Is a new Jewish temple necessary?

I don’t think it is up to us to say what is necessary or not necessary, so much as whether or not Israel has the basic right to worship as she sees it where she sees fit.

The real question here is: Will we really see a new Jewish temple when the next big peace comes?

Well, it stands to reason that the next big peace shall come in stark contrast to the War on Terror. It also stands to reason that Islam, with atrocities done in its name by fringe radical elements proclaiming Islamist fundamentalist ideals, could suffer a significant loss…which loss the world could only allow if Western civilization felt extremely hurt or threatened, and that the loss to Islam would inspire Moderate Islam to very actively shun, disgrace, decry, and defeat both the radical ideals and the radical practitioners from within its realm of influence, a very important aspect to the end of the war.

Moreover, it would naturally occur in the aftermath of the War on Terror, to preserve peace, that an elite world organization would justify the marginalization of Christianity and Judaism—the 42 month storm. Add to these likelihoods the biblically prophetic reality of a Jewish temple in Jerusalem being the epicenter of ‘the last days’ and it looks like the pieces are coming together.

What about those who say the prophecy of the great tribulation came to pass in 70AD?

Well, let me put it this way: consider the phrase “all living things” which can be inferred from the following verse: “and except those days be shortened, there should no flesh be saved”  [Matthew 24:22].

Now, compare the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem to other sieges brought against that city in its history. Is it really that much different? Did the 70AD destruction of Jerusalem threaten the existence of “all living things,” including Rome’s armies in Jerusalem at the time, as well as Rome’s citizens back in Rome, not to mention all the citizens of Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, North America, etc.? In 70AD did the technology even exist for man to bring about a planet-wide extinction event?

Or look at this way: in 70AD people were alive who could have been warned of doomsday threats by direct word-of-mouth from Jesus’ disciples. So, why was it stressed to the disciples that they should write these signs down for people to read?

“…(whoso readeth, let him understand)…” [Matthew 24:15].

“…(let him that readeth understand)…” [Mark 13:14].

Maybe it is just me, but there seems to be some similarity between these parenthetical statements and what we read in the opening of Habakkuk’s writing: “And the Lord answered me, and said, Write the vision, and make it plain upon tables, that he may run that readeth it. For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry wait for it; because it will surely come, it will not tarry” [Habakkuk 1:2,3].

The last part is somewhat ambiguous at first glance: it tarries, so wait, but it does not tarry. The purpose of Habakkuk’s vision is not under discussion here, but if this concept could apply—and I submit that it could—to a situation with the end of the War on Terror and the question of a new Jewish temple, then I think the answer is plain: that if the conditions are at all fitting for these occurrences, then there is no reason to expect them not to occur.

In other words, if it turns out in the next decade or four that a Jewish temple could begin coming together in Jerusalem, and the world would allow it, there is no reasonable expectation that people would simply procrastinate for one reason or another and put it off for another century or more.



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s