Jerusalem Prophecy Unfolding - Temple Mount Takeover

[500]

I am talking about the "RULE".

The previous two rules: one around 87 years and the other around 89 years.

One ended with the attack by the Iraqi King (we call him Bakh-Nasr; I don't know you call him).
The second ended with Roman Titus.

Ur math is very bad. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem in 586 BC while Jews control it since 1000 BC.

 

[Meengla]

Jews broke the covenant with God, ever since, all their prophecies is null and void. We only go by our sources. And this is not about religion for the Israeli's, it's to annex the West Bank. They are fooling the Christian right wing crowd in US and Europe to keep aid and support flowing in. And to recognize the soon annexation of the West Bank to expand their country into more Palestinian territory.

It's a secular issue. All religious disputes are eventually secular when you dig deep enough. In this case, yes, the Evangelical Christians maybe seeking an Armageddon, but Israelis, except for the fanatics in the West Bank, are not so much religious.
This is pure and simple land theft, bankrolled by American tax payers, in clear view of powerless American politicians who could lose their political careers if they dare defy Israel. Meanwhile, $3+ billion of American money per year goes into supporting a country with pretty high living standard.

 

[Dil Pakistan]

Ur math is very bad. Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem in 586 BC while Jews control it since 1000 BC.

...and how does it counter my point?

The times you are referring to as "control" is not equivalent to "rule".
If you look into the history books Israelites had a "rule" twice and each duration was less than 90-years.
You are trying to establish that presence of Israelites in large numbers meant they were the rulers as well - this is totally wrong.

What you describe as "control", is the time when Israelites were present there in large numbers. But! they were divided and had multiple kingdoms and multiple rulers. There was no unified control.

If you check the timeline from Prophet Suleiman, where the story starts, there are many battles and rulers. Never in these times Israelites have ruled this area - although the temple did exist (as you say), but it does not mean the rule of Israelites.

Then are times prior to Prophet Zakariyah up to time of birth of Prophet Yahya (at this time this area was under the Roman rule _ King Herod).

Therefore, the times you are referring are not times which have been described as "rule" of Israelites. The real "rule" is as I have described.

 

[500]

...and how does it counter my point?

The times you are referring to as "control" is not equivalent to "rule".
If you look into the history books Israelites had a "rule" twice and each duration was less than 90-years.
You are trying to establish that presence of Israelites in large numbers meant they were the rulers as well - this is totally wrong.

What you describe as "control", is the time when Israelites were present there in large numbers. But! they were divided and had multiple kingdoms and multiple rulers. There was no unified control.

If you check the timeline from Prophet Suleiman, where the story starts, there are many battles and rulers. Never in these times Israelites have ruled this area - although the temple did exist (as you say), but it does not mean the rule of Israelites.

Then are times prior to Prophet Zakariyah up to time of birth of Prophet Yahya (at this time this area was under the Roman rule _ King Herod).

Therefore, the times you are referring are not times which have been described as "rule" of Israelites. The real "rule" is as I have described.

Both control and rule. No one else ruled in Jerusalem during that period.

 

[Dil Pakistan]

Really?

So how do you explain Assyrians?

 

[500]

Really?

So how do you explain Assyrians?

View attachment 444963

Assyrians failed to capture Jerusalem.

 

[Dil Pakistan]

Assyrians failed to capture Jerusalem.

This is only Hebrew account of the events.

There are other accounts as well, in which Kingdom of Judah subjugated.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Kid. That is referring to the actual judgement day when all of the people will be gathered in one gathering and judged for their deeds. Do not try to teach us our religion man, something which you not know yourselves and have a very biased view about it.

And when the last warning will come to pass, we will gather you together in a mingled crowd.'"

 

[500]

This is only Hebrew account of the events.

Thats everyone account of events. Ur own caption says that there was only a siege of Jerusalem but nothing says about taking it.

And even if Assyrians indeed conquered Jerusalem it still would be 300 years of Jewish rule and not 87 as u claimed.

 

[sammuel]

BTW what are some Jewish end times prophecies please do share some with us.

First i want to correct you about some thing that you wrote cynically - " go ahead build your temple " .

Allow me to just share , since i have seen others misunderstand this, that this is not possible. Let me point to you a passage in the bible that mention how the first temple was built .

King david , who by all accounts in the bible was God's favourite king wanted very much to built a permanent temple for the lord. But God did not allow it. As it is written :

" But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build a house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood. "

1 Chronicles 28:3

So king david was not allowed to build the temple because he was man of war and only his son Solomon was allowed to build the temple. The temple can only be built in a time of peace.

Also, the two temples where build at a time when prophets walked the land and where the living connection between the nation and God . With out them no temple can be built. Sure , someone can build some structure there , but it would only be a house of brick and stones with out any soul or spiritual value. And of those we have plenty off , we sure don't need another one.

The temple can only be built by divine intervention. It is not up to man to decide. So let God judge between us.

And in the meantime , let the Muslims pray in their Mosques , let the Jews pray in the Western wall and let there be peace in the land.

With out it , all those prayers aren't worth much anyway.

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Give me something from talmud or torah.

First i want to correct you about some thing that you wrote cynically - " go ahead build your temple " .

Allow me to just share , since i have seen others misunderstand this, that this is not a possible. Let me point to you a passage in the bible that mention how the fist temple was built .

King david , who on all accounts in the bible was God's favourite king wanted very much to built a permanent temple for the lord. But God did not allow it. As it is written :

" But God said unto me, Thou shalt not build a house for my name, because thou hast been a man of war, and hast shed blood. "

1 Chronicles 28:3

So king david was not allowed to build the temple because he was man of war and the only his son Solomon was allowed to build the temple. The temple can only be built in a time of peace.

Also, the two temples where build at a time when prophets walked the land and where the living connection between the nation and God . With out them no temple can be built. Sure , someone can build some structure there , but it would only be a house of brick and stones with out any soul or spiritual value. And of those we have plenty off , we sure don't need another one.

The temple can only be built by divine intervention. It is not up to man to decide. So let God judge between us.

And in the meantime , let the Muslims pray in their Mosques , let the Jews pray in the Western wall and let there be peace in the land.

With out it all those prayers aren't worth much anyway.

 

[sammuel]

Give me something from talmud or torah.

I thought i Just did. That was from the Bible. Anything in particular you are looking for ?

 

[Ahmet Pasha]

Thats from bible. Im looking for end of days signs from talmud or torah.

I thought i Just did. That was from the Bible. Anything in particular you are looking for ?

 

[Brutas]

~

Now I am not saying that this present days israel is the promised return before the end of days. There is no guarantee for that. Our stay in the holy land is conditional. If we fail to behave we could go on another exile.
But one thing is for sure. Whether we go on one more exile or ten more exiles , at the end , right before the end of days we are supposed to return to the promised land.

You stated "Our stay is conditional...". Very interesting comment coming from a Jew (I would assume). Historical facts agrees with your statement as jews were expelled so many times from that land, but I haven't seen any mainstream jewish organization accepting that. I believe the official line is, the land is given with no condition-no strings attached, even thou it's opposite to historical reality.

 

[Dil Pakistan]

Thats everyone account of events. Ur own caption says that there was only a siege of Jerusalem but nothing says about taking it.

And even if Assyrians indeed conquered Jerusalem it still would be 300 years of Jewish rule and not 87 as u claimed.

You are again mixing different things to try and make a case for "Jewish rule over Jerusalem".

Look at the following:

After the Prophet Hazrat Yusuf-Peace Be Upon Him - PBUH (Joseph) Israelites stayed in Egypt and due to the teachings of Hazrat Yusuf the descendants of 12-brothers managed to achieve higher places for themselves.
After this there was a Nationalist revolution in Egypt and Israelites were made slaves (The Pharos).

The first Prophet after Hazrat Yusuf was Hazrat Musa-PBUH (Moses). With him Israelites went out of Egypt and then followed him for many decades.

Hazrat Musa-PBUH was followed by the Prophet Hazrat Yusha-PBUH (Josuha) and then many other Prophets - about 12,000 in total.

But the point to be noted is that, no one after Hazrat Musa-PBUH was given the Shariah; not even Hazrat Daood-PBUH (David) - who was given the book. Therefore, from the time of Hazrat Musa-PBUH till the time of Hazrat Zikriyah-PBUH and Hazrat Yahya-PBUH (John The Baptist) and even Hazrat Issa-PBUH (Jesus) it was only and only the Shariah of Hazrat Musa-PBUH that everyone followed - CORRECT?

Now! if you agree to the above, no where in the Shariah of Hazrat Musa-PBUH, there are meant to be the "KINGS" or a "KINGDOM". Israelites were meant to be a "Kingdom of Priests" not a "Supreme Monarch".

In addition, the fundamental fact you are ignoring is, that from the times of Hazrat Musa-PBUH till the times of Hazrat Yahya-PBUH and Hazrat Issa-PBUH there is not a single day in the history of Israelites that there was not a Prophet amongst them - do you agree?

So! if there was always a Prophet amongst the Israelites from the times of Hazrat Musa-PBUH till the times of Hazrat Yahya-PBUH and Hazrat Issa-PBUH; then the only leader that could be (or would be) has to be the Prophet of the relevant time.

And if every Prophet followed the Shariah of Hazrat Musa-PBUH, then how can their be any King of Israel at all and how can there be any rule of Israelites?

Can you explain this dichotomy that has been created by your arguments?