(July 5, 2018 at 10:38 am)Drich Wrote: Here's the problem with that though.. Jesus's anti temple anti religion attitude towards what the temp became is evident through out the gospels. It was also the reason so many turned to christianity after the destruction of jerusalem. Meaning this anti temple sentiment was hard taught and previously ingrained into the people. so when the temple fell as predicted and 'no stone left unturned' ( because the fires burned so hot it melted the gold and silver and it filled the cracks in the floor so rome pried apart the foundation stones to gain the mass amounts of gold down there.) they themselve turned to Christianity.
I don't see how Christ being against the established priesthood and temple is a problem for the view that the destruction of the temple was not prophetic (either because it was a contemporary event, or one readily foreseeable). Jesus as an apocalyptic preacher taught ideas that were hostile to the existing priesthood. That he was anti-establishment seems readily explained by that fact. I don't see how you feel his anti-establishment views are any kind of a problem for the type of theories in play.
![[Image: extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg]](https://i.postimg.cc/zf86M5L7/extraordinarywoo-sig.jpg)


