What is "This Generation?"

[whirlwind]

When a person sees words written on a page the first thing that has to be done is to interpret what those words mean, and as has been shown over and over again on this Forum, the very same words in the very same text are interpreted to mean something entirely different to each person who's interpreting them.

There is no such thing as THE WORDS OF THE LORD! Every word you see is one that was written by a human, and is being interpreted by a human!

Blessings,
Rose

[whirlwind]

Gotcha! You went EXACTLY where I thought you would go. Now compare Matthew’s account with that of Luke’s, and you will see that Luke's account is no different than Matthew's.

Luke 21: 5-6 Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations, He said, 6 'These things which you see—the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down.'

Luke and Matthew make absolutely NO mention of the foundation, western wall, outer court, or any other place EXCEPT the temple and its decorations. The Apostles were showing Christ the beautiful decorations and stones ON THE TEMPLE. The wailing wall is not part of the temple; furthermore, it may not even be Jewish. Studies of this wall are currently showing that the wailing wall was a wall built by Hadrian for the Roman Fort Antonia, which was used to keep the Barbarians out. Plus, the wailing wall was never considered a Jewish site until the 16th century. Lastly, the location of the wailing wall was used by Christians for more than 1000 years as a trash dump. It wasn’t until the 16th century that secular Jews moved the location of prayer to the wailing wall, and all based on a false premise.

At any rate, your 'inference' that 'one stone upon another' must mean every aspect of Jerusalem's buildings does not match the subject matter of the Temple Stones and its decoration. You’re usurping an interpretation (non-written interpretation) that the 'wailing wall' is part of the temple, but that is not what the Apostles were looking at. Jesus only responded to what they were looking at, but you’re inferring that Jesus was referring to everything (structure) around them. THAT is an inference based on an opinion with no factual basis.

Matthew 24:1-4 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Please read His Words. They need no explaining. I will add the following verse...take heed!

24:4 And Jesus answered and said unto them, Take heed that no man deceive you.

You are dead wrong, and it’s crazy to assume that the temple hasn’t been destroyed because of a wall that:

1. Has nothing to do with Herods temple
2. Was never even part of the Apostles discussion
3. Was not looked at, or admired by the Apostles
4. Never made 'DIRECT' mentioning by Christ

So your theory is nothing more than a loop-hole attempt to excuse the 70AD significance of the temple’s destruction. It’s as though you’ve rejected any Biblical significance of the horrible events of 70AD.

Weird is all I can say…very weird.

Joe

The end of the world/age, the sign of His coming and the stones one upon another HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH 70 AD. And ask yourself...do the "beautiful stones and donations" mentioned in Luke as adorning the temple have anything to do with stones "one upon another?"


Accept His Words or accept those of man but remember....take heed that no MAN deceive you.



.

[whirlwind]

Since anytime the destruction of the 'temple' was mentioned you countered with the true temple still stands, it became necessary to specifically designate the physical stone temple. That's the reason we use 'buildings of the temple' from the verses or 'man made' or 'physical,' etc. But, the 'buildings of the temple' WERE the component parts of the temple. There was no temple with a bunch of outbuildings scattered about the mount. There were the inner/outer courts, porches, men's court, women's court, baths, holy of holies etc. Those were the 'buildings of the temple.'

I continue to say the true temple stands. Your use of "buildings of the temple" is the proper use as it is what is written. Jesus DID NOT say the temple.

The buildings of the temple were all things seen by Christ as He sat upon the mount of Olives. All the "things" you have listed which includes the foundation upon which they were constructed were the buildings of the temple.

.

[TheForgiven]

Matthew 24:1-4 And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down. And as he sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the end of the world?

Please read His Words. They need no explaining. I will add the following verse...take heed!

Isn't it ironic how you ignored Luke's account all together, and are instead relying on the phrase "buildings" in Matthew's account. Weren't they all asking the same thing?

5 Then, as some spoke of the temple, how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations

Luke shows that the Apostles were speaking of the temple itself, in how it was adorned with beautiful stones and donations.

Now take a look at Mark's account:

1 Then as He went out of the temple, one of His disciples said to Him, “Teacher, see what manner of stones and what buildings are here!”

They were just in the temple, and as they were walking out of the temple, it is then that the disciples remarked of the very same things that Mathew and Luke record; the stones and construction of the temple that THEY JUST WALKED OUT OF; the western wall (of the first century temple complex) was not even visible from where they were standing. Even so, the wall that exists today is not Jewish.

You are going far beyond what is written. AND YOU STILL have not answered the fact that the wailing wall was never part of Herod's temple. That was a wall built by Hadrian which made up the western side of Ft. Antonias. You have not done your home work.

And trust me bro. When it comes to deception, you certainly fit the shoes of the false witness. You confidently assert with no proof, not validity, and no common sense that the temple Jesus spoke of, walked out of, wept over, to still be standing.

Perhaps you'd be interested to know why secular Jews in the 16th century chose this wall as the place of prayer. You'd be shocked!

The Christians who resided in that region used this wall, built by the Romans, as a trash dump site.

You are more than deceived bro; you are out of this world.

And you still have not answered Richards question, which you keep avoiding.

I'm awaiting your answer as well.

Joe

[TheForgiven]

I continue to say the true temple stands. Your use of "buildings of the temple" is the proper use as it is what is written. Jesus DID NOT say the temple.

Oh be he said the western wall?????

Unbelievable! Absolutely unbelievable.

It's obvious you're still ignoring Luke's account, which specifically mentions THE TEMPLE.

Joe

[Richard Amiel McGough]

I continue to say the true temple stands. Your use of "buildings of the temple" is the proper use as it is what is written. Jesus DID NOT say the temple.

Oh be he said the western wall?????

Unbelievable! Absolutely unbelievable.

It's obvious you're still ignoring Luke's account, which specifically mentions THE TEMPLE.

Joe

Ha! You got that right Joe! It's amazing to watch Whirlwind use every possible trick to suppress the truth of God's Word, especially since he declared in another thread that "I accept His Word in all things...that is the only way." Oh yeah baby ... that's about as believable as his argument against the Christ's prediction of the destruction of the Temple:

Luke 21:5 And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly stones and gifts, he said, 6 As for these things which ye behold, the days will come, in the which there shall not be left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Christ explicitly referred to the TEMPLE when he said "As for these which you behold." Note also that there is no mention of any stones not part of the Temple. The plain meaning of the text is clear and incontrovertible, and it just happens to contradict the "word of Whirlwind." No surprise there!

Richard

[Rose]

I continue to say the true temple stands. Your use of "buildings of the temple" is the proper use as it is what is written. Jesus DID NOT say the temple.

The buildings of the temple were all things seen by Christ as He sat upon the mount of Olives. All the "things" you have listed which includes the foundation upon which they were constructed were the buildings of the temple.

.

Hi Whirlwind,

Did you know that in order to have "buildings of the temple" there must have been a Temple? Otherwise, they would be called buildings of some other structure, not the temple. You can't have it both ways.

Blessings,
Rose

[Richard Amiel McGough]

Hi Whirlwind,

Did you know that in order to have "buildings of the temple" there must have been a Temple? Otherwise, they would be called buildings of some other structure, not the temple. You can't have it both ways.

Blessings,
Rose

Yes, Rose, I'm sure he knows that! But it's completely irrelevant because the Bible NEVER uses the word "Temple" to describe the the stupid pile of rocks called the Temple! Never! Not once! Here, let me prove it to you:

1 Kings 6:7 And the temple, when it was being built, was built with stone finished at the quarry, so that no hammer or chisel or any iron tool was heard in the temple while it was being built.

Hope that helps you understand the "mind" of Whirlwind.

[Tomret]

I continue to say the true temple stands. Your use of "buildings of the temple" is the proper use as it is what is written. Jesus DID NOT say the temple.

I didn't suggest the true temple doesn't stand. Matthew wrote "buildings of the temple." Mark wrote of the "great buildings" of the temple they had just exited. Luke summed those phrases with the word "temple." Luke was not an eyewitness, but might be compared to a modern highly conscientious investigative reporter.

(NASB) Luke 1:1 Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, 2 just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word, 3 it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus; 4 so that you may know the exact truth about the things you have been taught.

Since Luke was much closer to the event than you, and since his account was based on what he learned directly from the eyewitnesses, I'll have to take his word over yours.

The buildings of the temple were all things seen by Christ as He sat upon the mount of Olives. All the "things" you have listed which includes the foundation upon which they were constructed were the buildings of the temple.

From that vantage point He would have had a view not only of the buildings of the temple, but also retaining and city walls, surrounding homes, and other more distant structures, yet He only said the stones of the "buildings of the temple" (aka temple) would be thrown down. The "things" were component structures (buildings) of the temple which did sit upon a foundation. All that was surrounded by a wall, which was not a foundation as you like to claim. It was a wall.

[CWH]

Welcome whirlwind to this forum. I believe it is a divine whirlwind that brought him to this forum and it has caused a whirlwind in my head after reading this thread. making my hewd goes round and round. I think I finally understand what whirlwind is trying to say:

1. Jesus is the invisible temple that is still standing on the Temple Mount and it will never be destroyed.
2. What we see currently on the Temple Mount is the Dome of the Rock, the Aqsa Mosque and the wailing wall, the residential buildings...these are the buildings on the temple Mount.
3. It doesn't matter whether the current western wall is the original wall of the Temple or not (which is debatable) as it is still used as in worship to God by the Christians and the Jews and it still stands at the original site of the original Temple.
4. Since the wailing wall is used in worship to God and is standing at the original site of the Temple, it is still consider as part of the original Temple worshipping an invisible temple of God i.e. Jesus on the temple Mount. And as such the stones or building of the "original Temple" still stands. And only when this wailing wall of the "original temple" is destroyed with no stones upon another will the end comes.
5, let's imagine Jesus talking to us today just as He talked to his apostles opposite the Temple Mount 2,000 years ago, "you see the beautiful Dome of the Rock with itas golden Dome, the Aqsa mosque with their religious treasures and donations, the wailing wall standing on my invisible temple? These things which you see—the days will come in which not one stone shall be left upon another that shall not be thrown down.'

Is that correct? I hope I am not adding to the confusion.

Many Blessings.