Support building the third temple in Jerusalem?

[dqhall]

The most important fact of life in Judea and Galilee at the time of Jesus was the fact that they were Roman provinces under occupation by detachments of the Roman army. This was not a relatively benign occupation such as occurred in West Germany following World War II. It was much more like the Soviet occupation of Eastern Europe... a brutal military repression. At the same time, the Roman authorities exacted an outrageous level of taxation through the notorious system of "tax farming". In this system the rights to collect taxes were sold to the highest bidders. These "publicans" then proceeded to enrich themselves by setting exorbitant tax rates and by brutally enforcing their collection. People were known to be driven to suicide or even to selling their children into slavery as a result of the demands of the publicans.

Combine this oppression with the two thousand year struggle of the Jewish people for independence and freedom and you have an extremely volatile political climate. It was so volatile in fact that in the time period from one hundred years before Jesus, to one hundred years after him, the Jews rose in revolt an amazing sixty-two times. Interestingly enough all but one of these revolts originated in Galilee. Is it any wonder that the Roman authorities viewed any gathering of Galileans or any Galilean leader with great suspicion? Although quite a few of these revolts were small and localized, three of them evolved into full scale wars. The end result of all of this was the complete destruction of the Jewish nation and the great "Diaspora" of the Jewish people.

The chief priests of the Sanhedrin were likely to extract more tithes than lesser priests. The priests sent their agents to the threshing floors during the harvest to take their ten percent. They took a two drachma tax for temple construction and maintenance. The law required numerous sacrifices and offerings. These were paid for by the people. There were merchants selling animals in the temple and changing Roman coins for coins without graven images suitable for use as korban, a.k.a. temple offerings. These were heavy taxes on the people. Jesus had some strange ideas like healing on the Sabbath. The religious leaders were jealous as more people were going to Jesus than their synagogues. They were worried the people would no longer go to them. They were maddened as the law required stoning Sabbath violators. They wanted him dead. Jesus recommended paying taxes to Caesar. During his trial, Pilate made efforts to release Jesus. The people demanded a man (Barabbas) who had murdered during a riot or rebellion should be released instead of Jesus. Pilate feared a riot and condemned Jesus.

 

[JacksBratt]

I don't think any Christian who believes in the superiority of the sacrifice that Jesus offered. Would even consider the thought of supporting a sacrificial temple.

This borders on heresy and shreds the letter to the Hebrews.

Most Christians support the rebuilding of the Temple as it is a sign that Christ is returning soon.

None of them would ever go and sacrifice in it anymore than I would go to a Priest for confession.

I don't try to stop them, or condemn them for it.. I just believe that it is not necessary. They do.

So, the people of Israel are still waiting for their messiah... well the non messianic ones... so... their building it is of no worry to me.. but it is a sign of an end of this age.. which I welcome.

 

[JackRT]

The chief priests of the Sanhedrin were likely to extract more tithes than lesser priests.

The Sanhedrin was not made up of priests. The majority of judges were actually Pharisees. The priests were of the tribe of Levi and were either entirely, or nearly so, Sadducees. In Judaism there was only one "chief priest", the High Priest, and he was a Sadducee and a Levite. He was also the personal appointment of the Roman governor and perhaps the most hated person in Judea. Your entire post indicates an almost complete misunderstanding of the political and religious realities of first century Judaism.

 

[Carl Emerson]

I've got my own thoughts on the OP, but I would like to respond to the above quote as it's something I've studied quite a bit recently.
Rev. 3:9 refers to a group of Jews who are chastised due to lies about their Jewishness or behaviour as Jews. It mentions these Jews being brought before the church in
Philadelphia as a shaming/ punishment from God.
This group are basically wicked people masquerading as Jews just as in the letter to the church of Ephesus chastises "those who claim to be apostles but are not, and have found them false".
That's why I think it's important to be careful and cautious using the 'Synagogue of Satan' verse, as it's badly misused and abused.
Your post almost sounds like you mean every Jewish place of worship refers to that verse.
It's interesting that throughout the letters to the churches, each one addresses the failings, weaknesses and luke-warm nature of each of the churches. Although it's not all bad.

Thanks for your response... I have in fact heard this verse applied to all Jewish worship.

The passage in Luke 4:16-29 records that all attending Jewish worship in Nazareth tried together to kill Him.

Further the warnings in Matthew 23 confirm that worship was led by corrupt leadership.

For that reason I would not be quick to dismiss the sentiment of Rev 3:9 and suggest that it only referred to a small group.

At the same time I have a love for Jewish people but distrust the religion of Judaism.

 

[Ricky M]

Ricky, I'm not interested in attempts to hijack the op to push allegorical interpretations. Not everything you've posted is wrong, but it is not what this op is about. If you feel the need to validate your affinity for allegorical reading then post an op in any one of the three Christian Scriptures board in CF, but don't hijack Carl's op for your own agenda.

Love you too angry man

 

[Yeshua HaDerekh]

Christians have been greatly deceived about the Jews. One of our biggest misconceptions is that the torah and tanach (the old testament) is their primary religious scripture. This is completely false. Their primary religious text is the talmud. The talmud says that Jesus is burning in excrement for eternity for his sins. It claims that Mary was a harlot and Jesus is the bastard son of a roman soldier named Pantera. The pentateuch also allows pedophilia, the worship of moloch, and it classifies all non-jews as animals.

Another misconception is the wrong assumption that modern jews are related to the children of Israel. They aren't. Their ancestry is in Turkey, not Israel. They speak yiddish, not hebrew, and their scripture is the talmud, not the torah. The people that want to build a third temple want to build a temple to a God other than the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.

By the time Jesus lives the children of Israel were a minority in their own country. When they were shipped off to slavery in Babylon, their former territory was filled by all the enemy tribes God had previously commanded them to kill. The word "Jew" was a description of a nationality, not a race. It was the same as "American" now. The Macabees (of whom Herod was from) were edomites that took over Israel and cruelly slaughtered the Jews. Herod, when he heard that the messiah had been born sent out soldiers to kill all male children. This is because Herod knew that the children of Israel and the jews were two different groups of people- he was a jew, and he never wanted the children of Israel to escape his rule, so he attempted to kill their messiah to prevent a challenge to his power.

The modern state of Israel is a satanic abomination. There is no prophecy in the bible that says the children of israel will regain their nation without the arrival of the messiah. Israel is just a hiding place for international thieves.

You have no idea what you are talking about...

 

[dqhall]

The Sanhedrin was not made up of priests. The majority of judges were actually Pharisees. The priests were of the tribe of Levi and were either entirely, or nearly so, Sadducees. In Judaism there was only one "chief priest", the High Priest, and he was a Sadducee and a Levite. He was also the personal appointment of the Roman governor and perhaps the most hated person in Judea. Your entire post indicates an almost complete misunderstanding of the political and religious realities of first century Judaism.

Wikipedia knows more than you. They are copyright free:
“The Mishnah tractate Sanhedrin (IV:2) states that the Sanhedrin was to be recruited from the following sources: Priests (Kohanim), Levites (Levi'im), and ordinary Jews who were members of those families having a pure lineage such that their daughters were allowed to marry priests.”

You lack knowledge of Jewish history. Talmudic Rabbinical sources date back to the first century BC. We also have the historical writings of Flavius Josephus. You might like to read a better source of first century Jewish history:
Jerusalem in the Time of Jesus, Joachim Jeremias, 1969.

 

[Nige55]

Thanks for your response... I have in fact heard this verse applied to all Jewish worship.

The passage in Luke 4:16-29 records that all attending Jewish worship in Nazareth tried together to kill Him.

Further the warnings in Matthew 23 confirm that worship was led by corrupt leadership.

For that reason I would not be quick to dismiss the sentiment of Rev 3:9 and suggest that it only referred to a small group.

At the same time I have a love for Jewish people but distrust the religion of Judaism.

Thank you Carl. Nice to have a polite and well written response, I'm so used to seeing attacking and flaming here.
I share your sentiment regarding a love for the Jewish people but a distrust for the religion.
I've heard people use Rev 3:9 in very wrong ways. I still refer back to the context of the verse, and that the very letter before depicts those who say they are apostles but are not, people who are liars, - just like those Jews mentioned in the Philedelphia letter.

If we paint all Jews with the brush used for those described in that verse, then we should also do the same for all apostles (followers of Christ in our case).

Matthew 23 sadly could apply also to much of the Church these days, I've been to plenty with corrupt leadership, and in some cases flat out wicked leadership. There's no shortage of horrific goings on in churches locally, and all around the world.
Given the condemnation to all the churches the letters were directed to, I don't personally feel we can be in much of a position to be casting stones.

That's just my 2 cents.

 

[Josheb]

First thing, you’re coming off as a jerk.

First, I don't care. That's your baggage (Lk. 6:45). If you choose to read into the post negative attributes that's on you and will not in any way have any effect on how I address the matter of the third temple. You don't have to like anyone here or how they come across. The tou prohibits you from making the posts about the posters. So start with the log, not the speck. The problem here is I asked a question and it didn't get answered, the response was fallacious and I noted the malfeasance bluntly, asking for change. If you don't like posters pointing out your errors then don't post errors.

I’ve had a long day at work...

What a jerky thing to post.

I was trying to be polite...

Completely false. It is not polite to avoid answering questions. Now you've made the posts all about you. Surely you do not want me digressing to address that practice.




All you've done is once again fail to answer the question asked and given me more evidence to point out the emptiness of third-temple theology. You - none of you - can or will answer some of the most basic scriptural and logical questions begged by the theology that by any objective measure should be easily answerable by any adherent. But it is somehow imagined telling me I'm coming across as a jerk is cogent discourse when it is neither cogent nor polite. And my point is thereby proven: y'all can't or won't answer some of the most basic questions begged by third-temple theology and when asked to do so the response is often indignant ad hominem. So remember my handle, Curtis. You'll either ignore me or post cogently, because I'll exploit the subterfuge to point out the paucity of reason in the silence, errors, and fallacy.



Simple question:

What makes you think it is going to happen?

 

[Josheb]

Love you too angry man

Calling people angry when they are not is not loving. Try Ephesians 4:29 today as you interact with others. Think about what it might be like to correct wrongdoing without feeling angry. Think what it would be like to correctly identify the point of discussion or inquiry in an op and then stay on topic to that point.


No anger required.

 

[Carl Emerson]

Thank you Carl. Nice to have a polite and well written response, I'm so used to seeing attacking and flaming here.
I share your sentiment regarding a love for the Jewish people but a distrust for the religion.
I've heard people use Rev 3:9 in very wrong ways. I still refer back to the context of the verse, and that the very letter before depicts those who say they are apostles but are not, people who are liars, - just like those Jews mentioned in the Philedelphia letter.

If we paint all Jews with the brush used for those described in that verse, then we should also do the same for all apostles (followers of Christ in our case).

Matthew 23 sadly could apply also to much of the Church these days, I've been to plenty with corrupt leadership, and in some cases flat out wicked leadership. There's no shortage of horrific goings on in churches locally, and all around the world.
Given the condemnation to all the churches the letters were directed to, I don't personally feel we can be in much of a position to be casting stones.

That's just my 2 cents.

I think we are probably on the same page...

I make a distinction between the people and the religion.

For this reason I do not paint anyone with anything.

I do think the demonic has infiltrated Judaism and Matt 23 also applies in some cases to the church.

For this reason I think Rev 3:9 is both accurate in context and also more broadly applicable.

However there is much to be done in showing the Love of Jesus to the Jews.

 

[Erik Nelson]

Friends,

I get the impression that many believers support the building of the Third Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

Maybe they think this hastens the second coming?

As our bodies are now His temple for the Presence of God, why rebuild what He desecrated and destroyed?

Folks anxiously wait for the sacrifices to begin again yet the One Sacrifice has been made.

Jesus in His day, described the Jewish place of worship as the Synagog of Satan in Rev 3:9 - do we want a repeat of this???

What is going on?

Can't hurt to remember what happened the last time anyone tried to rebuild the temple, in the 4th century AD under Julian the Apostate

 

[Robin Mauro]

Friends,

I get the impression that many believers support the building of the Third Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

Maybe they think this hastens the second coming?

As our bodies are now His temple for the Presence of God, why rebuild what He desecrated and destroyed?

Folks anxiously wait for the sacrifices to begin again yet the One Sacrifice has been made.

Jesus in His day, described the Jewish place of worship as the Synagog of Satan in Rev 3:9 - do we want a repeat of this???

What is going on?

Amos 5:18
"Woe to them who desire the day of the Lord. The day of the Lord is darkness and not light."

 

[JacksBratt]

Amos 5:18
"Woe to them who desire the day of the Lord. The day of the Lord is darkness and not light."

One verse? Usually, pastors, will find three places in the scripture to support one other... This is to avoid context problems.

Do you have support texts?

 

[Robin Mauro]

One verse? Usually, pastors, will find three places in the scripture to support one other... This is to avoid context problems.

Do you have support texts?

Have you read Daniel? What he saw in the future made him sick, as it should us all

 

[Carl Emerson]

Have you read Daniel? What he saw in the future made him sick, as it should us all

Not if you are among those with imputed righteousness that walk in His will.

 

[lazyservantofYahweh]

I see it the same way.

John 5:43
I am come in my Father's name, and ye receive me not: if another shall come in his own name, him ye will receive.

The Father's name is Yahweh. The name of the Son is Yahuwshua.

 

[Charlie24]

The Father's name is Yahweh. The name of the Son is Yahuwshua.

If that's what you want to call Him it's ok with me.

I like Jehovah and Jesus.

 

[lazyservantofYahweh]

If that's what you want to call Him it's ok with me.

I like Jehovah and Jesus.

What if I told you that "jehovah" means he rushes into engulfing ruin and "jesus" means vision of Zeus? Would you still believe in these names of satan?

 

[Charlie24]

What if I told you that "jehovah" means he rushes into engulfing ruin and "jesus" means vision of Zeus? Would you still believe in these names of satan?

I would say you need to find another source for your definitions.