Will Trump seek asylum in Israel and Build the 3rd Temple?

[Freedm]

That is the point a spirit becomes a demon. This process is described for current humanity in Romans 1 by Paul.

Romans 1 doesn't say anything about a spirit becoming a demon. I just read it.

All spirits reside with God. You can read about them in 1 Kings 22:19-25.

1 Kings does not say that all spirits reside with God. I'm afraid you're basing a lot of your understanding on things that are just not scriptural.

 

[Freedm]

Satan has gone far and above the call of duty in changing Genesis 1 into a modern virtual realty. He even has theistic evolutionist believing that his virtual realty is real. Genesis 1 can never be reconciled with modern science no matter how one spins it, pun intended. We are past the point of declaring Genesis is truth unless we are hypocritical in what we have been taught. We cannot declare science is true at the same time Genesis 1 is true. It is physically impossible.

It sounds like you're saying Genesis 1 is not true. Is that what you believe?

 

[Freedm]

I am thinking the temple is just a building and never referred to as the heavens and earth in Scripture.

The Jews referred to the temple as "heaven and earth".

Besides, if you use logic and common sense, you will see that it would not make sense otherwise. Look at what Jesus said here:

Matthew 5:18
for, verily I say to you, till that the heaven and the earth may pass away, one iota or one tittle may not pass away from the law, till that all may come to pass.

If Jesus was speaking of the literal earth that we are standing on, then that would mean that we would have to obey the law until a cataclysmic event sometime in our future. So what would that do to your Christian faith? It would mean we were still not saved by grace. It would essentially destroy our faith. Therefore we know, that Jesus was not speaking of the earth on which we stand. He was speaking of something else, namely the temple.

 

[Freedm]

Have you seen the spacing of most entrances to amusement parks? Have you seen the long lines at amusement parks? Seems pretty normal to me instead of absurd. Not all people are planning to enter or leave this city at the exact same time, are they?

Amusement park entrances are not 700 km apart. And how many trillions of people do you think will live in this giant city? And you think 12 entrances would be enough for all those people? How many entrances does the city of Chicago have?

 

[Freedm]

"If we will never experience death, as Jesus told us, then how can we be resurrected from it?"

You proposed the question about never dying so no resurrection being possible. You also have spoken as if the resurrection is past. Both are false doctrines.

I'm saying no future resurrection is possible. "Future" being the key word. The resurrection must already have happened, by logic. I'll repeat, Jesús told us that we would never experience death. If that's true, then we can not be resurrected. Ergo, we have already been resurrected.

If, on the other hand, the resurrection were still future, then we would first have to experience death. Is that what you believe? That we will experience death?

 

[ewq1938]

I'm saying no future resurrection is possible. "Future" being the key word.

Well, that is unscriptural. The resurrection takes place at the second coming.

The resurrection must already have happened, by logic. I'll repeat, Jesús told us that we would never experience death. If that's true, then we can not be resurrected.

It's not true. Almost everyone is promised death, death of the mortal body. It's the second death that won't be experienced by those who are saved.

Ergo, we have already been resurrected.

If, on the other hand, the resurrection were still future, then we would first have to experience death. Is that what you believe? That we will experience death?

It's a fact. You know it is, since you know people who have died, and know every single human has died since the beginning except possibly a couple people but that is debated.

 

[ewq1938]

The Jews referred to the temple as "heaven and earth".

Citation please.

 

[ewq1938]

As I said, the references to a "new heaven and new earth" refer to the temple, not the actual earth.

Not in the context of Rev 21, where there is a new Earth and where a new Jerusalem descends to it where no actual temple exists which defeats your whole point. I will agree "heaven and Earth" can be used non-literally but that argument falls apart in the text of Rev 21.

 

[Freedm]

It's not true. Almost everyone is promised death, death of the mortal body. It's the second death that won't be experienced by those who are saved.

It's a fact. You know it is, since you know people who have died, and know every single human has died since the beginning except possibly a couple people but that is debated.

I don't anybody has entered into the state of death since 70 AD. If a person on earth "dies", they are immediately moved into the next life, which means they never experience death. If you go from one life to the next, there is no time for death. Do you understand what I mean?

 

[Freedm]

Not in the context of Rev 21, where there is a new Earth and where a new Jerusalem descends to it where no actual temple exists which defeats your whole point. I will agree "heaven and Earth" can be used non-literally but that argument falls apart in the text of Rev 21.

It does not at all fall apart in Rev 21. Why would a physical temple have to exist in order for my point to have validity? Quite the contrary. The new heaven and new earth replace the old physical temple. That's my whole point. There will never be another physical temple because Jesus is the new temple.

 

[Freedm]

Citation please.

Here's the first one that popped up on a Bing search. It's not hard to find.

When Heaven and Earth Passed Away: Everything Changed.

Here's another.

The Jerusalem Temple and the “End of the World”

And here's a stackexchange question and answer about it

In the 2nd temple period were either the tabernacle or the temple ever referred to as "heaven and earth"?

 

[ewq1938]

I don't anybody has entered into the state of death since 70 AD. If a person on earth "dies", they are immediately moved into the next life, which means they never experience death. If you go from one life to the next, there is no time for death. Do you understand what I mean?

It's just a poor denial of the truth that death does exist and mortals do die. Nothing changed regarding this in 70AD.

1Co 15:35 But some man will say, How are the dead raised up? and with what body do they come?
1Co 15:36 Thou fool, that which thou sowest is not quickened, except it die:
1Co 15:37 And that which thou sowest, thou sowest not that body that shall be, but bare grain, it may chance of wheat, or of some other grain:

 

[ewq1938]

The new heaven and new earth replace the old physical temple.

That isn't scriptural. The NHNE replaces the old heaven and earth. There is no temple in the NHNE.

 

[ewq1938]

Here's the first one that popped up on a Bing search. It's not hard to find.

When Heaven and Earth Passed Away: Everything Changed.

Here's another.

The Jerusalem Temple and the “End of the World”

And here's a stackexchange question and answer about it

In the 2nd temple period were either the tabernacle or the temple ever referred to as "heaven and earth"?

Exact citations (in quotes) proving what you claimed, not just links.

 

[No Pre-TB]

There is no "hint hint". The city is described as being literal. Fantastic yes, but literal nonetheless.

Rev 21:24 And the nations of them which are saved shall walk in the light of it: and the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it.
Rev 21:25 And the gates of it shall not be shut at all by day: for there shall be no night there.

And there being no more sea is literal, the dragon is literal, the locusts are literal, the harlot is literal, the stars falling from outer space to earth is literal and a floating city with streets of gold is literal.

Ever hear of a literal floating city called a bride of Christ?

 

[ewq1938]

Ever hear of a literal floating city called a bride of Christ?

Yes, Rev 21. The city symbolizes those who will worship there. It's a literal city because people travel there and enter through it's gates. They are part of that bride.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Yes, Rev 21. The city symbolizes those who will worship there. It's a literal city because people travel there and enter through its gates. They are part of that bride.

We are the city. Just as the harlot isn’t a physical city. A city was deemed female and identified with the people that dwelt there.

Do you think the harlot is 1 city in the world that rides a beast?

 

[ewq1938]

We are the city. Just as the harlot isn’t a physical city. A city was deemed female and identified with the people that dwelt there.

Both are true. The city is literal, and represents the bride. A new heaven, a new Earth and a new Jerusalem. All are literal and real. Symbolic meanings do not take away from the literal.

Old Jerusalem is a literal city and so is new Jerusalem. All the new versions of things will be literal.

Do you think the harlot is 1 city in the world that rides a beast?

Not a literal city or a literal woman and there will not be a new Babylon in the eternity. satan's versions of things are counterfeit so the comparison is flawed from conception.

 

[No Pre-TB]

Not a literal city or a literal woman and there will not be a new Babylon in the eternity. satan's versions of things are counterfeit so the comparison is flawed from conception.

If you recognize that the harlot isn’t a literal city, why is its contrasting city literal? You must also believe the tree of life is going to be literally sitting in the city then too.

What do you think of this?
And showed me that great city; which is no other than the church, the bride, the Lamb's wife; just as the apostate church, all along in this book before, is called the great city, Revelation 11:8 but now that being demolished, there is no other great city in being but the church of Christ, called a city before; Revelation 21:2 here a "great one", not only because of its prodigious large dimensions, Revelation 21:16 but because of the number of its inhabitants, being such as no man can number; and because it is the residence of the great King, the tabernacle of God will be in it;

 

[ewq1938]

If you recognize that the harlot isn’t a literal city, why is its contrasting city literal?

I explained that already.

You must also believe the tree of life is going to be literally sitting in the city then too.

Yes, and it will bare a new fruit each month.

What do you think of this?
And showed me that great city; which is no other than the church, the bride, the Lamb's wife; just as the apostate church, all along in this book before, is called the great city, Revelation 11:8 but now that being demolished, there is no other great city in being but the church of Christ, called a city before; Revelation 21:2 here a "great one", not only because of its prodigious large dimensions, Revelation 21:16 but because of the number of its inhabitants, being such as no man can number; and because it is the residence of the great King, the tabernacle of God will be in it;

It shows Gill believes the city is literal, being the tabernacle of God. You didn't quote the portion completely. It isn't much longer so no reason not to include the rest:

"though this epithet is left out in the Alexandrian copy, and in the Vulgate Latin and all the Oriental versions: "the holy Jerusalem"; called "the new Jerusalem", Revelation 21:2 here "holy", in allusion to the city of Jerusalem, which was called the holy city, Matthew 4:5 on account of the temple in it, the place of divine worship; but here this city is so called, because it is the residence of the holy God, Father, Son, and Spirit, inhabited only by holy men, made perfectly so, and encompassed by holy angels."