If the Wailing Wall is the Remains of the Temple Then Jesus Made A False Prophecy

[Josheb]

This is about the poster and not the post and has no manners or respect. It is accusatory. This is a warning to keep to the subject and stop with the personal derogatory remarks.

Curious, since that portion of Post 79 quotes another post and that post was not moderated. I assume the rest of the thread will be perused and any similar content addressed, with warnings given for any and all similar content, including but not limited to....

• Your assumptions aren't facts.
• I'm not interested in playing childish gotcha games.
• Yes, your games continue.
• Your statements show lack of understanding of building construction.
• When you show respect for the subject of this thread........... then I might do the same for the material you present.
• It is your reasoning in this post that led to so many of His disciples to abandon him...
• You don't realize how silly your statements really are.
• If you don't want to believe him, that is your choice...
• You display complete ignorance of architectural subjects. It's best you stop.

...because there is one poster in particular who has been abusing everyone else with ill-mannered, disrespectful, and accusatory content without sanction and we'd all like equal treatment. I'd hate to think Post 79 was singled out unfairly . I can report all those posts if you like. Just let me know.




I edited the specified content from Post 79 so that the post is now rule complaint .

 

[TMSO]

If you believe that Messiah Jesus was always correct, how do you explain Mark 13:1-2, Matthew 24:1-2, and Luke 21:5-6?

[Mar 13:1-2 LSB] 1 And as He was going out of the temple, one of His disciples said to Him, "Teacher, behold what wonderful stones and what wonderful buildings!" 2 And Jesus said to him, "Do you see these great buildings? Not one stone will be left upon another which will not be torn down."

It's very clear that the New Testament Gospel writers record that Jesus predicted total and complete destruction of the 2nd temple complex. It is verified and accepted history that the Roman army beseiged, captured and ultimately destroyed the temple and the city walls in 70 AD.

Yet, we are told by the Jewish religious leaders and archaeologists that a portion of that temple still exists. The Wailing Wall. The western portion of the temple mount. It is considered one of the most holy sites.

Both can not be true. Either Messiah Jesus is a liar or Jewish tradition is believing a lie. Oh, but the inventive minds of Christian scholars provide an answer. They get around this problem by stating that the Wailing Wall is only the retaining wall of the temple - not really part of the temple itself. However, Jesus said "not one stone will be left".

Josephus provides some inconvenient facts in his history. "NOW as soon as the army had no more people to slay or to plunder, because there remained none to be the objects of their fury, (for they would not have spared any, had there remained any other work to be done,) Caesar gave orders that they should now demolish the entire city and temple, but should leave as many of the towers standing as were of the greatest eminency; that is, Phasaelus, and Hippicus, and Mariamne; and so much of the wall as enclosed the city on the west side. This wall was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as were to lie in garrison, as were the towers also spared, in order to demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well fortified, which the Roman valor had subdued; but for all the rest of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the ground by those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was left nothing to make those that came thither believe it had ever been inhabited. This was the end which Jerusalem came to by the madness of those that were for innovations; a city otherwise of great magnificence, and of mighty fame among all mankind." War of the Jews, Book VII, Chapter 1

Josephus states the entire city AND temple were demolished. But scholars would have you believe that the army left the foundations intact. Josephus says that part of the city's western wall was spared including 3 truly magnificent towers. This western wall had nothing to do with the temple. But all of the rest of the wall was so thoroughly destroyed no one could even tell anything had ever been there. Anyone can research where the temple was located. It was part of the EASTERN wall of the city. That means, the temple buildings AND the retaining walls and complex would have been thoroughly demolished. Just as Jesus predicted.

But no one has ever discovered where the Roman fort of Antonia was. The fort that was located just north of the temple, on a hill which provided an overview of the temple complex. A fort that was a city within a city. Housing for an entire legion. Why would the Romans destroy their own massive fort? They wouldn't. So what the Jews consider the Wailing Wall and the current temple mount, is actually the location of that Antonia Fortress. They are deluding themselves and believing a lie.

This is an important realization. If any part of the temple still exists, then Jesus' prophecy is not true. Can you accept that?

The wailing wall is part of the retaining wall. If you remove that wall, the mountain would cease to exist. That wall is holding up the mountain. It is not considered part of the temple for the purpose of Jesus prophecy. Again, if that wall were gone, so too would the mountain be gone.

 

[Mr GLee]

The wailing wall is part of the retaining wall. If you remove that wall, the mountain would cease to exist. That wall is holding up the mountain. It is not considered part of the temple for the purpose of Jesus prophecy. Again, if that wall were gone, so too would the mountain be gone.

How do you figure the mountain will not exist. How large is this mountain ?

Christ declared it is desolate when walked out .Is desolate not wil be when the last brick falls .There was no literal sign needed or given . Jesus said it an evil generation unredeemed mankind that does seek after signs .Believers have prophecy.

 

[TMSO]

How do you figure the mountain will not exist. How large is this mountain ?

Christ declared it is desolate when walked out .Is desolate not wil be when the last brick falls .There was no literal sign needed or given . Jesus said it an evil generation unredeemed mankind that does seek after signs .Believers have prophecy.

You may want to look up what a retaining wall is. It is not a wall of the temple, but a wall holding up that side of the mountain. Perhaps it is because of the size, and immense weight of the temple? Of the actual temple, nothing remains.

 

[Mr GLee]

You may want to look up what a retaining wall is. It is not a wall of the temple, but a wall holding up that side of the mountain. Perhaps it is because of the size, and immense weight of the temple? Of the actual temple, nothing remains.

I have never heard using a mountain to say Christ said is desolate. No will be maybe. The mark of his living word what he says (let there be) it comes to pass .No signs were given to wonder or guess after .. . . . .Is desolate just like today .

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Please see the OP - the first post - for the evidences that do not support what the last posts are stating.

 

[Josheb]

Please see the OP - the first post - for the evidences that do not support what the last posts are stating.

Please see all the many posts that show the "evidence" presented in the first post is not actual evidence and several errors occur therein.

It's very clear that the New Testament Gospel writers record that Jesus predicted total and complete destruction of the 2nd temple complex.

No, that is NOT "very clear." Not a single verse cited states anything about a "complex." That is a fact of the text. That is evidence. What they do specify is the buildings and the wailing wall is not part of the temple building. That is a fact of history. That is evidence.

Yet, we are told by the Jewish religious leaders and archaeologists that a portion of that temple still exists. The Wailing Wall. The western portion of the temple mount. It is considered one of the most holy sites.

Several problems here. The first is that we do not base our thinking or doctrine or practice on what Jewish leaders and archeologists say on any occasion scripture is contradicted. That's a fact. That is evidence. Neither do we take colloquial statements to be more valid, veracious, or significant over factual ones. The wailing wall can be said to be part of the temple colloquially but in actual fact it wasn't. That is a fact. That is evidence.

Both can not be true.

Correct!

Either Messiah Jesus is a liar or Jewish tradition is believing a lie.

Jesus is not a liar. However, there are other options besides the two specified. Jews could be deluded, not lying. The salient fact is Jesus is not a liar. The temple buildings, not the outside wall was destroyed in its entirety. That's a fact. That is evidence.

Josephus provides some inconvenient facts in his history........... Josephus states the entire city AND temple were demolished.

It is called "hyperbole." Histories of the ancient era were not like modern histories, and they most definitely were not factual newscasts. Histories of that time were written to assert various points of view and the four gospels, and the book of Acts demonstrate that fact (no pun intended ). That is a fact. That is evidence.

But scholars would have you believe that the army left the foundations intact.

And what does scripture state?

But no one has ever discovered where the Roman fort of Antonia was.

Who cares?

This is an important realization.

No, it is not an important "realization,"

If any part of the temple still exists, then Jesus' prophecy is not true. Can you accept that?

No, that is not necessarily true or correct because the use of hyperbole is a common literary device (all four of the gospel writers employed it) and Jesus often employed it in his teachings. Those are facts. They are evidence. Can you accept that?

Please see the OP - the first post - for the evidences that do not support what the last posts are stating.

Please practice your own standards and give consideration to what others have posted because 1) the opening posts are deeply flawed, 2) others have broached valid concerns, and 3) you should have integrity and practice what you preach. Do us the curtesy of showing us the same degree of respect you demand for yourself.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Please see all the many posts that show the "evidence" presented in the first post is not actual evidence and several errors occur therein.

No, that is NOT "very clear." Not a single verse cited states anything about a "complex." That is a fact of the text. That is evidence. What they do specify is the buildings and the wailing wall is not part of the temple building. That is a fact of history. That is evidence.

Several problems here. The first is that we do not base our thinking or doctrine or practice on what Jewish leaders and archeologists say on any occasion scripture is contradicted. That's a fact. That is evidence. Neither do we take colloquial statements to be more valid, veracious, or significant over factual ones. The wailing wall can be said to be part of the temple colloquially but in actual fact it wasn't. That is a fact. That is evidence.

Correct!

Jesus is not a liar. However, there are other options besides the two specified. Jews could be deluded, not lying. The salient fact is Jesus is not a liar. The temple buildings, not the outside wall was destroyed in its entirety. That's a fact. That is evidence.

It is called "hyperbole." Histories of the ancient era were not like modern histories, and they most definitely were not factual newscasts. Histories of that time were written to assert various points of view and the four gospels, and the book of Acts demonstrate that fact (no pun intended ). That is a fact. That is evidence.

And what does scripture state?

Who cares?

No, it is not an important "realization,"

No, that is not necessarily true or correct because the use of hyperbole is a common literary device (all four of the gospel writers employed it) and Jesus often employed it in his teachings. Those are facts. They are evidence. Can you accept that?

Please practice your own standards and give consideration to what others have posted because 1) the opening posts are deeply flawed, 2) others have broached valid concerns, and 3) you should have integrity and practice what you preach. Do us the curtesy of showing us the same degree of respect you demand for yourself.

This thread is about facts and truth. Your statements have been shown to be incorrect. Please stop reposting the same things continually and constantly.

 

[TMSO]

I have never heard using a mountain to say Christ said is desolate. No will be maybe. The mark of his living word what he says (let there be) it comes to pass .No signs were given to wonder or guess after .. . . . .Is desolate just like today .

If the wailing wall is a wall of the temple, then Jesus was not speaking of AD 70 in Matthew 24. I don't believe He lied, and that what He said came to pass in AD 70. As such, this is not a wall of the temple, but part of the retaining wall that was outside the temple. I tried using the argument that since the temple wall is still standing, then the Olivet Discourse has nothing to do with AD 70. I have since learned otherwise.

 

[EarlyActs]

Probably best to take your discredited views elsewhere. I'm only interested in discussing the research I present. Not derailing this thread with discredited views.

It is a huge mistake to only be interested in the research we present. See my 5 page bibilography in THE COVENANT WAR.

 

[EarlyActs]

If the wailing wall is a wall of the temple, then Jesus was not speaking of AD 70 in Matthew 24. I don't believe He lied, and that what He said came to pass in AD 70. As such, this is not a wall of the temple, but part of the retaining wall that was outside the temple. I tried using the argument that since the temple wall is still standing, then the Olivet Discourse has nothing to do with AD 70. I have since learned otherwise.

Mt 24A is about current times, in direct, ominous warnings that must be acted upon by them. The warnings worked. Best if you got familiar with all of the 1st century, instead of your concerns. THE COVENANT WAR could start that, at Amazon.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Mt 24A is about current times, in direct, ominous warnings that must be acted upon by them. The warnings worked. Best if you got familiar with all of the 1st century, instead of your concerns. THE COVENANT WAR could start that, at Amazon.

Actually, a better source is the book referenced in my profile.

 

[EarlyActs]

Actually, a better source is the book referenced in my profile.

About what exactly? Have you even read a summary of CR from Amazon? Are they even on the same topic?

 

[EarlyActs]

Here's a way to start: explain the 4 most quoted Psalms in early Acts and how they 'launched' the expansion of the kingdom of God.

 

[EarlyActs]

Actually, a better source is the book referenced in my profile.

Sorry none found. What if you just gave the title here? I did hear of one mentioned in the YT but it was 'my book.'

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

Mt 24A is about current times, in direct, ominous warnings that must be acted upon by them. The warnings worked. Best if you got familiar with all of the 1st century, instead of your concerns. THE COVENANT WAR could start that, at Amazon.

A much better and more accurate book is to be found here:
Hidden Rhythms in Prophecy

 

[EarlyActs]

A much better and more accurate book is to be found here:
Hidden Rhythms in Prophecy

The problem with the title (and I understand if you think this is premature) is that history is the answer. The dramatic questions of what happens in the NT are historical. Not so much prophetic and definitely not future. The future is actually very uncomplicated.

I did read the blurb page. You are also bypassing the NT quoting the OT. Most teachers are abject failures on this, either by being unfamiliar or by meddling (seriously changing the meaning). I have been in huge fights against the actual meaning of David seeing the resurrection as the enthronement, Acts 2.

I am interested in the use of the ancient stars. I might be interested in that much. In Larson's doc The Star of Bethlehem, there is a very cogent explanation of the ancient view that could be 'dialed' (computed) forward and showed a world king born in Israel and also a ladder dropped from heaven to save men (Jacob's stairs).

But generally, you are seeking future events as thought it was a 'safe' form of Nostradamus.

If you actually understood CR, you would not put it in this category at all. CR is NT history (with a minimum of dwelling on Dan 9 because it is a miniature vision of NT history--provided the antecedents are not messed up). My master's research, including translating some of Josephus, was under the working title 'Luke-Acts and the zealot revolt.'

Maybe you can define 'better' and 'more accurate' some other way, but so far it is a comparison of apples and volkswagens. I abandoned future prognostic details quite a while ago, since the line was about 10K entries long.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

The problem with the title (and I understand if you think this is premature) is that history is the answer. The dramatic questions of what happens in the NT are historical. Not so much prophetic and definitely not future. The future is actually very uncomplicated.

I did read the blurb page. You are also bypassing the NT quoting the OT. Most teachers are abject failures on this, either by being unfamiliar or by meddling (seriously changing the meaning). I have been in huge fights against the actual meaning of David seeing the resurrection as the enthronement, Acts 2.

I am interested in the use of the ancient stars. I might be interested in that much. In Larson's doc The Star of Bethlehem, there is a very cogent explanation of the ancient view that could be 'dialed' (computed) forward and showed a world king born in Israel and also a ladder dropped from heaven to save men (Jacob's stairs).

But generally, you are seeking future events as thought it was a 'safe' form of Nostradamus.

If you actually understood CR, you would not put it in this category at all. CR is NT history (with a minimum of dwelling on Dan 9 because it is a miniature vision of NT history--provided the antecedents are not messed up). My master's research, including translating some of Josephus, was under the working title 'Luke-Acts and the zealot revolt.'

Maybe you can define 'better' and 'more accurate' some other way, but so far it is a comparison of apples and volkswagens. I abandoned future prognostic details quite a while ago, since the line was about 10K entries long.

Obviously you are commenting out of complete ignorance. Not interested.

 

[EarlyActs]

Obviously you are commenting out of complete ignorance. Not interested.

But you are doing that about CR. If you want to have some rapport, some credibility, you might start with that. I'm not the one who called everyone else childish.

I can tell when something is about 'the history of prophecy' (teachers who predicted the future wrong until you the new writer came along) vs the history of revolution in the NT. It would not feature past OT books, for one thing, but stick to places where the NT quotes books in explanation of what is going on, like Lk 23 quoting Hos 10.

As you may know Paul said he only taught (did not go beyond) what Moses and the prophets said. The contents: that Christ would suffer and be preached to the nations. If you trace that back, it is down to his quotes and those of early Acts (about 20). They would completely avoid trying to 'tell the future' for the 10Kth time.

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

But you are doing that about CR. If you want to have some rapport, some credibility, you might start with that. I'm not the one who called everyone else childish.

I can tell when something is about 'the history of prophecy' (teachers who predicted the future wrong until you the new writer came along) vs the history of revolution in the NT. It would not feature past OT books, for one thing, but stick to places where the NT quotes books in explanation of what is going on, like Lk 23 quoting Hos 10.

As you may know Paul said he only taught (did not go beyond) what Moses and the prophets said. The contents: that Christ would suffer and be preached to the nations. If you trace that back, it is down to his quotes and those of early Acts (about 20). They would completely avoid trying to 'tell the future' for the 10Kth time.

You seem to be under the impression that I'm interested in enabling your argumentative opinions. I am not. Not interested in the slightest. Please stop trying to get an argument started and stop posting the same information over and over again.