Another Jewish Temple?

In recent months, my readership in Israel has spiked dramatically. I suspect interest in the “Holy Land” has increased worldwide due to the heightened conflict with Palestinians. I have expressed my opinion about the future of Israel as a nation previously. Everyone agrees that God dealt a serious blow to Old Testament Judaism when the Messiah was crucified, and the temple veil was torn. Then, seventy years later, the Romans completed the act of God’s judgment by destroying the Jerusalem temple. One might expect that would have signaled the end of the Jewish people. Yet here they are making news today. Ever since Israel became a nation again in 1948, speculation has continued regarding their place in God’s plan.

The centerpiece of this speculation revolves around the rebuilding of a Jewish temple. I have often questioned the need for a temple in the millennial kingdom imagined by the followers of Darby and Schofield. (I have discussed this previously as the dispensational/millennial view – abbreviated as DM.) Typical of the DM view and most who believe there will be another temple on earth, John MacArthur suggests that there will be unresurrected people in the millennial kingdom, and they will worship in the temple described by Ezekiel. Although he admits that Christ’s sacrifice was the “final” one, MacArthur insists continual earthly sacrifices will be performed. The purpose of the sacrifices would be retrospective rather than prospective according to MacArthur. Possibly.

If I dismiss the DM view, I can think of two possible explanations for the revelation of a temple that Ezekiel saw. Because the vision was given during the period when Israel was in captivity in Babylon, and because the temple of Solomon had been destroyed, God may have been giving instructions for the rebuilding of the temple that would eventually take place under Zerubbabel. That would explain the minute physical detail of the construction and the attendant regulations. However, there are several factors that argue against a physical building. The fact that neither Zerubbabel’s nor Herod’s temple met these specifications is noteworthy. Also, the land was never allotted by tribes during the remainder of the nation’s history as Ezekiel envisioned. It also seems significant that the nation of Israel was overrun by Muslims, and the temple mount became the site of an Islamic Mosque.

Another possible reason that the temple was revealed to Ezekiel is wholly symbolic. Ezekiel 47:6-12 supports this idea. The prophet is shown a river that flows from the temple to the Dead Sea. It starts as a trickle and gradually becomes a flood. It “heals” the sea so that freshwater fish become abundant. There are trees that bear fruit each month with leaves that are for healing. This scenario bears a striking resemblance to what John describes in the heavenly scene from Revelation. Naturally, those who hold to the teachings of Darby and Schofield believe this proves the existence of an earthly temple during the millennial kingdom. Those of us who understand apocalyptic literature as symbolic do not expect to find a physical reality drawn from the vision any more than we expect a literal thousand-year kingdom.

If we assume that Ezekiel’s temple was symbolic, it is easy to explain its tremendous size, the miraculous water, the healing trees, and the strict regulations for temple personnel. The purpose of the earthly temple was always to display God’s holiness and to provide for His prescribed worship. The architecture, the utensils, even the clothing of the priests each have symbolic meanings. By showing Ezekiel a perfect temple, God was reestablishing His call for perfect obedience. Had Israel done that, the miraculous river would have become a metaphor for the grace and healing of God that would have flowed from proper worship and obedience. Indeed, the world might have been healed/saved had the Israelites understood their divine responsibility.

My biggest problem with the DM position requiring another physical temple is that it seems to completely ignore what Jesus the Messiah, Paul the Apostle, and John the Revelator said about a temple. When Jesus spoke to His disciples about his immanent departure, He promised that they would become the home of God on earth: “Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves me, he will keep my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and will take up residence with him.” That promise is echoed in John’s Revelation: “Behold, the dwelling of God is with humanity, and he will take up residence with them, and they will be his people and God himself will be with them.” Paul makes numerous clear statements that the church corporately and the Christian individually are the New Testament temple.

According to John’s vision, God’s throne is in the heavenly Jerusalem to which we have all come as Christ’s followers as the writer of Hebrews explains. John says plainly, “And I did not see a temple in it, for the Lord God All-Powerful is its temple.” God doesn’t need a building in earthly Jerusalem for His residence on earth; we are His residence. I am not a pre- mid- or post-millennial believer. I am pro-millennial; whatever God chooses to do in the end times, I am for it. I am humble enough to admit that if John Nelson Darby and C.I. Schofield were right, the continued existence of the nation of Israel and her biblical enemies may mean something. But I am not holding my breath waiting for a red heifer and another Jerusalem temple. Jesus could come today; He doesn’t need another temple.

Related posts: America is Not the Promised Land; Canaan Cannot Be Heaven; Binding Satan; Why Heaven Matters