Announcement

Collapse

Eschatology 201 Guidelines

This area of the forum is primarily for Christian theists to discuss orthodox views of Eschatology. Other theist participation is welcome within that framework, but only within orthodoxy. Posts from nontheists that do not promote atheism or seek to undermine the faith of others will be permitted at the Moderator's discretion - such posters should contact the area moderators before posting.


Without turning this forum into a 'hill of foreskins' (Joshua 5:3), I believe we can still have fun with this 'sensitive' topic.

However, don't be misled, dispensationalism has only partly to do with circumcision issues. So, let's not forget about Innocence, Conscience, Promises, Kingdoms and so on.

End time -isms within orthodox Christianity also discussed here. Clearly unorthodox doctrines, such as those advocating "pantelism/full preterism/Neo-Hymenaeanism" or the denial of any essential of the historic Christian faith are not permitted in this section but can be discussed in Comparative Religions 101 without restriction. Any such threads, as well as any that within the moderator's discretions fall outside mainstream evangelical belief, will be moved to the appropriate area.

Millennialism- post-, pre- a-

Futurism, Historicism, Idealism, and Preterism, or just your garden variety Zionism.

From the tribulation to the anichrist. Whether your tastes run from Gary DeMar to Tim LaHaye or anywhere in between, your input is welcome here.

OK folks, let's roll!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Was Titus the Man of Sin

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Was Titus the Man of Sin

    While not quite a full fledged Preterist, I have jettisoned premillenialsm/pre-trib a long time ago. In a discussion regarding 2 Thess 2:4, I was challenged that the anti-christ has not entered the Temple of God, proclaimed himself God and been worshiped. I found serveral websites which said he did but they were lacking in source support. Apparently, something in the Talmud makes the claim but it is deemed unreliable by my opponent. It wouldn't bother me if I were wrong, but surely there is some reliable source material besides implication or secondary commentary. Can anyone help me?

  • #2
    Considering the temple burned at the end of the siege of Jerusalem, I'm not sure Titus could have then entered the Holy of Holies. In my reading of Roman history, I don't recall Titus claiming to be a god. I am skeptical of any claim that Titus is the man of sin.
    "For I desire mercy, not sacrifice, and acknowledgment of God rather than burnt offerings." Hosea 6:6

    "Theology can be an intellectual entertainment." Metropolitan Anthony Bloom

    Comment


    • #3
      Honestly, I think the "man of sin" is probably just talking generally about false prophets within the church. Paul uses the word "temple" to refer to the church or to the individual Christian. I can't think of any time where he ever uses it to refer to the literal temple.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Thoughtful Monk View Post
        Considering the temple burned at the end of the siege of Jerusalem, I'm not sure Titus could have then entered the Holy of Holies. In my reading of Roman history, I don't recall Titus claiming to be a god. I am skeptical of any claim that Titus is the man of sin.
        Josephus says he raised his ensign or ensigns, Roman symbols placed in locations of conquest, like the American flag. As I understand it, Josephus describes holy things (like furniture) in The Holy Place but the commentary says the Holy of Holies did not contain furniture. Presumably, he could not have described it without being present. Those ensigns were supposedly worshiped.

        In Judea, Titus was proclaimed emperor by his men after learning that his father Vespasian died. And Roman emperors were sometimes worshiped. The claim that he was the Man of Sin is not implausible, but so far unproved. That's where I stop. I thought there might be more information out there.

        And, according to the Jewish sources other than Josephus, he laid with a prostitute in the temple, profaning it. They even provide her name. Josephus says that a soldier threw a fire brand over the temple walls against Titus' wishes, setting the fire. Titus had planned to make the temple a shrine to the Roman pantheon.
        Last edited by grahamcracker; 05-22-2014, 08:16 PM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Obsidian View Post
          Honestly, I think the "man of sin" is probably just talking generally about false prophets within the church. Paul uses the word "temple" to refer to the church or to the individual Christian. I can't think of any time where he ever uses it to refer to the literal temple.
          This is why I'm a futurist.
          "I was the CIA director. We lied, we cheated, we stole, it was like... we had entire training courses. It reminds you of the glory of the American experiment." - Mike Pompeo, Secretary of State (source).

          Comment


          • #6
            Surely it is clear that the parousia in 2 Thes 2:4 isn't the "coming on the clouds" of the Son of Man.

            Comment


            • #7
              You might want to take a look at what Paul means by "the temple of God."
              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
              sigpic
              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Paprika View Post
                Surely it is clear that the parousia in 2 Thes 2:4 isn't the "coming on the clouds" of the Son of Man.
                Far from it.
                "Behold the LORD rides on a swift cloud and is coming to Egypt. The idols tremble and the hearts of the Egyptians melt with fear." ( Isaiah 19:1)

                Just trying to be fair. Btw, if you want to convert me to futurism, this isn't the place and I'm not interested. And if you don't believe there is any historical evidence that Titus was the man of sin, you only have to say so. I'm not here to debate the overall merits of Preterism. That door is closed for the time being. Thanks for your interest.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                  You might want to take a look at what Paul means by "the temple of God."
                  I assume it is straight forward. For now, I have no reason to believe he meant anything other than the second temple which still stood in his earthly lifetime. Currently, I'm not aware of any viable alternatives.

                  Blessings to you.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by grahamcracker View Post
                    Far from it.
                    "Behold the LORD rides on a swift cloud and is coming to Egypt. The idols tremble and the hearts of the Egyptians melt with fear." ( Isaiah 19:1)

                    When Paul talks elsewhere about the parousia of Christ, he says it is when the general resurrection occurs (1 Cor 15, 1 Thes 4).

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by grahamcracker View Post
                      I assume it is straight forward. For now, I have no reason to believe he meant anything other than the second temple which still stood in his earthly lifetime. Currently, I'm not aware of any viable alternatives.

                      Blessings to you.
                      I suggest that you do a search in the Pauline epistles (at, say, biblegateway.com) for the word "temple." The results may surprise you.
                      Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                      Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                      sigpic
                      I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Source: The Didache cf. 100 AD



                        16:3 For in the last days false prophets and corrupters will be plenty, and the sheep will be turned into wolves, and love will be turned into hate.

                        16:4 When lawlessness increases, they will hate and persecute and betray one another, and then the world-deceiver will appear claiming to be the Son of God, and he will do signs and wonders, and the earth will be delivered into his hands, and he will do iniquitous things that have not been seen since the beginning of the world.

                        16:5 Then humankind will enter into the fire of trial, and many will be made to stumble and many will perish; but those who endure in their faith will be saved from under the curse itself.

                        16:6 And then the signs of the truth will appear: the first sign, an opening of the heavens; the second sign, the sounding of the trumpet; and the third sign, the resurrection of the dead—

                        16:7 not of every one, but as it is said: "Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him."

                        16:8 Finally, "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory."

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        The Early Church was expecting the "World-Deceiver" to come in the future. So, it couldn't have been Titus.
                        That's what
                        - She

                        Without a clear-cut definition of sin, morality becomes a mere argument over the best way to train animals
                        - Manya the Holy Szin (The Quintara Marathon)

                        I may not be as old as dirt, but me and dirt are starting to have an awful lot in common
                        Stephen R. Donaldson

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Paprika View Post

                          When Paul talks elsewhere about the parousia of Christ, he says it is when the general resurrection occurs (1 Cor 15, 1 Thes 4).
                          That assumes there is only one, or depending on one's futurist persuasion, two. But "coming" language appears several times in the OT, if I am not mistaken. And it usually preceded and referred to some sort of impending judgment. Maybe I am wrong, but I would not be surprised if those other "comings" were translated with the word "parousia" in the LXX.

                          Question: If you know your gospels, remember that the disciples were puzzled and apparently unaware of Jesus suffering, death and resurrection--- even though Jesus mentioned it several times. That said, what sort of coming were they asking about in Matthew 24:3? ("What will be the sign of your coming...?") Did they actually expect Jesus to depart and return visibly in the sky? Or, if they did not understood "coming" language in terms of judgment, what sense would question make? But if they DID understand His coming in the context of judgment, they could still ask it in the way they said it and be completely unaware of the Jesus' suffering, death and resurrection.
                          Last edited by grahamcracker; 05-23-2014, 04:56 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Bill the Cat View Post
                            Source: The Didache cf. 100 AD



                            16:3 For in the last days false prophets and corrupters will be plenty, and the sheep will be turned into wolves, and love will be turned into hate.

                            16:4 When lawlessness increases, they will hate and persecute and betray one another, and then the world-deceiver will appear claiming to be the Son of God, and he will do signs and wonders, and the earth will be delivered into his hands, and he will do iniquitous things that have not been seen since the beginning of the world.

                            16:5 Then humankind will enter into the fire of trial, and many will be made to stumble and many will perish; but those who endure in their faith will be saved from under the curse itself.

                            16:6 And then the signs of the truth will appear: the first sign, an opening of the heavens; the second sign, the sounding of the trumpet; and the third sign, the resurrection of the dead—

                            16:7 not of every one, but as it is said: "Then the Lord my God will come, and all the holy ones with him."

                            16:8 Finally, "Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven' with power and great glory."

                            © Copyright Original Source



                            The Early Church was expecting the "World-Deceiver" to come in the future. So, it couldn't have been Titus.
                            I don't care. The Didache wasn't inspired.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                              I suggest that you do a search in the Pauline epistles (at, say, biblegateway.com) for the word "temple." The results may surprise you.
                              I'm not sure how persuasive that would be. People's interpretation implies a background of context. If I view all of the words through a Preterist mindset, how would that change my mind?

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by seanD, 03-26-2020, 12:05 PM
                              44 responses
                              4,934 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post eschaton  
                              Started by KingsGambit, 07-29-2018, 07:36 PM
                              73 responses
                              13,108 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post eschaton  
                              Started by hamster, 07-05-2015, 01:07 PM
                              116 responses
                              31,418 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post ReformedApologist  
                              Working...
                              X