[Xqjfxmfk]

Dear Vassiliki,

Thank you for your response, I don't take it personally, since I'm fortunate enough to worship the Triune God myself, poorly as I am able!

You are correct, Judaism does not worship the Holy Trinity, and from an Orthodox perspective any other image of God is indeed in serious error. Nevertheless, there may be a case to be made for respecting and acknowledging the religious impulse in all faiths, particularly the ones which respect Holy Scripture or at least parts of it. The Holy Spirit may operate in such ways as to make even sinners and atheists work towards the greater history of our salvation (even though sin is of course still sin) - how much more true is it to suggest that the misguided but sincere faithful from other faith communities, struggling in the dark to live just and pious lives despite the inherited blindness of their community to Orthodox Truth, may nonetheless - even through spiritual darkness itself - be led by the Holy Spirit towards fulfilment of the One True Triune God's unfathomable divine purposes? Can we put it past the Father, Son and Holy Spirit to surprise us in such ways?

To put things more simply, the Jews may rebuild the temple for their own reasons, but in doing so they may inadvertently fulfil the Triune God's plans for this earthly edifice (in fact, even taken from a negative perspective where re-building the Temple = paving the way for Antichrist, the reconstruction is still part of God's plan. The difference being of course, that in this case an Orthodox Christian shouldn't actively support such a project, to put it mildly!).

So I'm wondering if an alternative view of the re-building of the Temple in Jerusalem is permissible from an Orthodox perspective? I am bearing firmly in mind the fact that this is nothing more than an Orthodox forum for discussion, not a church council! I'm hoping therefore that this is the right forum for gentle and respectful, unbiased speculation on such matters. If this question upsets any forum members, I will be very sorry, and call my careless questioning to an end.

In Christ
Byron

[Bejemoelemymn]

Your question is a very difficult one and I am not about to answer it well because of its difficult and sensitive nature - it does deserve respect as you point out. For the most part, I just want to make some scattered comments:

1. Once we are blessed with being invited by the Holy Spirit into the fullness of the Truth, and we accept it, then we really should live for this Truth and not worry about the cares of the world ... concern yourselves only with what today will bring - Seek First the Kingdom of God and everything else will be given unto you ... is this not Christ's spoken advise for us? He also says that He came as a double-edged sword to bring division between father and son, etc .. we must not take this verse lightly ... it applies to our immediate family and to our wider family too.

2. I do not believe we should be supportive of anything that is against God; such as the rebuilding of the third temple - this is the comment that is definately hard to put into the right words, as I explained earlier

3. Revelation is not a pre-destiny journal! Revelation is the documented history of man ... God has not preordained these events and we act them out like robots - God knowing what we would do (because He is outside of time and IN eternity) gave us His Word so in the fulness of the Holy Bible is our entire history, from the Alpha to the Omega ... where we are reinstated into eternity ...

This point is often what confuses many people to think that we are all part of some elaborate plan so anything goes .. not so.

4. However, to end this post, this IS what the Orthodox church actually teaches on about Isreal (not all the other nonsence available on the Internet)

Based on the teaching of the holy Bible, there are no discriminations between the nations; God calls people from all nations. The national and racial discriminations are now abolished and everything is conducted "in Christ" (Gal. 3:26-29).

The divine oeconomia, therefore, is the same for all the nations; there are no two oeconomias, one that will end with the "receiving of the Church", and another one during some earthly reign for a thousand years under the Jews.

Israel was called first. But the Israelites rejected this calling, and for this reason the other nations come first now. When the "fulness of the nations" is completed, the Israelites will be called again. Then this will become "their fulness" (Rom. 11:12. 15-21. 25-32. Matth. 21:43. 13:46).

Israel's fall became the reason for the inauguration to be passed on to the other nations. However, "their fulness" will be treasure for the Church (Rom. 11:12). This will take place after the "fulness of the nations", i.e. after the number of the ethnics (pagans etc.) that will convert to Christianity is completed (Rom. 11:25).

[soydaykam]

, I find the suggestion that Antichrist will be brought to the world through my race is perilously close to antisemitism, ... - after all, Christ came to humanity through the Jews, why not Antichrist?

Byron,

This suggestion is not limited to Fr Seraphim Rose, but it is found in many of the Fathers that the antichrist will be born of the tribe of Dan. The goal of the antichrist is to deceive the world into accepting him in the place of Christ and thus the common ancestry will be an important factor in that deception. It is not an antisemitic slur, but rather a part of the attempt by the evil one to give the world an "imitation Christ" who will supplant the true Christ. If there is any "blame" here it is to blame the evil one for once again using the Hebrew people to attack the Body of Christ. This should not bring anger towards the Jews but rather compassion that they should be so vicitimized by the evil one. If there is any anger, it must be directed toward the evil machinations of the devil.

Fr David Moser

[laperuzdfhami]

Dear Vassiliki,

Thank you for your thoughtful responses. Your item no. 2 appears to be a simple restatement of the negative hypothesis concerning the reconstruction of the temple, but perhaps you are trying to look for different words with which to express this insight. At any rate, I do accept this hypothesis on good faith, and will therefore not be joining the online group promoting the Temple's reconstruction.

I also agree that the connection to one's ancestors should never stand between oneself and faith in God, an error which is committed not just by Jews as an ethnic group, but also sadly by Christians who collapse their ethnicity into their religion, until religion becomes just another symbol on their national flag - which brings me to your quoted text, with which I am also in agreement, though I would add that it's important to explain to Jewish people today, they won't have to wait around for the conversion of the very last gentile, before they can begin their journey towards Christ! Who is the author of this text?

Dear Fr Moser,

Thank you for this clarification of the reason behind the predicted racial origin of the Antichrist. If the whole of Christendom had been able to view things as you do, taking compassion on the Hebrew people for their victimization by the evil one, such things as pogroms and the holocaust would never have occurred. Most of us, sadly, tend to get angry at sinners (and take our own problems out on them) instead of feeling sorry for them for being ensnared by the devil, at whom our anger should be directed, as well as at our own complicity with him. Also, I would respectfully add that even a compassionate view of the Jewish condition may entail the risk of overlooking what genius and spiritual insight there already is in Jewish thought, from Maimonides to Buber and Levinas. Surely something of Christ may be at work in the minds and hearts of such thinkers, as also in the hearts of the righteous who perished in the concentration camps, even if they themselves would not or could not credit Him?

In Christ
Byron

[yespkorg]

I am always disturbed by discussions of the "anti-Christ," as if people who embark on these speculations know what they are talking about. "anti-Christ" is a complex symbol and we err if we think we know that it pertains to a certain historical prediction. I am basically skeptical of any statements regarding the Apocalypse of John or any other Biblical apocalyptic because it is highly symbolic but most people treat it as if it were not and they have unlocked the keys for determining what it really means.. They usually think it means something that is focused on their life time, which is highly prideful.

As for rebuilding the Temple, well, who knows? Israel is seeking meaning as a society. Why do we exist? Do we exist for some reason more than just being a haven for Jewish people? If so, perhaps we have failed miserably, since a couple of Iranian nukes would kill us all. There must be some other reason. They are all struggling and fighting among themselves as to the reason for Israel. Its original purpose no longer exists: it was to demonstrate that socialism works. Pretty much everyone in Israel no longer believes that.

I think practical considerations regarding rebuilding the Temple will win out. They would have to demolish the mosque and then you are really talking trouble...But the problem with Israelite theology is that the symbol Israel has become a perpetual mortgage against the Jewish people. The payments never stop...

[WeestDype]

I am always disturbed by discussions of the "anti-Christ," as if people who embark on these speculations know what they are talking about. "anti-Christ" is a complex symbol and we err if we think we know that it pertains to a certain historical prediction. I am basically skeptical of any statements regarding the Apocalypse of John or any other Biblical apocalyptic because it is highly symbolic but most people treat it as if it were not and they have unlocked the keys for determining what it really means.. They usually think it means something that is focused on their life time, which is highly prideful.

Hi Owen, it is true that discussions around the anti-Christ are always very sensitive. Truly it is because of the mysterious-nature of the writing's of John that cause such wide speculation to what it all means. I would have to agree with you that the topic is "complex", however, I do not totally agree that it is all "symbolic" ... there are many Saints in our church who we can refer to that can substantiate that the reality of Revelations WILL occur. The problem is only when the two prophets return will we know the WHEN and (as you point out) we spend much time trying to predict this when that we misdirect our spiritual life and end up in a prideful situation.

Coming from the angle of being an Orthodox, I would have to point out that:

1) Most (99%) of the "speculations" and the "dooms-day" predictions are usually from influences "outside" of the fullness of the Truth (the Church itself). Examples include, Protestants, Roman Catholics, sects, etc ... If we keep this in mind, we then realise that predictions outside of the church are directed by the devil himself and can not be true ... HOWEVER, IF THE CHURCH officially comments on the matter, then out of our belief that the Holy Spirit guides and directs the Church - we trust the Truth of that message.

2) The Church has its Saints that put out the messages. The Book of Acts is the only book of The Holy Bible that does not have an ending .. I have heard that this is because it continues in the lives of the "official" saints of the church ... Saints like Kosmas the Aitolian, etc leave clues behind for us that add to the Book of Revelations. They have clearly said that the anti-christ WILL be an actual historical person - they have never really said when!

In Christ ...

[masterso]

St Nikolai of Ochrid and Zhicha said that Hagia Sophia is "the most faithful and most glorious exposition of Christian doctrine, Christian celebration.... It, manifests the beginning and the end of the world... It is the heart of the Orthodox people and their soul; their eternal hope and inspiration".

According to Patriarch Pavle, the oft-called "living Saint" and head of the Serbian Church says: "The name alone, Aghia Sophia, means the Incarnate God, the eternal Wisdom of God, and the physical structure of the temple represents a testimony to the revelation of the Mystery of the Incarnation."

Respectfully Herman, I trust the words of these men - as well as the Saints already mentioned - when it comes to the Church of the Holy Wisdom, the seat of St. John Chrystostom among others.

• Thank you Jonathan for these beautiful quotes. People can say all negative things they wish to say, but Aghia Sophia is Aghia Sophia. It is dear to God, His Saints, to us and to our ancestors.

• VV wrote:

2) The Church has its Saints that put out the messages. The Book of Acts is the only book of The Holy Bible that does not have an ending .. I have heard that this is because it continues in the lives of the "official" saints of the church ... Saints like Kosmas the Aitolian, etc leave clues behind for us that add to the Book of Revelations. They have clearly said that the anti-christ WILL be an actual historical person - they have never really said when! This is amazing, thank you for sharing. I have never heard this before!

• Byron, since I have similar ancestry (my maternal greatgrandmother was Hebrew) I can tell you, if I was asked I will not sign it. Why should I sign it when I know that Antichrist is going to be coronated and worshiped there! When I know that from there he will condemned many. When I know the two Prophets Elias and Enoch will be denouncing him right there. Even if these apocalyptic events were not enough to convince someone, the past events are enough. God said He can destroy and rebuild the Temple in three days (and we know by now what He meant) and these words were a cause for accusing Him and one of the causes for His Passion. Also you know that there were historical figures who tried to rebuilt the temple, one was the Emperor Julian the Apostate - prior to that he was Christian and committed apostasy and became a pagan and when he tried to rebuilt the Temple fire came from the ground - not that God will not allow the Temple to be rebuilt, but it was not the time yet. Why would I want to excercise any influence about that place where the last apostasy against Christ will take place? Since you pointed out something about Christians and nationality, I will also not consent (sign petition) if a pagan friend asks me to help with my signature to restart the pagan religious practices in the temples all over Greece.

[Drugmachine]

Its original purpose no longer exists: it was to demonstrate that socialism works. Pretty much everyone in Israel no longer believes that.

While it's true that many of the earliest Zionist leaders espoused socialism, it's pretty clear from their writings that they held very unsocialist extreme racist and chauvanistic views (though nothing that you wouldn't find in the Talmud). Seeing the history through that very useful prism of hindsight, it's pretty clear that now that, among the Zionist leaders at least, Socialism was never anything more that a convenient cloak for the agenda of establishing a Jewish state. That's why you'll find mainly the political left supporting the establishment of the State of Israel in the early 20th century, figthing against the "evil" anti-semitic Monarchies and Authritarian regimes of Europe. This is also perhaps the reason why a lot of Socialists now are viruently anti-semitic and pro-Palestinian, to the extreme case of glorifying terrorist attacks: they feel betrayed by the political leap the Zionists appeared to make.

For the Zionist's part, I don't think they see their political shennanigans as anything underhand, and that the "ends justified the means." The ends are nothing more or less than the establishment of a Jewish state based on Biblical boudaries (though there are arguments over what those boundaries should be). "Jewish" is defined by Israel themselves in this case under the law of return: the law applies to those who can trace their Jewish ancestory through the maternal line (two generations I believe) and any one who has converted to the Jewish faith. Moreover, while it doesn't matter if a Jew is practicing of non-practicing his religion, any Jew who actively converts to another religion is automatically disqualified from the law of return. This in itself is enough to show that nature and aims of the State of Israel. The writings of the early Zionists and of Israeli politicians throughout its history also confirm the largely religious/chauvanistic vision for the country. Even Israeli politicians who have been to all intents and purposes atheist have appealed to Biblical and Talmudic arguments for their country's existance (though not on the international stage for obvious reasons).

[Ambrakam]

Dear Nina,

I decided a few posts earlier that I wouldn't actually be joining the online support group for the reconstruction of the Temple. My only remaining interest in the whole question is academic, in the sense that I wonder what a genuine and sober Orthodox Christian, patristically informed approach to such Jewish theological issues could be, and whether it would necessarily involve a negative assessment of Jewish aspirations. Given the always strong current-event feelings that Israel / Jewishness / the Middle-East / the Book of Revelation etc. can provoke, I suppose it was a bit unrealistic to expect such detachment. Concerning pagan practices in Greece, I too would not lend my support to their return, and I find the sheer number of neo-hellenistic pagan publications available on newsstands around the Greek-speaking world a depressing phenomenon. Inevitably these publications also promote crude anti-Zionist, anti-semitic messages (so no changes there) to dull their readers' brains even further and detach them fully from reality. However, I would probably take a more serious look at a petition for the serious-minded preservation of national heritage, raising awareness of history and culture through f.e. restoration of the architectural structures (not the associated religion) of ancient Greece. If some misguided people think that by restoring and preserving Greek temples an opportunity is offered to worship Artemis or Apollo in them, that is sad. Similarly, while I realise the religious significance for some Jews of the reconstruction of the temple in Jerusalem, I don't think all Jews are therefore compelled to see their national history in that way, and it also doesn't mean that I support Judaism's religious denial of Christ as the Messiah. I do think though, that if there are potential areas for encounter and dialogue between religions, there are likely to be more such areas between Judaism and Christianity than there are with neo-pagan spiritualities.

Dear Jonathan Michael,

In a country like Cyprus, where a person can vote for a communist party and go to Church the next day as though nothing untoward or discordant had happened, I have noticed that socialists tend to take a pro-Palestine stance regardless of the facts, and I have also noticed how comfortably the old antisemitic attitudes of an unreconstructed, never-truly-understood-or-practiced Christendom can hide behind the political arguments of those who think of themselves as socially 'progressive'. Also, if Zionism is 'chauvinistic', as you say, and if the purposes of the Israeli state are clearly religious, not political - I wouldn't know, and I've never been particularly interested to find out either; when arguments like this however, are presented to justify negative attitudes towards Israel as a political entity, I can't help wondering what those who offer such arguments would have done, had they been the ones persecuted for centuries in Europe and losing their families in WWII, and what they would be doing if they were now cornered by a number of hostile Arab nations. I wonder if a little 'chauvinism' would then be excused? Or is it not chauvinism when you're a Christian, with God on your side?

In Christ
Byron

[gettoblaster]

Dear Nina,

I decided a few posts earlier that I wouldn't actually be joining the online support group for the reconstruction of the Temple. My only remaining interest in the whole question is academic, in the sense that I wonder what a genuine and sober Orthodox Christian, patristically informed approach to such Jewish theological issues could be, and whether it would necessarily involve a negative assessment of Jewish aspirations.

Well since you have made the decision I am sorry that I did not realize that, however there was not a conclusive post on your end therefore I decided to participate in the thread also for the fact that I hadn't read it until yesterday. Also as a MOT I think I am entitled to express my opinion.

Here you ask about Patristics. Patristics reveal that it is expected that Antichrist will have a coronation in that Temple. However you say something diametrically opposite further:

If some misguided people think that by restoring and preserving Greek temples an opportunity is offered to worship Artemis or Apollo in them, that is sad. Similarly, while I realise the religious significance for some Jews of the reconstruction of the temple in Jerusalem, I don't think all Jews are therefore compelled to see their national history in that way, and it also doesn't mean that I support Judaism's religious denial of Christ as the Messiah. However, I would probably take a more serious look at a petition for the serious-minded preservation of national heritage, raising awareness of history and culture through f.e. restoration of the architectural structures (not the associated religion) of ancient Greece. Therefore I am not so sure if Patristics or Architecture is more important to you (when you started the thread) as expressed in the above lines.

Concerning pagan practices in Greece, I too would not lend my support to their return, and I find the sheer number of neo-hellenistic pagan publications available on newsstands around the Greek-speaking world a depressing phenomenon. Inevitably these publications also promote crude anti-Zionist, anti-semitic messages (so no changes there) to dull their readers' brains even further and detach them fully from reality. Hmmm sorry but I have not seen such publications when I have visited. Furthermore I do not really leaf through them to know what opinions those publications contain within.

However, I would probably take a more serious look at a petition for the serious-minded preservation of national heritage, raising awareness of history and culture through f.e. restoration of the architectural structures (not the associated religion) of ancient Greece. But there is a huge difference between the pagan temples and the Temple of Jerusalem, since its rebuilding (which as we know will happen because as expressed in Patristic writings it is God's will, therefore the thirst for an architectural preservation a particular group has will also be satisfied) means Antichrist and Armagedon. And no pagan temples have been associated with Antichrist. Oh btw do you know that where the battle of Armagedon will take place there is actually nothing, just vast mostly flat field and there are not constructions there. It is amazing how even things wait for the Second Coming.

Also since Christ said that He can destroy and rebuild the Temple (His Body, the Church) in three days - this my dear Byron has satisfied all what I need in this life. Christ came and died for us all and His Holy Resurrection is all things to us. Also let's remember what the hymn says: "Rejoice, rejoice O New Jerusalem..." (by the way this was the favorite hymn of the Saint of Sarov. So the New Jerusalem is elsewhere dear Byron.

I do think though, that if there are potential areas for encounter and dialogue between religions, there are likely to be more such areas between Judaism and Christianity than there are with neo-pagan spiritualities. Yes and no. Because in the name of the love for the neighbor we must extend the message of salvation in Christ to all without discriminating.

[ticfarentibia]

A couple of comments. First, just because a saint says something doesn't make it doctrine. I shy away from any comment from someone, saint or not, who says he knows what the Apocalypse means historically, who believes he can predict the future from it. It's debatable in my mind as to whether or not it should ever have become canonical, and the only reason it is is because of the source, not the content.

Second, regarding the chauvinism of Zionism, okay, by that definition, Judaism is inherently chauvinistic from the beginning. But so is virtually every other society and nation that has ever existed. The Japanese, under that definition, has been in recent times the most chauvinist of peoples on the face of the earth. They still are but it is publicly muted because of their war record.

America fits the definition, considering the influence of Jonathon Winthrop on our political history. The Belgians even had their go at it for a couple of hundred years.

If you read Eric Voegelin's The New Science of Politics, you see how this works out -- how theology is always reflected in political symbolism. Which should cause us to consider that the New Testament is in a sense the antithesis of political religion.

So I don't find attacking Israel for being chauvinistic to be particularly illuminating or helpful, especially since it's a secular term that has only been around for 200 years. Are the Arab Palestinians not also chauvinistic in the extreme, especially the ones who describe Israelis as dogs and who state openly that they will never be satisfied until every Israeli is wiped off the face of the earth?

Do you see my point here? Anyone can twist history to support their rabid prejudices.

As for the theology of it, Christians believe that Israel rejected Christ, but that it was God's plan that they do so. So there is a paradox at the heart of our theology regarding Israel. Should Israel be eternally punished because of this? Is God eternally punishing Israel because of this? Why would this be the case, if it were part of His plan from the beginning?

From the Jewish side, there is much ferment and debate among themselves as to what it means to be a Jew, and what does it mean to be a chosen people. If you go to Jerusalem you will quickly discover that no two Jews agree among themselves on these questions.

Also, Jews smart from the Christian idea that they killed Christ and are therefore to be despised, which has all too often been the popular Christian idea. I see no Christian Patristic basis for this. If someone can show me otherwise, I will gladly consider the evidence.

I have little patience for rants against modern day Israel, for a whole variety of reasons. I will go so far as to say that supporting them in their own homeland is the least the world can do as the result of the holocaust. Does it create a whole new set of problems. Yes, of course. But so does Christ. Christ causes problems. He upsets peoples lives. He upsets nations. He turns everything upside down. When Paul preached in Greece that was the major complaint against him, who is this guy running around turning the world on its head. Let's get rid of him.

[Mynameishappy]

I have little patience for rants against modern day Israel, for a whole variety of reasons. I will go so far as to say that supporting them in their own homeland is the least the world can do as the result of the holocaust.

This is all well and good, but it does not mean we have to support their occupation of Palestinian territories which the entire international community (with the exception of the U.S.A., Israel, Micronesia, Palau, and the Marshall Islands) considers illegal and inadmissible.
It does not mean we have to support them in rejecting a peaceful solution to the conflict - a return to the June 1967 borders - which, again, the entire international community (with the aforementioned exceptions), including Iran, the Arab League of Nations, and even Hamas, continue to propose year after year after year.
It does not mean we have to support their policies of collective punishment of an imprisoned refugee population, or their disproportionate retaliations to attacks they themselves provoked by breaching the cease-fire.

By all means, we as Christians should support the Jewish community, we should compensate for the tragedies and horrors they endured throughout history, and we should work unceasingly to ensure that such things are never again repeated. But let us not use the satanic horrors inflicted upon them to justify the murderous policies of the State of Israel.


In an attempt to keep the discussion within the terms of use listed below, my point is essentially this:
Since the Church is the New Israel, and since we look towards the Heavenly Jerusalem, the conflict regarding the State of Israel is essentially a secular one. As Christians we should not view it in terms of Jew vs. Gentile, picking sides based on an affinity or aversion towards Judaism. The Christian position on the conflict is to be on the side of justice, love, and peace. Which side one believes that to be depends on how one interprets the facts surrounding the conflict.

[AndyColemants]

We are getting on a volatile tangent that is well outside the terms of use. For your information and edification:

From the Monachos Community Handbook:
Off-topic guides:

• Is your post just an expression of personal opinion? If so, it may not be on-topic. The Discussion Community is not primarily an opinion forum, but a place for study and discussion of patristic heritage. Read details in our Community Outline.
• Is your post about current events or world news? If so, it is probably not within our scope. News / current events only fall within our scope if they are in some way related to the patristic and monastic themes of the forum.
• Is your post about another religion or church? If so, it is likely not within the scope of the Discussion Community, which does not exist to foster inter-church / inter-Christian discourse.

Please read the terms of use for further details.

[Idonnaink]

It seems that there is no way to avoid a secular political argument at this time in this thread. It's time therefore to take a break and so I will be closing this thread for the time being.

Fr David Moser