Will the Jews build a Third Temple?

[Arial]

But not all Jews deny Christ.

That is why I said Jewish religion.

Unless you consider the Old Testament oracles given to us by the Jews.

What do you mean by OT oracles? Something specific? They prophesied of Christ. Much was a shadow of his coming. But when He came, the religious of Israel (Saducees and Pharisees) denied him. And that religion still does today.

What does that have to do with anything?

Much of Dispensationalism (including the branch MacArthur promotes) also teaches the temple will be rebuilt and the old order of worship will be reinstated, including the animal sacrifices.

 

[Tambora]

Source is the Jewish religion that denies that Jesus is Messiah.

There are several sects of "the Jewish Religion", just as there are of the Protestant Religion.

I wouldn't place any stock in the coin or the claim. It is rooted in anti-Christ. (Either as a hope or a sign. Dispensationalism.)

The coin is a reality, and so is the desire of some sects of Judaism wanting to build a temple.

Since Israel's politics is basically secular with secular laws, I'm not sure how a newly built temple would be allowed to function.

Law enforcement would need to have access to it.

Animal sacrifices may have heavy restrictions, if allowed at all.

There is also the legitimacy of the priesthood and whether one can verify with any certainty they are a direct descendant of Zadoc.

Not to mention the structure of the temple itself (ie. the measurements and materials used).

And there's the mystery of where to build it. (Will anywhere in Jerusalem do?)

And there's that nagging question of why build it since there is nothing in scripture about God demanding that the Jewish people build a third temple.
I mean, on who's authority would it be built?

There would be a lot of "iffys" about a building of a third temple.

 

[prism]

What do you mean by OT oracles? Something specific? They prophesied of Christ. Much was a shadow of his coming. But when He came, the religious of Israel (Saducees and Pharisees) denied him. And that religion still does today.

Romans 3:1-2 NASB95
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? [2] Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Much of Dispensationalism (including the branch MacArthur promotes) also teaches the temple will be rebuilt and the old order of worship will be reinstated, including the animal sacrifices

Do you have a citation of that?

 

[Arial]

Romans 3:1-2 NASB95
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? [2] Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

Do you have a citation of that?

MacAruthur flat out said so in one of his OT text notes of his study Bible. I quit reading his study Bible and his books after that because I knew they couldn't be fully trusted. That is not to say, that much of what he says doctrinal I feel is correct.

But if you do not think that what I said is true, read through any end times forum on any Christian site, and you will see it.

Romans 3:1-2 NASB95
Then what advantage has the Jew? Or what is the benefit of circumcision? [2] Great in every respect. First of all, that they were entrusted with the oracles of God.

My original statement had nothing to do with the oracles of God. And it was disparaging them in no way, or the Jews. The Jewish religion today denies Jesus was the Messiah of the OT just as most did in Jesus' day. So why would Christians put any stock in what they are doing in Israel or in trying to reestablish it old order, or who put out a coin with Trumps face of it because they think he is the one who will get the temple rebuilt?

 

[prism]

MacAruthur flat out said so in one of his OT text notes of his study Bible. I quit reading his study Bible and his books after that because I knew they couldn't be fully trusted. That is not to say, that much of what he says doctrinal I feel is correct.

i'll take that as you haven't got a citation

But if you do not think that what I said is true, read through any end times forum on any Christian site, and you will see it.

I also read on other Christian sites, lots of hate going MacArthur's way, even dispensational ones.

My original statement had nothing to do with the oracles of God. And it was disparaging them in no way, or the Jews. The Jewish religion today denies Jesus was the Messiah of the OT just as most did in Jesus' day. So why would Christians put any stock in what they are doing in Israel or in trying to reestablish it old order, or who put out a coin with Trumps face of it because they think he is the one who will get the temple rebuilt?

Yes, religion in general (being at its core, a system of works), denies Jesus

 

[Arial]

I also read on other Christian sites, lots of hate going MacArthur's way, even dispensational ones.

I am wondering what that has to do with anything.

 

[prism]

I am wondering what that has to do with anything.

Not sure, but you brought up Dispensationalism (#379) and MacArthur (#381)

 

[Arial]

Not sure, but you brought up Dispensationalism (#379) and MacArthur (#381)

I guess you missed my point. 'Nuff' said.

 

[Mr GLee]

Unless you consider the Old Testament oracles given to us by the Jews.

I would offer.

Given by the Holy Spirit. God is not a dying Jewish man. It's not a Jewish religion in respect to an outward fleshly Jew but is according to the new name the father named His bride in Acts. Christian meaning resident of the city of Christ prepared for the bride. A Christian Jew .

Romans 2:27-29;And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law?;For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; (death) whose praise is not of men, but of God.

Some outward Jews in Revelation tried to enter Christian fellowship with a Jewish DNA card as If God was a racist, an identity thief rather than the devil. The father of lies said : I will be like God I will ascend to the cloud of his presence . Men can be women. . .women can become men or anything they can Imagenation comes up with, the hating power of misogyny, misandry.

Satan having no spiritual understand hates all flesh His goal destroy mankind.

Satan the King of identity thief a certain way teaching darkness is evil and not it represents evil along with king of lying signs to wonder after as if true prophecy to confirm the lie

The witness of two

Revelation 2:9 I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.

Revelation 3:9 Behold, I will make them of the synagogue of Satan, which say they are Jews, and are not, but do lie; behold, I will make them to come and worship before thy feet, and to know that I have loved thee.

 

[Josheb]

But not all Jews deny Christ.

They cease being Jews if and when they accept Jesus salvifically. There are no Jews in Christ Jesus.

Unless you consider the Old Testament oracles given to us by the Jews.

They were given to "us" by God, not the Jews. The Jews typically discounted or ignored those oracles and when they did heed them the Jews misunderstood what was said more often than not.

What does that have to do with anything?

While only @Arial can speak for herself and answer that question in her context, I will add Dispensational Premillennialism is a Judaized form of Christianity. It inherently divides God's people into two groups with two separate purposes and teaches there are two ways to coming to Christ, one by grace alone and the other by grace plus works (except Dispensationalist teachers are not forthcoming about the latter). Op-relevantly speaking, Dispensational Premillennialism teaches a temple must be built before salvation comes to the Jews and that is a works-based soteriology (even if they deny it). The term "dispensationalism" is used generically to include al modern futurisms, especially that of Darbyism and modern Zionism, because they share a come hermeneutic and set of doctrines.

 

[prism]

I guess you missed my point. 'Nuff' said.

Yes, I must have missed it, whatever it was.

 

[prism]

They cease being Jews if and when they accept Jesus salvifically. There are no Jews in Christ Jesus.

They were given to "us" by God, not the Jews. The Jews typically discounted or ignored those oracles and when they did heed them the Jews misunderstood what was said more often than not.

So, are there no gentiles in Christ Jesus, either? (Gen 4-12).
The oracles of God were given by God to the Jews first (unless Moses was a Gentile).

I will add Dispensational Premillennialism is a Judaized form of Christianity. It inherently divides God's people into two groups with two separate purposes and teaches there are two ways to coming to Christ, one by grace alone and the other by grace plus works (except Dispensationalist teachers are not forthcoming about the latter).

I would call that here-say dispensationalism or dispensationalism with a Reformed bias.

Dispensational Premillennialism teaches a temple must be built before salvation comes to the Jews and that is a works-based soteriology (even if they deny it). The term "dispensationalism" is used generically to include al modern futurisms, especially that of Darbyism and modern Zionism, because they share a come hermeneutic and set of doctrines.

They also teach that that temple is the Antichrist temple.
I'd rather hold a futurist view than a preterist or one that spiritualizes most all the prophecies in such a way that anyone's interpretation can mean nearly anything.

 

[Arial]

They also teach that that temple is the Antichrist temple.

Do they? Do you have a citation for that?

I'd rather hold a futurist view than a preterist or one that spiritualizes most all the prophecies in such a way that anyone's interpretation can mean nearly anything.

When carefully and properly done, the meaning of the symbolic language and images can be ascertained from their previous appearances in scripture, mainly the OT.

 

[prism]

Do they? Do you have a citation for that?

You made the original assertion that the temple must be built before salvation comes to the Jews,,so that ball is in your court.

When carefully and properly done, the meaning of the symbolic language and images can be ascertained from their previous appearances in scripture, mainly the OT

Is that why the reform have so many views on eschatology?

 

[Josheb]

So, are there no gentiles in Christ Jesus, either? (Gen 4-12).

Nope. None. Galatians 3:28. There are no Jews, no Gentiles, no slaves, no free men (or women), no males, no females.

The oracles of God were given by God to the Jews first (unless Moses was a Gentile).

Yes, sorta, but the earlier statement was that it was the Jews that gave us the oracles. That statement is incorrect. Moses was not a Jew, btw. He was a Hebrew, not a Jew. If we're going to get super-technical, Moses was from the tribe of Levi, not Judah (from which the term "Jew" originated). As far as scripture goes, there are no Jews until Ezra. The first time the term occurs in the Tanakh is in 2 Kings 25 and that's a reference to people left behind in the land of Judah (not the entire promised land).

I would call that here-say dispensationalism or dispensationalism with a Reformed bias.

Start an op on it and I will quote leading and authoritative Dispensationalist after leading and authoritative Dispensationalist for the last 125 years and prove the point, and I will do it so irrefutably that there should NEVER be any question about the matter ever again. You could, alternatively, just Google the matter because one of THE fundamental beliefs in Dispensational Premillennialism AND its hermeneutic is the separation of Israel from the Church.

Or you could take leading contemporary Dispensational Premillennialist Michael Vlach's word for it HERE.

"Dispensational scholars have emphasized certain beliefs as most essential to this system. Charles Ryrie (1925-2016), for example, presented a sine qua non (i.e. essential conditions) of Dispensationalism that involved three areas: (1) a distinction between Israel and the church; (2) a hermeneutic of “literal interpretation” to all areas of scripture including Old Testament prophecies; and (3) the glory of God as the underlying purpose of God in history."​

"Another dispensationalist, John Feinberg, offered six “essentials” of Dispensationalism: (1) multiple senses of terms like “Jew” and “seed of Abraham; (2) a hermeneutic in which the New Testament reaffirms and does not reinterpret the Old Testament; (3) unconditional promises to national Israel in the Old Testament must be fulfilled with national Israel; (4) a distinctive future for Israel; (5) the church as a distinctive organism; and (6) a philosophy of history in which history is the gradual implementation and outworking of the kingdom of God."​

"Early Classical and Traditional Dispensationalism argued that there are two peoples of God — one with an earthly destiny and the other with a heavenly destiny. Revised and Progressive Dispensationalism assert that all believers of all ages share the same destiny on a restored earth."​

And if you like I can quote, Darby, Scofield, Chaffer, Ryrie, Walvoord, Ice, Saucy, Blaising, Bock, Ware, more of Vlach, Feinstein, Watson, and a few others. I'm not talking about heretics like Hagee or Copeland. I can fill posts of leading DPers in their own words to prove what I posted. Not merely evidence it. PROVE it.

Post an op on it.

They also teach that that temple is the Antichrist temple.

Not according to Michael Vlach.

"Particularly significant to Dispensationalism is the belief that the seventieth week of Daniel 9:27 will occur in the future. This allegedly involves a coming seven-year period that includes the activity of an antichrist figure who does an abomination event in the Jewish temple."​

It's a Jewish temple, not an antichrist temple. You do realize it's only Dispensational Premillennialists/modern futurists that 1) think Israel is relevant to Christian eschatology at all, and 2) they are the only ones concerned with and constantly telling everyone another temple will be built. No other Christian eschatology teaches either position.

I'd rather hold a futurist view than a preterist or one that spiritualizes most all the prophecies in such a way that anyone's interpretation can mean nearly anything.

Which has absolutely nothing to do with this op or what I posted. That is a petty, irrational red herring that has no place in a serious discussion on whether or not Jews will build a third temple.



And for those Dispensational Premillennialist/modern futurists lurking this exchange: If you find yourself thinking, "Well that is not what I believe," then there are only two options. The first is you're not actually a Dispensationalist and the second is, if you are a Dispensationalist then you're not a very good one. MANY Dispensationalists are shocked to find what DPism actually teaches. That's why there are so many former Dispensationalists in the Church. I, and many others here in CCAM are former Dispies. I have ready most of what every noted Dispensationalist teacher has written in the last 180 years. I have had scores of discussions with Dispies and have heard/read "That's not what I believe," or "I did not know..." more times than I can count. And as far as this op goes.....


There is not a single verse in the entire Bible that explicitly states another temple will be built, much less one will be built in our future. The Bible could be attentively read a gazillion bazillion times, actively searching for that verse, and no such verse will ever be found.

 

[prism]

Not according to Michael Vlach.

"Particularly significant to Dispensationalism is the belief that the seventieth week of Daniel 9:27 will occur in the future. This allegedly involves a coming seven-year period that includes the activity of an antichrist figure who does an abomination event in the Jewish temple."

an abomination event in the Jewish temple.", referring to...

2 Thessalonians 2:3-4,8-10 KJV
Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition; [4] Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God. [8] And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming: [9] Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders, [10] And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

So that passage is either untrue or maybe the Preterists have it right, i.e. it's all been fulfilled.
I see nothing wrong with Vlach's statement

 

[Arial]

You made the original assertion that the temple must be built before salvation comes to the Jews,,so that ball is in your court.

I see. You have no citation.

Is that why the reform have so many views on eschatology?

I don't know that they do. Reformed is a theology not an eschatology. They are typically amil in one form or another and covenant rather than dispensational. But I challenge you to find any two Christians who have identical interpretations of eschatology, specifically Revelation.

What is it that you are arguing against and what is your purpose with these statements? They seem to be just that---argumentative,

 

[prism]

I see. You have no citation.

Only 'cause I never made the claim.

I don't know that they do. Reformed is a theology not an eschatology. They are typically amil in one form or another and covenant rather than dispensational. But I challenge you to find any two Christians who have identical interpretations of eschatology, specifically Revelation.

That's my point. So why do the Reformed harp on Dispensationalists, when they don't even have a unified eschatology of their own?

What is it that you are arguing against and what is your purpose with these statements? They seem to be just that---argumentative,

Just questions in response to comments in (#379/#381), I'm not arguing against anything, just asking.

 

[Paul]

Yes to the OP. The man of lawlessness reveals himself to the world as the one spoken of in prophecy by sitting in the temple declaring himself God. And as Paul wrote in 2thess 2 he is destroyed by a coming of the Lord not man. Zach 14 also has similar language as the Lord returns to defeat the armies attacking Jerusalem and Rev 16 has a coming of the Lord rev16:15 to defeat the beast’s armies visible and invisible.
Also rev 11 speaks of more than an inner sanctuary. After considering all these signs given by God that there will be another temple built by unbelievers.

 

[Mr GLee]

Only 'cause I never made the claim.

That's my point. So why do the Reformed harp on Dispensationalists, when they don't even have a unified eschatology of their own?

Just questions in response to comments in (#379/#381), I'm not arguing against anything, just asking.

A born-again Jew is not one outwardly according to what the eyes see but is one inwardly whose praise is of God not seen not dying mankind seen.


Romans 2:28-29;For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh:;But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; (death) whose praise is not of men, but of God.


God is not a racist. . the sin of murder of character stealing the true hidden identity of the heart. false witness

Satan (I will be like God) the king of identity theft, King of lying sign by which men and wonder, wonder, wonder the same as if true prophecy

Dispensationalists comes with different times some they call pre rapture other post.

The best tool is the signified using the temporal things seen to give the unseen understanding of the parable. Which according to the prescription. The loving commandment(2 Corinthian 4:18) Look not to the things seen the temporal but look to the eternal things called faith, referred to as hidden manna in Revelation 2:17

The proper hermeneutics (signified) given in the opening of the book

Revelation 1:1 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass; and he sent and signified it by his angel unto his servant John:

Revealation20: 3And cast him into the bottomless pit, and shut him up, and set a seal upon him, that he should deceive the nations no more, till the thousand years should be fulfilled: and after that he must be loosed a little season.

Remember throughout the bible beginning two times in the Old Testament and one prior to Revelation.

God is no in a time restraint he finished all the work in 6 days. Thousand years as if a day, not a thousand years is the same as a day .

Psalm 90:4 For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday (not is) when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

Ecclesiastes 6:6 Yea, though he live a thousand years twice told, yet hath he seen no good: do not all go to one place?

2 Peter 3:8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, (not is )and a thousand years as one day.

He will be released to again to build another abomination of desolation. Temples made with human hands as a will of dying mankind.


Like with Peter as a false prophet in Mathew 16 t tried to deceive all the nations God is a Jewish man dying man as King of kings.


The vail was rent there was no Jewish man sitting in what some Jews called holy of holies .