Geoff Hudson

Mt.24
(1)Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings.

(2)"Do you see all these things?" he asked. "I tell you the truth, at the end of the age, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

(3)As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives, …

Mk.13
(1)As he was leaving the temple, one of his disciples said to him, "Look, Teacher! What massive stones! What magnificent buildings!"

(2)"Do you see all these great buildings?" replied John. "Not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down."

(3)As Jesus was sitting on the Mount of Olives opposite the temple,…

Lk.21
(5)Some of his disciples were remarking about how the temple was adorned with beautiful stones and with gifts dedicated to God. But Jesus said,

(6)"As for what you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down."
********

Mt has Jesus outside the temple, Mk has him leaving, and Lk has him inside. Mt and Mk have Jesus seated immediately on the Mount of Olives, and Mk adds “opposite the temple”. Lk has him going to the Mount in the evening (Lk.22:37). I suggest Mt and Mk have edited their sources to convince the reader that Jesus is forecasting the destruction of the temple complex that the disciples see from the Mount. Lk has Jesus forecast the same, but is less manipulative, and thus more original.

I would also suggest that the disciples are admiring the alter, not the temple buildings - references to “buildings” in Mt, “massive” stones and “magnificent buildings” in Mk are editor’s additions. To admire the alter, the disciples would have been inside the temple area (as in Lk) and near the sanctuary. Taking Lk as more original, the disciples were then remarking how the alter was adorned with “beautiful” stones and with “gifts” (presumably sacrifices). What constituted “beautiful” stones was in the minds of the beholders.

The alter was an impressive structure in its own right. In the shape of an unfinished pyramid, it was 50 cubits square at the base and 15 cubits high, according to Josephus. More importantly it was made of unhewn (natural – God made) stones. Literally, it was a large pile of loose stones that had not been worked with iron tools – presumably, the use of such tools would have made the stones less pure. Such a structure would be relatively easy to demolish – the stones could be “thrown down” as in all three synoptics.

The phrase “As for what you see here” in Lk.21:6 implies that Jesus had said something before. I would suggest that the missing words are the verses Lk.20:17 and 18. These appear out of context as a riddle in the parable of the tenants, but fit perfectly in Lk.21:

Lk.20
(17)Jesus looked directly at them and asked, “Then what is the meaning of that which is written: ‘The stone which the builders rejected has become the capstone’?

(18)Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed.”

The “capstone” would be the pointed apex (a pyramid itself) and the largest stone which if placed in position on the alter would make it a perfect pyramid. Fall on a pointed stone and you get “broken to pieces”. The question is: what did the capstone represent in the mind of the prophet? It was certainly a symbol of perfection, and it would have pointed heavenwards.

Lk.21:5-6 then reconstructs as:

(5)Some of his disciples were remarking about how the [temple] {alter} was [adorned] {built} with [beautiful] {unhewn} stones and with [gifts] {sacrifices} dedicated to God.

Jesus looked directly at them and asked, "Then what is the meaning of that which is written: " 'The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone’? Everyone who falls on that stone will be broken to pieces, but he on whom it falls will be crushed."

(6)But Jesus said, "As for [what] {the alter} you see here, the time will come when not one stone will be left on another; every one of them will be thrown down."

I conclude that Jesus’ original prophecy was not the destruction of the temple, but the redundancy and possible destruction of the alter – there was no need for animal sacrifice to achieve purity before God. The prophecy was pre 70. And you know who I think Jesus was.

Geoff

mike_decock

Was the temple completely destroyed in 70? Was literally "not one stone left on another"?

Even so, you could make the same prediction about any building and someday it will come true, right?

-Mike...

Geoff Hudson

Josephus doesn't say so. It was probably levelled much later, starting with Hadrian. But the gospel editor's wanted people to think that Jesus predicted the complete destruction - hence my analysis that they used sayings of Jesus with different original meanings.

Geoff

Geoff Hudson

BEAUTIFUL STONES of the ALTER (not the temple) in Luke 21:5 agrees with the Jewish Encyclopedia. The disciples were leaving the alter (not the temple) on the seventh day of the Feast of Tabernacles - the most important Jewish Feast, although you wouldn't think it was from reading the NT.

The Alter in Rabbinical Literature (Ref. The Jewish Encyclopedia – on-line):

The Altar was made a special object of veneration on the seventh day of the festival of Tabernacles, when the people made a circuit around it seven times, and addressed it on DEPARTING: "To thee belongeth BEAUTY, O Altar! To Him, the Lord, and to thee, O Altar!" (Suk. iv. 5).

"The Altar is the means of establishing peace between the people of Israel and their Father in heaven; therefore, IRON, which is used as an instrument of murder, should not be swung over it. What a guarantee for those that endeavour to establish peace between man and man, and between nations and nations, that no evil shall befall them!" said Johanan ben Zakkai (Mek., Yithro, 11; Tosef., B. K. vii. 6).

And in the same spirit he said: "If the altar of the Lord must be built of WHOLE STONES (according to Deut. xxvii. 6), all the more should the men that perform the peaceful work of divine instruction be whole-souled and peaceful" (ib. 7). In a similar strain: "If the very stones of the altar are to be treated with respect and with decorum, how much more living man!" (Mek. l.c., end).

Geoff