Rich Wounds Yet Visible Above

[Baptist Renegade]

That's my beef with Dispesnationalists who claim that the Temple and sacrifices are to be restored as a memorial in the Millennium. Again, what need is there to memorialize the living and eternal ruler sitting on a throne there in Jerusalem?

A biblical archaeologist (and Holy Land Expert) visited our church early last year and I had a quick discussion with him that I see no prophetical purpose whatsoever for rebuilding the temple but can understand why such a thing is vitally important to the Jews. He says he was in agreement with me but had to be careful with how and where he would discuss his personal views specifically! I think he was likely a closeted Reformed guy and possibly even a proponent of Covenant Theology which was truly a breath of fresh air. Those in his field are usually rabid dispies and all of the "charts and graphs" are their bread and butter! My wife and I are planning on a Holy Land tour with him in the next year or so.

 

[Ransom]

He says he was in agreement with me but had to be careful with how and where he would discuss his personal views specifically!

Remember Grant Jeffries? He grew up in my church and his sister was on staff until a few years ago. My tongue still has the bite marks from his sermon on the prophetic implications of Y2K back in 1999.

 

[ALAYMAN]

Given the Dispensationalist assumption that prophecy foresees what is yet future, when they see passages in places such as Ezekiel that foretell the rebuilding of the Temple and the restoration of the sacrfices, they assume it's a future third Temple (often ignoring that Ezekiel was pre-exilic when the second Temple was still future).

Given that assumption, how do you deal with second Thessalonians and the man of lawlessness setting in the temple?

 

[ALAYMAN]

I don't disagree. We have a remembrance of Christ's sacrifice--the Lord's supper--and Paul says that "as often as [we] eat this bread and drink the cup, [we] proclaim the Lord's death until he comes" (1 Cor. 11:26). The implication of "until he comes" is that when Christ is here in the flesh, there is no longer any need for the remembrance.

That's my beef with Dispesnationalists who claim that the Temple and sacrifices are to be restored as a memorial in the Millennium. Again, what need is there to memorialize the living and eternal ruler sitting on a throne there in Jerusalem?

So as not to derail your original question too far, it seems to me that Christ remaining in his human body--the same one--is part and parcel with his work as mediator and intercessor. The work of the Atonement is complete (Heb. 1:3), but his work as mediator continues. Christ is God and man because in that work, he represents both God and men; and since the intercessory work goes on, the incarnation did not cease at the ascension.

The hope of the Christian is the resurrection of the body, not the escape from the body, and it also seems to me, not a new body: restored, perhaps, but not a different body than the present one, which strikes me as more in line with the Greek philosophy of transmigration than the Christian view of resurrection. And that means that if Christ is the firstfruits of the resurrection, then he, too, is in the same flesh that he had on earth. And if his wounds are there as a testament to his sacrifice on the cross, then it stands to reason they also remain "yet visible above."

So much goodness in this, amen. I may revisit some other thoughts related to this post later.

 

[Ransom]

Given that assumption, how do you deal with second Thessalonians and the man of lawlessness setting in the temple?

Paul's use of "temple" isn't always literal (cf. 1 Cor. 3:16). It's a metonymy. The Temple is the seat of divine authority. But the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed not long after Paul wrote that, and ceased at that time to be the centre of the worship of God. Jesus said he would destroy the Temple and in three days build another one not made with hands--he was referring to the foundation of the church following his death and resurrection. Again, as 1 Cor. 3:16 says, we are the temple he built. God resides in our midst, not in man-made edifices (Acts 17:24).

 

[Ekklesian]

I'll simply post my thoughts about why He still bears the marks of the Cross in the absence of His stripes and bruises and the marks of the thorns.

Because they are the marks of His identity. Even before Creation, and before the rebellion in heaven, the Cross was the eternal destiny of the Son. Not a contingency plan. It was always the Plan. And it was by that work that He merited the Name that is above all names, and the titles and positions that come with it.

Crown Him with many crowns, the Lamb upon His Throne.

Worthy is the Lamb that was slain.

 

[Ekklesian]

not a new body: restored, perhaps, but not a different body than the present one

Not different one, but one that has been changed. To say the wounds abide because they pre-existed the Resurrection seems to ignore everything Paul told us explicitly about the Resurrection, chiefly that our bodies are sown a natural body, but they will be raised a spiritual body.

Natural ties are dissolved.

Proceding from your premise, wouldn't it follow that we can expect to be raised with all our injuries deformities and maimings?

 

[ALAYMAN]

Paul's use of "temple" isn't always literal (cf. 1 Cor. 3:16). It's a metonymy. The Temple is the seat of divine authority. But the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed not long after Paul wrote that, and ceased at that time to be the centre of the worship of God. Jesus said he would destroy the Temple and in three days build another one not made with hands--he was referring to the foundation of the church following his death and resurrection. Again, as 1 Cor. 3:16 says, we are the temple he built. God resides in our midst, not in man-made edifices (Acts 17:24).

My sympathies on the literal/metaphorical sense of Temple lies near this thinking.

 

[illinoisguy]

The Greek word for "temple" in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is NAOS.

The Greek word for "temple" in John 2:21, "But he spake of the temple of his body," is NAOS.

The Greek word for "temple" in 1 Corinthians 3:16-17, "ye are the temple of God," where it clearly refers to the people of God, not a literal edifice, is NAOS. See also 1 Corinthians 6:19, "your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost," is NAOS.

The Greek word for "temple" in 2 Corinthians 6:16, "ye are the temple of the living God," is NAOS.

The Greek word for the figurative temple in Ephesians 2:21 is NAOS.

In Revelation 21:22, where "the Lord Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it," the word is NAOS - no literal building needed.

CONCLUSION. The NAOS or temple in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is not necessarily a literal edifice with animal sacrifices. The reference may be to a false religious leader who sets himself up among and amidst God's people. Even if is interpreted as a literal brick-and-mortar temple, it could be speaking of the Second Temple then existing in Jerusalem. This verse is routinely cited by the sensationalist prophecy-mongers as a proof-text for a Third Temple to be built soon in Jerusalem, and they build entire speculative prophetic scenarios on this one verse, but there is no basis for the assumptions that they make based on this one verse.

 

[illinoisguy]

Remember Grant Jeffries? He grew up in my church and his sister was on staff until a few years ago. My tongue still has the bite marks from his sermon on the prophetic implications of Y2K back in 1999.

The Rapture Ready web site praised Grant Jeffrey as a great scholar, but they gave him bad marks for his Y2K speculations:

"Grant Jeffrey also spent too much time and effort speculating and focusing on the so-called Y2K disaster, which obviously did not warrant concern. In his book, Millennium Meltdown, Jeffrey attempted to document proof that as the new millennium began millions of computers throughout the world would begin to crash. The lights would go out where the computers that run the electric power grid failed to make the transition to the next century. Jeffrey explained how the Y2K crisis was to be the most expensive and damaging crisis in history and how it could certainly set the stage for the rise of the antichrist and the Tribulation period. These beliefs were common for that time and, while they held hints of paranoia, they were not inherently wrong, just a waste of time. . . . While he may have had some dubious beliefs and may have suffered some credibility for them, Grant Jeffrey truly was an expert in the field of Bible Prophecy."

Grant Jeffrey

Grant R. Jeffrey was a beloved Canadian Bible teacher, evangelist and famous author, often referred to as a "great servant of God." He touched many hearts

www.raptureready.com

In his book "Messiah," published in 1991, Grant Jeffrey made a big deal about how Christ was supposed to return 6000 years after the date of creation.

"As we approach the final years of the 20th Century, those who are aware of this prophecy are gripped by a growing messianic expectation. The Messiah is coming! . . . As we approach AD 2000, they [some Orthodox Jews] believe that this period of history is significant as the completion of the 6th millennium after creation." He avoided definite date-setting, but gave readers the general impression that the Rapture was likely to occur around the year 2000. He cited current events at the time of publication (Saddam and the Gulf War, breakup of the Soviet Union, etc) as unmistakable signs of the end. The promotional blurb on the book states, "After exhaustive study of the Scriptures and of new archeological discoveries, Grant R. Jeffrey has come to the inevitable conclusion that our day of reckoning is near. The biblical evidence is clear: as the year 2000 approaches, mankind hurtles toward a final appointment with destiny." Lots of vague warnings about how the end is near, but nothing specific. Just another typical worthless dispenSENsationalist pulp-fiction prophecy book, with the usual heavy emphasis on speculations by Jewish rabbis. The year 2000 came and went, and we're still here, still "hurtling" and watching the "signs of the times."