 years.  That amount of time can't be right because it says it commences with the rebuildng of Jerusalem which we know is 445 BC.  We have the starting point.  So how can it be 7 decades?  Christ didn't preach 70 years after 445 B.C.  We know the 445 B.C date is correct historically.   

You're backdating scripture that wasn't meant to be backdated. It's future still.  Jesus very clearly gave the signs for the end in Matt 24 that compliment what Daniel was saying and it has NOTHING to do with Christ's preaching.  He was asked "what are the signs of the end of the age?"  This is what Daniel was referring to.  Your version makes absolutely NO SENSE!  You're not putting it together expositionally. 

I can see you're way over your head on this. 

and it should.  We should ALWAYS go to the source when there's a question.  Always.  That's the right thing to do Leauki.  I agree wholeheartedly.   Lula can't seem to get that.  She thinks the Latin is the best source when it's not. 

LEAUKI POSTS 152

Yes true, but what's the distinction between the OLd Testament Temple, Divine worship and ceremonies and the future one that some are planning to rebuild?   God.

God gave Moses the clearest and most definite directions regarding the Tabernacle and the Temple. For example the LORD told Solomon, "I have heard thy prayer and I h ave sanctified (by My presence) this house which thou hast built; and my eyes and my heart shall be always there." But becasue of Solomon's apostasy, that all ended. Ditto with Herod's Temple, yet its ending has vastly more significance.

After the ninth hour Christ died. At that moment the Temple Veil was rent in two from top to bottom. The tearing of the Veil which had screened the Holy of Holies from the people's eyes did proclaim not only the end of the old Mosaic covenant, its sacrifices, ceremonies etc, but even of the Holy of Holies itself. God is telling the Jewish people who had rejected Christ something major here. 

That's why I said that the rebuilding of the Temple will be a work of man, by man for man, and will be a work in vain, meaning that God isn't going to be anywherre near or backing the supposed rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple that's being discussed.  

No.

The answer is "time". G-d is eternal. He is not the difference between past and future.

I thinks so far we have seen two major differences between how we view G-d.

First, I think that no man can assume to speak for G-d, whereas you accept the idea that some can. I consider it a sin, you consider it appropriate.

Second, I think that G-d is eternal, you think He is changing and similar to time.

lula posts:

kfc posts 149

KFC,

We agree Daniel's "abomination of desolation" has happened with Antiochus IV which is recounted in 1 and 2 Machabees and will have multiple fulfillments.

But carefully read Daniel's 3 references to the "abomination of desolation". You'll find  it is a time when the "sacrifice and offering" cease 9:27, or when the "continual sacrifice" is replaced. 11:31; 12:11; 8:11-13.

Daniel's "Abomination of desolation" as a time when the "sacrifice and offering ceased" occurred in 67-70AD during the Jewish-Roman War which ended with the destruction of the Temple and the city of Jerusalem.  


Go back and read St.Matthew  24:15 "abomination of desolation" and you'll find it refers to a sacrilege on the altar or desecration of the sanctuary of "the holy place" by a "man of sin" 2Thess. 2:3-4 or "Antichrist" 1St. John 2:18 who must come prior to the end of the world.

70AD fits Daniel's "abomination of desolation" as there was a desecration of the sanctuary of "the holy place" by a "man of sin". Titus was a pagan a "man of sin" and he profaned the Temple.

Why was 70AD a fulfillment of Daniel 9:26-27?  Read St.Matt. 26: 64. At His trial Jesus quoting Daniel told the Sanhedrin which condemned Him that they will see the day (in their generation) when He "the Son of Man" comes to judge them. And He did...the Temple is no more...and ever since there has been a religious poverty and famine of the former people of God for, of their own doing, they are "without King, without Prince, without sacrifice and without altar." Osee 3:4.

I agree the "abomination of desolation"  will take place in the future at the time of Antichrist who will sit "in the holy place".

You say  "the holy place" is going to be a future rebuilt Temple and I say, "no way, Jose".

Now concerning AC and the abomination of desolation, Antichrist isn't going to give a hoot about animal sacrifices or putting a stop to them. It's the sacrifice associated with the New Covenant worship in the Holy Mass that will cease or be replaced by a pseudo sacrifice when Satan is loosed and Antichrist is revealed.


"standing in the holy place"....even if a future Jerusalem Temple will be built...it cannot be "the holy place" as God will not dwell there...Almighty God has made that plain in 33Ad when the Temple Veil was rent in two from top to bottom.

In this passage, "the holy place" is the Church of the New Covenant .....the sacrifice is the "clean oblation" on the Church altars located all over the world as per the fulfillment of Malachais 1:11.  

These passages are not predicting a future Jerusalem Temple in which the AC will desolate. The Temple here is the New Covenant Church the Catholic Church.

can you back this up with scripture?