jump to navigation

The Third Temple Fallacy August 2, 2011

Posted by Henry in Eschatology & End Times.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

There are many Evangelical Christians who believe that Christ cannot come until after a third Jewish temple is built in the city of Jerusalem, arguably on the site where King Solomon’s temple stood. Aside from the fact that there are problems associated with the sighting of the third temple on the Temple Mount where the al Aqsa mosque currently stands, one of the central questions here from a Christian point of view is whether the building of such a temple is indeed written in Bible prophecy. There are no prophecies which directly require the building of another temple to usher in the return of Jesus Christ, although Dan 9:27 has been cited as ‘proof’ text. In spite of this fact it would appear that many in Evangelical circles have been duped into believing that such a temple is required and that they have a responsibility in contributing to the fulfilment of prophecy, as if God needed our help. One of the consequences of this fallacy has seen Evangelical Christians, particularly across America, contributing vast sums of money to support the rebuilding of the temple.

Whatever the relative merits of the Jews rebuilding their temple are, Christians have no business contributing to such an effort. In the first place such a temple, with its revived sacrifices and ordinances would be an affront to God considering the fact that Christ did away with all this through his death on the Cross. Evangelical Christians who support this rebuilding work are therefore unwittingly denying the work of Christ on the Cross and are making the Cross of non-effect. To return to the works of the Law is to deny the election of Grace through Christ’s death on the Cross but this reality seems to be lost on those who are committed to the establishment of a third Jewish temple. If the Jews want to rebuild their temple, let them do so but Christians should be preaching “Christ crucified” (1 Cor 1:23).

There is a wave of “Christian Zionism” sweeping acrossAmerica and many organisations have been established with the expressed purpose of promoting Judeo-Christian values and heritage (ecumenism). One such organisation is the “Battalion of Deborah” whose expressed belief it is that Christians should be standing shoulder to shoulder with Jews in an attempt to fulfil the “Abrahamic covenant”, a view which they based on Gen 12:1-3. Here is a quote from their website:

“….we believe it is Biblically Correct for us, as Christians and fellow believers in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, to stand together with Israel and the Jewish People, in education to the masses regarding the promises of God, in support, in prayer and in our physical presence in the Land. It is for this purpose that we have been ordained and called out as ‘like-minded’ group of people and that we pledge to work toward being a blessing to Israel…”

As Christians however we are called to observe the teachings of Christ and we are ordained to fulfil the Great Commission. There is nothing in the teachings of Christ which encourages Christians to engender ecumenical relationships with unbelievers whether they are Jews or otherwise. Instead scripture commands Christians to come out from among them and be separate (2 Cor 6:17). However these organisations are entering churches and sharing the pulpits with Jewish religious leaders in order to drum up support for Israel and to raise funds towards the Temple Mount development plans.

This ecumenical construct has been made possible however due to a distinct lack of discernment on the part of many Evangelical Christians. In accordance they misapply scriptures such as Dan 9:27 in order to justify their position. In Dan 9:26, Daniel related the destruction of the SECOND TEMPLE that was to be built by the decree of Cyrus. Yet, some have insisted on inserting a gap of over 2000 years between verse 26 and verse 27 in order to arrive at a conclusion that verse 27 refers to the ending of sacrifices in a third temple. Even if such a gap could be established verse 27 does not make mention of a temple and the absence of a temple does not preclude sacrifices and oblations from being performed. 

In summary, the third temple is a Jewish ambition which has nothing to do with Christians or the fulfilment of Bible prophecy as concerning Christ’s return. Prophecy does not indicate or give instruction for the constitution and the construction of a third temple, which would actually be an abomination in the face of the Cross.  With the destruction of the second temple, the Old Covenant vanished away and has been replaced by the New Covenant in Christ’s blood. Christians therefore have no business working to fulfil a mission that denies the Christ who bought them out.

For a more detailed expose on this topic read this article: http://www.thomaswilliamson.net/temple_next_event.htm



1. Hopeful_watcher - September 7, 2011

It’s true I would never desire or glorify a building of a temple, but if prophetically it is accurate (and I get you are ALSO saying it isn’t) then a building of a thirst temple can be viewed as a sign if His coming. Likewise, the coming of the lawless one is an abomination to the cross, but still a prophetic inevitability. Whether its propheticaly true or not, I whole heartedly agree that Christians have no place in assisting such a construction. That like fomenting evil in hopes the AC

Hopeful_watcher - September 7, 2011

(Con’t) will reveal himself so that Christ will return. That is like the Muslims creating chaos so their mahdi will come. Pure insanity.

I read that there is a word in Daniel 9:27 that is Septuagint and Theodotion; Hebrew that means ‘wing’. Do you have any thoughts on that?

2. Henry - September 8, 2011

Indeed I am saying that the building of a third temple isn’t “prophetically accurate” and therefore is not a sign of Christ’s coming from a scriptural point of view. With regards to your question about whether the Hebrew word for “wing” occurs in Daniel 9:27, what I will say is that I don’t personally delve too much into Hebrew equivalents of English words – I leave that up to the translators. I do know where you are coming from though. Proponents of the Third Temple scenario claim that the anti-christ will put the abomination of desolation on the wing of a future rebuilt temple and that this will mark the begining of 3.5 years of tribulation.

I have explained in a number of posts why I don’t think this view holds true. It is my firm belief that the abomination of desolation has already been fulfilled – in fact fulfilled during the destruction of the second temple in 70A.D. by Titus Vespasian. There are two KEY scriptures to support this. If we read Luke’s version of the Olivet Discourse we come to the realisation that the abomination which makes desolate is the Roman Army. Take a look at this verse from Luke 21:

20And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies, then know that the desolation thereof is nigh.

Conflate this with Matthew 24 and Mark 13. Jesus warned the disciples here that when they see Jerusalem compassed about with armies they should note that the desolation thereof is nigh. The key word here is “desolation”. Ask yourself how many desolations of Israel are written in prophesy? The first desolation occurred at the hands of the Babylonians where the city was made desolate for 70 years. Read Daniel 9:2:

2In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.

Following this first desolation the Lord purposed to restore Israel and return them to the land and that is what Daniel’s prophecy (Chapter 9) is all about. But…. Daniel prophesied that this very said city and temple would again be made desolate at a future time. This occurred in 70 A.D., following Jesus’ warning where He referred back to the said prophecy of Daniel 9 when He said “when you see the abomination which maketh desolate, spoken of by Daniel the prophet…..” So to date there are only two desolations of Israel. If we were to project Daniel’s prophecy into the future we would be saying there would be a third desolation of Israel. Can this be supported by scripture? Read Isaiah 11 but particularly verses 11-12:

11And it shall come to pass in that day, that the Lord shall set his hand again the second time to recover the remnant of his people, which shall be left, from Assyria, and from Egypt, and from Pathros, and from Cush, and from Elam, and from Shinar, and from Hamath, and from the islands of the sea.

12And he shall set up an ensign for the nations, and shall assemble the outcasts of Israel, and gather together the dispersed of Judah from the four corners of the earth.

In “that day” the Lord will gather His people a SECOND time. Which day? The day of the Lord. If you read from verse 1 you get the picture that this will occur towards the close of time. In view of Isaiah 11 can we still argue that there will be a third desolation of Israel at some point in the future?

Hopeful_watcher - September 8, 2011

Thank you for the additional information. Please don’t misunderstood. I wasn’t challenging whether a third temple is prophetic or not, I was agreeing with you saying even if that were true, we would still have no business trying to build one. To be totally honest I don’t have enough reading in the scripture around this topic to make an educated opinion, so the additional information you provided will help me with my own discernment. Thank you and blessings to you in Christ’s name.

3. Henry - September 9, 2011

Please note that I was not trying to be defensive at all. I perceived that there were unresolved issues for you surrounding the topic which is why I constructed my response in such away that you would question yourself about what you know and point you in the direction of scriptures that may help to clarify issues for you. I know that this is a very difficult topic for some people particularly when they have been brainwashed with one particular view for years. I personally don’t want to try and brainwash anyone though – however I want people to take an objective look at scriptures for themselves and come to the correct conclusion.

There are teachers who have been teaching for many years that the 1948 reconstitution of Israel marks the “prophetic return” of the Jews to the Holy Land. But at the same time they teach that Israel will be made desolate again at some future time when anti-christ comes. However Isaiah 11 poses a serious problem to advocates of this view. So it is either the abomination of desolation, which triggers the dispersion of the Israelites is a past event or Isaiah 11 makes a mistake when it said that God would regather the dispersed of Israel the SECOND time in the day of the Lord. Do remember that Daniel 9 spoke of two desolations of Israel. The first at the hands of Babylon and the second when the people of a prince shall come and destroy the second temple. The second temple has already been destroyed in 70 A.D.

4. Hopeful_watcher - September 15, 2011

Consider this. Daniel 9:27 isn’t talking about the traditional Jewish sacrifice.

Take a look at Daniel 12:11
11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days.

There is a daily sacrifice being held NOW, everyday. It is called the Eucharist being held at mass in Catholic churches. They view this as a REAL sacrifice of the body and blood of Christ. Now if a false christ showed himself on the scene, then no Eucharist would be required as he would be here in the flesh.

Hopeful_watcher - September 18, 2011

Henry, have you sought discernment regarding the possibility that the sacrifice refers to the Catholic Eucharist?

5. Henry - September 19, 2011

Hopeful watcher,
That is a good “theory” but I do not believe that this is what the scriptures are talking about. For a number of reasons. Look at the verses again:

26And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 27And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

Which city and which temple was the angel referring to that would be destroyed? If you can understand that the angel was referring to the second temple that was to be rebuilt and worked backwards then you soon realised that since the second temple was destroyed in 70 A.D. then this prophecy is past. The desolation takes place at the end of the war – so verse 27 wasn’t introducing something new for a different time period but continued to explain what would befall Jerusalem at the time of the desolation. Consider this.

Hopeful_watcher - September 19, 2011

Wasnt the Vatican destroyed once while in Rome, then moved to its present location? Any destruction of the Vatican would be a second destruction of the temple. Since this is also called the age of the gentiles, doesn’t this point to a city that currently is head of the religious order for the gentiles?

Not trying to be argumentative, but these things make me ponder more deeply.

Hopeful_watcher - September 19, 2011

Also, Luke 21
24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

It would appear that there is an interesting correlation betwteen an attack on Jerusalem and an end of the age of gentiles, but gentiles are not in Jerusalem. A destruction of the Vatican who had been trying to mediate a peace deal in the middle east would fulfill all of those prophetic circumstances.

As an aside, the prophecy of the popes says the last pope will reside over the destruction of the Vatican. Not sire how much stock I want to put in that prophecy, but it doesn’t contradict this.

Hopeful_watcher - September 20, 2011

Lastly, it is interesting to note that in Daniel 9:24 just one verse back…

24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city

Note that the angel is talking to Daniel and says “your” holy city. Now Daniel was a Jew but he was speaking for the Babylonians. The Vatican is often thought of as the whore of Babylon. Why would the angel be generic and say your holy city in one verse and call out the city of Jerusalem specifically by name in the very next?

6. Henry - September 20, 2011

You need to exercise care when trying to interpret scripture. I fail to see how these scriptures could remotely be related to the Vatican. If you read Daniel 9 from the beginning you will note that the city that is in view is Jerusalem and that the prophesy here pertained to what would befall Israel in Daniel’s future (NOT our future). The Vatican is not recognized anywhere in scripture as the temple of God – in fact the Vatican is not a temple at all but the seat of power for the Catholic church. There are church buildings within the Vatican City however such as St Peter’s Basilica or the church of St John Lateran (the supposed mother of all churches) but these are not the temple. But put that aside for now.
In your last response you claimed that Daniel was a Jew speaking for the Babylonians and hence you believe verse 24 is referring to “Babylon”. This demonstrates to me that you still have not understood what you have read in the passage. At the time of the prophesy, Daniel came to the realization that the 70 years that for which God had banished Israel to Babylon (via the word of Jeremiah – see Jer 29:10) was now completed. Daniel therefore started praying and making supplication to God concerning his people, the Israelites, and the city of Jerusalem – see verses 16-19 of Daniel 9. It is from verse 20 that the angel Gabriel came to tell Daniel of the future of Jerusalem and its people. If Daniel was making supplications for Jerusalem why do you think that the angel would now come to tell him what would befall a different city other than Jerusalem? Verse 24 is therefore referring to the same city of Jerusalem, continuing from verse 20.
In relation to Luke 21:24 the destruction of Jerusalem was fulfilled by Titus Vespasian in 70 A.D. when he sacked Jerusalem and scattered the Jews – at that time Jerusalem was made desolate. This fulfilled the prophecy of Daniel 9:26-27 and Luke 21:5-6 concerning the destruction of the Temple – the second temple that was rebuilt after the Babylonian exile. It seems to me though that you approach the scriptures by projecting certain prophesies into the future when these things have already been fulfilled. Titus Vespasian and his Roman armies were Gentiles and they thoroughly trod Jerusalem under their feet.

Hopeful_watcher - September 20, 2011

Henry, blessings to you. thank you very much for the correction, as I see the error of my thinking. it should be a great comfort to you that your blog is doing as its intended, which is spreading the spirit of discernment.

I sometimes fall in the trap of having a projected view of what is coming and selectively reading scripture to validate that view, rather than letting the word speak for itself. Such is the case now. thank you for placing it into context.

look forward to reading more of your blog posts. you are doing the Lord’s work.

7. Jerry kelso - April 11, 2012

Henry, There was Solomon’s temple, Zorubbabel’s temple and Herod’s temple.
Isaiah 11 talks about the 2nd time to recover Israel.
The 1st gathering was after the Babylonian captivity. The captivity of Israel among all nations was fulfilled at 70 A.D. (Luke 21:20-24). God has not gathered the jews since. 1948 is not filtered in here because God’s gathering is in connection with the latter days; Matthew 23:37-39. Verse 37 is the rejection; verse 38 says the jews house is left unto them desolate and verse 39 ends with Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord. This shows that Israel has to come back to God as a nation who repents not, just because they come back in numbers bodily as a nation as in 1948. So it is true that God will recover them a second time at the second advent.
So for you to think that a third and fourth temple is absurd is distorted according to scriptures. One the church will be gone and in the tribulation they will also be backslidden just like they are today. And I am speaking corporately as a nation. The jewish people today are still Jews but, those born again are part of the church of the one new man.
The truth is that there are always plan to rebuild the temple and have sacrifices. However, the rod in Revelation 11 is not for building but, for chastening. 2 Samuel 7:14; Psalm 2:9; 89:32; Isaiah 11:4; Lamentations 2:8; Ezekiel 20:37; 1 Corinthians 4:21.
As far as the millennial the sacrifices and feasts will all be memorials. The sacrifices could never save to begin with they were substitutes to help cover sins until the reality came, who was Jesus and he died and rose again. The Jews were promised the new covenant but, they rejected it in Christ ministry on earth. The Jews were to always have the law but, it was supposed to be under New Covenant Standards. The Jews will still be Jews when Christ comes back and they will totally understand the death, burial, and resurrection as a nation in those days. Hebrews 8:7-13 talks about those days, that he will make the covenant after those days which will be the tribulation days for they are still blinded according to Paul in Romans 11:25-26. The Lord doesn’t even talk about the death, burial, and resurrection, but, he says: I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts: and I will be to them a God and they shall be to me a people. Verse 12 says; For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. This doesn’t mean that the basis is not the death, burial and resurrection anymore than there won’t be a temple in the tribulation and the kingdom. Zechariah 14:16 shows how the nations must come to Israel and keep the feast of tabernacles. All the feasts were perpetual and eternal covenants. So the sacrifices have to be for memorials. Now if you don’t think Ezekiel 40-48 is about the millennial temple then I’m all ears. God Bless Jerry Kelso

8. Jerry kelso - April 17, 2012

Henry, Will you at least say what you think Revelation 11:1-3 is talking about if it is not talking about a temple and sacrifices during the tribulation?
The temple doesn’t usher in the coming of the Lord. The jews will eventually understand the death, burial, and resurrection. But, these jews may not have that complete understanding or revelation at that time, since most of them will not be saved at that time.
I believe that Hebrews 8 bears out that after those days, God will put his laws into their hearts and minds. But, when they are building the temple they will mainly have the kingdom mentality which is the physical kingdom in which Messiah will come back and conqueor the kingdoms of this world; Revelation 11:15 and we shall rule and reign with the jews as the head of the nations. Revelation 5:10; Isaiah 2:2-4.
Your theory of the desolation already happening is fine if you want to believe that. That still doesn’t dismiss the fact that there is a temple that is in the middle of the tribulation that is desecrated in some way and for some reason. Feel free to give your explanation, I humbly ask. Jerry Kelso

9. Henry - April 20, 2012

In response to your comment of Aprill 11, I will say BRAVO!! You have said that the captivity of Israel into all nations was fulfilled in 70A.D. and that God would regather then the second time at the Advent. Good! But the idea of the 70th week in the future clearly implies that Israel would need to regather prior to the Advent and therefore be made desolate again. No? Anyway lets look at the scriptures that follow:

And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein. 2But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months. Rev 11

24And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.Luke 21

If the captivity of Israel occurred in 70AD along with the trodding down of the Gentiles how can you then put Rev 11:1-2 into the future? Why is it that you conveniently introduce a “parenthetical” at the 6th Seal but do not introduce one here? The Romans were gentiles and they trod Jerusalem under foot and you yourself agree that God will not gather them till the Advent so how can Rev 11-1-2 occur again in the future before the 2nd Advent? Similarly how can Rev 12 be future if Israel was led into captivity in 70 AD and they will not be regathered till the 2nd Advent? Rev 12 says that the woman flees into the desert after the male child was caught up. So again if Israel is in captivity of all nations and will not be gathered till the 2nd Advent then how can they flee into the desert when the dragon tries to persecute her. Note that the use of the word woman denotes a nation as a body of people and not a people in a scattered state. This why I said that Israel would need to have regathered prior to the 2nd Advent in order for her to be persecuted by the dragon and for her to flee into the dessert. Can you now see how confusing your arguments are and have been?

10. Henry - April 20, 2012

To add to my last point, if you grasped the fact that Luk 21:24 is the same event as Rev 11:1-3 then clearly that part of scripture is in the past and therefore the temple mentioned there is not a future temple but a reference to the temple that existed up until 70A.D. I know that you have tried in the past to introduce the concept that the angel said to John that these are the things that will occur hereafter but you should understand that the Revelations is not written in chronological order and some of the things said are a reflection of the past and how they relate to future events. For example in Rev 17 the angel tells John that the beast he saw “was”, “and is not”, and “is” or will come, telling John the beast was in the past but will rise agian in the future.

11. Jerry kelso - April 20, 2012

Henry, Luke 21 talks about 70 A.D. but, Matthew 24 and Mark 13 do not. Luke 21:24 till the time of the gentiles be fulfilled is prophetic and is line with Matthew and Mark. In Revelation 11the Antichrist desecrates the temple and will take over part of Jerusalem and Israel will be scattered for, the woman goes into the wilderness and the remnant is scattered. Read Revelation 12. It is nothing short of ridiculous to say the Revelation 11 is a historic fact when it is connected to the tribulation and the 2 witnesses. That is not proper hermeneutics and makes no sense that John would have a decent purpose to state that except in one’s own mind. Jesus being the manchild of Revelation 12 has more validity and reason than that. But, the reason I don’t believe the manchild is Jesus is because it is a future picture and why would John put a historical context in a future picture. You could say that it enhances the picture of the great confrontation between God and Satan but, it still wouldn’t fit as far as fulfillment.
The seals, trumpets, and seals are consecutive and the parentheticals work around them and then some things are not in consecutive order such as Revelation 17 and 18.
Your example in Revelation 17 is the beast that was in the past and will rise again but, that is a weak argument at best if you are trying to make the issue about the temple being 70 A.D.
You are getting glued on one point about the temple and not taking all the scriptures and contexts into consideration.
Jerry Kelso

Henry - April 24, 2012

Jerry, again you fail to see how baseless your arguments are. If Israel were scattered in 70 A.D (and entered into captivity)and they willNOT be regathered until the second advent how can they be scattered again BEFORE the second advent? Use your head andthink and don’t allow presuppositions to cloud your brain. Can you not see that you are claiming that Israel will be scattered again before they are actually regathered? This is what is ridiculous why you cannot see that Rev 11:1-2 is historic and similarly Rev 12. Rev 11 does not say anything about antichrist desecrating a temple and neither does Daniel 9. This however is what is being inserted into the scriptures to make them say what they do not. Since when does 144’000 men referred to in the singular as a “manchild” yet you talk abouthermeneutics? After the man-child is caught up, Israel is persecuted by the dragon and flees into the wilderness. Now in 70 A.D Israel already fled and will not be gathered till the second advent. So how can Israel flee into the wilderness prior to God regathering them – aren’t they already scattered since 70.A.D? Senseless really! Futhermore the scriptures said nothing about the remnants being scattered but rather that the dragon made war with the remnant of the woman’s seed. Please quote the scripture correctly.

12. Jerry kelso - April 27, 2012

Henry, There is nothing baseless about my argument except when you base them on your historical perception. What you fail to understand or believe is that 70 A.D. wasn’t the 70th week and has nothing to do with the big picture at all. There have been more than one gatherings into the area of Israel in the 30’s and 1936 was the biggest influx of all time and Israel became a nation in 1948. This is significant in prophecy but, still has nothing to do with Daniel’s 70th week anymore than 70 A.D.
If you don’t think Israel is going to be scattered again then you don’t believe Zechariah 13:9 is prophetic. Do you really think that Israel in Revelation 12 going into the wilderness is not a clear picture of being scattered. Today, America is about the only friend Israel is hated that is how hated she is and it will be worse in the tribulation.
Revelation 1:19 give the the order of the Revelation. And Revelation 4:1 states that John was caught up to Heaven and shown what must be after the church age. Revelation 11 is present tense for John was given a reed like unto a rod and the angel told him to rise and measure the temple of God and the altar, and them that worship therein. What purpose would it serve for John to measure the temple which was gone and destroyed. That is ludicrous!. Verse 2 is an extension of that verse which is without the temple leave out and measure it not for it is given unto the Gentiles and the holy city shall they tread under 42 months. This did not happen in 70 A.D. Quit being ridiculous.
You can believe Revelation 12 is a historical context and I have no problem with that to enhance the picture of the great confrontation between Satan and Christ and that Christ will rule with a rod of Iron, but, as far as fulfillment it fits better with the 144,000 because the 144,000 are raptured in the middle of the tribulation and it shows how they get to Heaven in Revelation 14. Either way the 144,000 are raptured at this time. Also, in verse 18 Satan is chasing the remnant of the woman’s seed and seed denote’s a birth taking placing at this time. The woman is a company of people and will birth a company of people. Isaiah 66:7-8 talks about before she travailed she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a manchild. Verse 8 deals with the travail of her children and the nation being born in one day. This is prophetic to the second advent and not 1948 when she became a nation. I know you want you to separate these two verses time wise but, I disagree. You question about the remnant being scattered because that is supposedly not written that way. This shows how you don’t understand context and how to put two and two together and this is why your reasoning is incorrect. The serpent casting out of his mouth the flood is actually the Antichrist’s army but, the Lord makes a way for the woman to get into the wilderness safely because the earth swallow’s up his armies which is probably an earthquake. Verse 17; And the dragon was wroth or mad with the woman. Why? Because she got away and now he can’t get to her. So he goes to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ. Zechariah says, 2/3 of Israel will come through the fire and and the other 1/3 will die. How? Through persecution. Those in the wilderness will not be persecuted because they will be safe. I have more scripture, scripture context, and scriptural reasoning than you do to prove my point that Revelation 11:1 and Revelation 12 is future and that it is a possibility just as much and actually more than yours. Even if you don’t believe that the 144,000 is the manchild it doesn’t make or break anything. You try to match up everything according to a scripture you think is similar or the only one you can find that is clear enough for you and then don’t consider the time factor.
As far as the regathering read Ezekiel 37 about the valley of dry bones of which will not be entirely fulfilled until the 2nd Advent. At this time the two sticks of Judah and Israel will be joined.
Back to your point about Revelation 11 not saying anything about the temple being desecrated and you are right but, 2 Thessalonians does where he is standing in the temple making himself as God. Daniel 9 doesn’t say Antichrist but, it does talk about a covenant maker and breaker being made. I wonder who that would have been? Titus? Maybe Vesparian? The Caesar? Maybe we could throw in Cleopatra? For you information there was no covenant made or broken in 70 A.D. with Israel only destruction and desolation. That is a history fact and a biblical fact. The only thing you’ll find as history to that effect is a Catholic fabrication of that history.
You need to learn how to interpret scriptures properly by understanding the context. I say this because you believe if you can’t find a scripture that talks about the tribulation temple then it has to be future. I have already explained why the temple is future in Revelation 11 and you cannot dispute it.
In conclusion;
1. 70 A.D. has nothing to do with the 70th week.
2. Revelation is present tense in Revelation 11:1 making it a future temple.
3. Daniel 9 has the one who makes and breaks the covenant and desecrates the temple which is a future picture because there was no covenant made or broken in 70 A.D.
4. These all show, including 2 Thessalonians 2:4 that there is a future temple in the tribulation.
5. Revelation 12 is a future picture according to Revelation 1:19 and Revelation 4:1 for the time factor of Revelation.
6. The woman is safe in the wilderness through the time of Jacob’s trouble, but, Satan will make war on the remnant after the woman is already safe in the wilderness. Also, the remnant will be watching the 2 witnesses going to Heaven and give glory to God. Revelation 11:13 which is after the woman goes into the wilderness.
You can believe whatever you want but, I don’t even think you are trying to be objective.
According to what I have given in these 6 points you give me your best answers to why you think that they are not scripturally correct because I am a logical and an objective person. Thanks! Jerry Kelso

13. Henry - April 30, 2012

First of all I NEVER said that A.D. 70 was the 70 week. If the 70 weeks are a continuous period of time from the decree of Artaxerxes then the 70th week would have finished approximately 3.5years after Christ ascended, which would have been around 35 or 36 A.D. Get the facts clear. In my view the 70 weeks are one continuous period of time. But put aside my view for now and answer the clear questions that I posed to you. I will present them here again for clarity:

If Israel was scattered in 70A.D. and they will not return (regathered) until at or around the time of the second advent then how can they be scattered again prior to that gathering?

But now you are using 1936 and 1948 to justify your argument but fail to see that this also confounds your arguments. When I referred to 1948 you accused me of “filtering” in those events yet you are now using them to justify your arguments. Well, if these gatherings mark the Isaiah 11 return how can they be scattered again at a future time in the supposed future 70th week or as per Rev 11:1-3 and Rev 12? Whilst answering that perhaps you could show me which prophecies mark the gatherings after the AD 70 exile. In my view there are none because any such prophecy would contradict Isa 11 which clearly says that God will gather Israel the second time after which they will not be dispersed again.

14. Jerry kelso - May 3, 2012

Henry, 1. We don’t agree hermeneutically
You misunderstand Daniel 9:24 and make it being fulfilled at Calvary. This is wrong because it is a direct prophecy to the physical covenant God has with the people of Israel and the Holy City. The Kingdom of Heaven was promised to the Jews and not the Gentiles. We were grafted in when Christ died and we will be a part of the earthly reign but, our primary calling is Heavenly. Israel has an unconditional covenant; the Davidic Covenant and the Abrahamic. It still is based on obedience. God will not reign with Israel til the whole nation repents.
2. Zechariah 13 plainly states the prophecy in the end times that 2/3 will be cut off and 1/3 will come through the fire. The woman in the wilderness will be preserved for 3.5 years and will be united with the remnant when Christ comes back to settle the kingdom. If you don’t believe this then you don’t believe the scriptures and you have no understanding of the jews and the Kingdom of Heaven reign. This proves that Daniel 9:24 has not been fulfilled yet.
3. If you think Daniel 9:27 has been fulfilled you are wrong for there was no covenant before or after 70 A.D.
4. If you think that the 70th week is continuous then that is your opinion and you don’t have a scripture to back it up. Daniel 9:27 proves that a covenant will be confirmed and the context is the 70 weeks; Daniel 9:24. Furthermore, you don’t understand the jewish meaning of one week which is shabua meaning 7. I have already stated before this 7 is in years because Daniel talked in years not days. Daniel 9:2.
5. The church did not begin until after the 69th week and will be raptured before the 70th week begins; 2 Thessalonians 2:7-8 The restrainer is the church that Paul talked about in 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17. He did not say the Holy Spirit was the restrainer for he will not be taken out of the way, even though he will step aside to allow the Antichrist to begin his conquest. Michael is also a restrainer for Israel and he will step aside so the Antichrist does his business of overcoming them temporarily. The key is verse 5: Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things. This is the time factor that points to 1 Thessalonians and the only ones taken out of the way is the church. Revelation 4:1 shows the portal in heaven called a door and this is literally what it means.
6. To your main question that you have a hang up about; the scattering of 70 A.D.; it emphatically has nothing to do with the 70th week. I told you more than once that Daniel 9:27 is about the desolation of the sacrifice and the causing of the oblation to cease under the one; (who is the Antichrist in this context) who makes a covenant. In 70 A.D. the temple sacrifice was done and ceased and has not been done again but, there was no covenant. Why is that so hard for you to understand. Daniel’s 70th week concerns Israel as a nation at Jerusalem. As you know Tel Aviv is the capitol today which is not the Holy City; Daniel 9:24. 70 A.D. is not in the 70th week at all so your question is irrelevant. This is why Revelation 11:1 and Revelation 12 are future and not historical. Also, Isaiah 11 that says again the 2nd time could not have begun until after the regathering from Babylon and other nations and after the 2nd dispersion which was in 70 A.D. which fulfilled Luke 21:20-24. God has not regathered them since. Jesus plainly rendered judgement on Israel physical House in Matthew 23:38 because of their spiritual condition verse 37. This happened in 70 A.D. Verse 39 he said; Ye shall not see me henceforth, till ye shall say; Blessed is he that cometh in the name of the Lord.
7. 1948 was not fulfilled because of the Palestinian Covenant because Israel is still backslidden and blinded and many are atheists. If I recall correctly the war of 1948 and Israel’s independence had to do with the United Nations and there was no national repentance.
I am sorry I cannot recall the 1948 scriptures but, I’ll get them to you later. But it is really doesn’t matter for the fact that it is not a part of the 70th week. But, at the same time it is crucial that and probably telling of the state Israel will be in, in the tribulation. Either way, 1948 deals with Israel being a recognized nation but, at this time Jerusalem is not the capitol and Daniel 9 as I said before deals with the Holy City destruction; and the nation born in one day Isaiah 66:6-7.
2 Thessalonians 2:3 says there will be a falling away first and this will be in the middle of the tribulation because verse 4 says that Antichrist will be sitting in the temple. I believe there will also be a false gathering because the Jews as a whole will still be backslidden at this time. It is also not far fetched to think that the jews who are insiders to the new world order will have a part in investing in making this happen when they are really sheep in wolves clothing. Scriptures show that Israel has pulled the wools over the people’s physically and spiritually. Isaiah 66:5 and Matthew 23:1-33. History shows that many of jews in Germany in the late 30’s were turncoats and helped bring that monster Hitler to power. Matthew 24:9; 15-26 shows the fleeing of persecuted jews and the
destruction of the temple and thus the nation almost being snuffed out of existence. Zechariah 13:9.
Last, but, not least is your thing about the message of the New Covenant. The New Covenant was established on better promises at Calvary. Most of the early church was a Jewish Church for the gentiles did not start the official grafting in until 8-10 years later with Cornelius and his household. Acts 10. But, the New Covenant was not established fully with the nation of Israel and because of Israel’s rejection and calling to the gentile church they never received the Kingdom of Heaven. This is why Jesus told the disciples it wasn’t for them to know when the Kingdom would begin.
In the tribulation most of Israel will still be blinded and may not even know what the death, burial, and resurrection is. At least it is safe to say that they will be like the children of Israel in Jesus day before that message came to be fully understood. You ask why because we as the church preach the death, burial, resurrection all over the word today.
I believe this scenario of Israel will be the same for these two reasons.
1. The conditions of their heart and blindness in their minds.
2. The message of the Kingdom as stated in Matthew 24:13; will be mostly talking about the physical kingdom on earth which will be the Kingdom of Heaven.
How do I back this up by the scripture? Go to the gospels and you will see that even Peter did not fully understand the death, burial, and resurrection because Jesus did not teach it. Read Matthew 16:22-23 in reference to Christ statement about dying and rising again. This happen just days before he went to the cross.
Jesus told Nicodemus that he must be born again. Born of the water to a Jew signified the Red Sea deliverance and in the new testament it is the washing of the water of the word and the Spirit would be the New Covenant within in them which would be a spiritual circumcision. Both new water and the spirit are signified for the jew in Ezekiel 36:25-26.
Hebrews 7-13 is an illusion to Jeremiah 31:31-34. This proves it has not happened yet and if you will notice there is nothing about the death, burial, and resurrection mentioned.
This doesn’t mean there is another salvation or that it won’t necessarily even be mentioned. Some believe that it wont’ be mentioned but, the point is that they will recognize that there national light will almost be snuffed out and they will have to call on God to save them and forgive them of their sins. So in the initial end have to be enlightened about the big picture of the death, burial, and resurrection. In Luke 24:44-47; Jesus had already died and rose again and the disciples still didn’t get it and had to open their eyes to understand.
You’ve got to take in consideration of how those people will be thinking in those days according to the scriptures and not because of what you know. You just assumed and reasoned because of one point. Your one point had a little truth but, not the entire truth to the whole context of what was being spoken. This is what I mean when I say a person can have a little truth but, not the whole truth.
I don’t claim to know everything but you have to exegete scriptures from all sides. And it is advantageous to understand correct Jewish exegesis as well.
I have answered your questions and I have not dodged them even though you don’t seem to understand them. If you think that I misunderstand your position then why don’t you give your hermeneutical rules of how you think one ought to interpret the scriptures.
Jerry Kelso

15. Birth Pains Upon the Earth | noahide news - June 23, 2016
16. Thin - October 25, 2017

I don’t intend to argue one side or the other regarding this issue. I would just like to know if you have a citation to this claim in the first paragraph:
“One of the consequences of this fallacy has seen Evangelical Christians, particularly across America, contributing vast sums of money to support the rebuilding of the temple.”
Thank you in advance.

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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