Epignossis
User
Platinum Boarder
| Posts: 151 |   |
|
The Temple and the conclusion - 2005/02/03 15:27
This is a continuation of a conversation with Eden based on my blog - More on the Temple and conclusion.
Eden said
Thanks Epig, it's great to have some 'fat to chew'! I have some questions though:
First century harvest? Hmm, while it seems reasonable there was a 'cut off' so to speak, (in-line with the reasons you gave) I don't think we should call it a harvest; to my knowledge, the angels did-not come and take the wicked out from among the kingdom, at that point - infact it seems it was the other way round, the wicked were the only ones left. 
Another interesting thought too, the temple that was destroyed in 70, was not the original temple Solomon built, so could a reasonable parallel be drawn between the origianl Christian temple (namely, Jesus and the faithful apostles and disciples) and Solomon's temple [which BTW had Jehovah's smoke and fire] and the re-built 1st century temple, with it's apostate system and the Christian congregation today, with it's apostate systems?
Did that make any sense?? :grin
Eden can I focus first on the the Temple comparisons. I think you are onto something in regards to the Temple comparisons between the 1st century and Solomon's one on the one-hand and the Christian cong today and its apostate systems. (I think that is the comaprison you are making?)
What I find interesting is that the Jews who were building the second temple were kinda worried about this temple. (see Haggai 2:3) There was no ark, no shekinah light and certainly not the same level of grandeur with this one. Yet Haggai pointed out in 2:9 that the glory of this house would be greater. In verse 7 he pointed out that he was going to "rock the nations".
Now at this point I would note that NWT says " and the desireable things of all the nations must come in". I think that translation does not make sense as it stands especially when you use NWTs own cross-reference in Heb 12:27 which signifies a shaking out of things, not a bringing in.
Other translations talk about the desireable thing coming in - or the desire of the nations. That clearly is the Messiah. When you think about it, this set of verses is a Messianic prophecy yet NWT mentions everything bar the Messiah!
Anyway, my point here is that the later temple was going to see the desireable thing come in. This was true of the 1st century despite the apostate system that had grown up by then.
So how might that apply today if at all. For sure there is an apostate system operating in respect of the Christian values Jesus espoused. But what constitutes the Temple and how did it become the Temple?
If there was not a harvest in the first century or at least some sort of close-off, what was the mechanism for establishing the Temple, especially when in Zechariah we are told "sprout" or "branch"will build the temple and that that Zerubbabel would build its foundation. (see Zech 4:9, and 6:13.)
So who were these characters in the first century and who might they be now if anyone? Certainly in the first century you could say Jesus was "sprout". But who was Zerubbabel. Given what is said in Haggai 2:9 and 2:20-23 it seems that Zerubbabel has a role in the future when this rocking of the nations take place.
It seems to me that future is now and not the 1st century. So, when was that foundation laid for the temple, when was it completed, when was the headstone brought forth etc?
More and more questions - hope you can help here Eden
Much love and spirit
ePig
Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone thinks he has acquired knowledge of something, he does not yet know it just as he ought to know it. But if anyone loves God, this one is known by him - 1 Cor 8:1-3 |
Forum 
