[LICraig]

Dear monachos members,

A friend has invited me to join an online group which promotes the reconstruction of BEIT HAMIKDASH, the Temple in Jerusalem. I am of part Jewish ancestry myself, and not instinctively averse to the idea, but as an Orthodox Christian I wonder what our own attitude to this should be. Is it appropriate for an Orthodox Christian to share this aspiration?

Posters' views and suggestions will be much welcomed, especially from clergy.

In Christ
Byron

[Eviftilia]

It would be very interesting from an archaeological perspective. However, the theological and political implications of such a thing would have to be taken into consideration.

Every Orthodox church is a temple, where the sacrifice of Christ is made present in the Eucharist. The reconstruction of the Temple in Jerusalem would naturally be followed by the reinstituting of animal sacrifice. By declaring such sacrifices necessary, or even acceptable, one would be denying the redeeming work of Christ. The restoration of the Levitical priesthood would likewise be a denial of the Christian priesthood.

Add to that the worldwide anger and inevitable bloodshed that would follow the destruction of the Haram al-Sharif, Islam's third holiest shrine, I don't really see why any Christian would support such a movement.

[Xiciljed]

Dear monachos members,

A friend has invited me to join an online group which promotes the reconstruction of BEIT HAMIKDASH, the Temple in Jerusalem. I am of part Jewish ancestry myself, and not instinctively averse to the idea, but as an Orthodox Christian I wonder what our own attitude to this should be. Is it appropriate for an Orthodox Christian to share this aspiration?

Posters' views and suggestions will be much welcomed, especially from clergy.

In Christ
Byron

And some devout Orthodox Christians want the Hagia Sophia back as a church. Ain't gonna happen. Unless it is part of God's grand design, no mere machination of man, no matter how Machiavellian will matter. The Temple and ritual sacrifice have served their purpose, thy are no longer needed, and God has seen fit to arrainge things to make it's reestablishment impossible. Unless the Lord build this house, those who build it labor in vain. Chiliasts might support such an undertaking, to somehow "expedite" the "End Times". We are not Chiliasts. We don't try toanipulate God or the times, so I don't see any good reason that the Church would support such activities, particularly since there is no way it can be done without bloodshed and I'm not talking about bulls.

[Haftdrarp]

And some devout Orthodox Christians want the Hagia Sophia back as a church. Ain't gonna happen.

Perhaps its the way you phrased this one but I think that this is ONE post were you are wrong, my dear Herman

This return of Aghia Sophia has been prophecied by Kosmas the Aitolian and other notable saints ..it WILL happen but perhaps not in our lifetime. Its gonna happen. Indeed, the newest prophecy to come out is that it will be the Russians who will fight in Turkey against the Asians ... and will be victorious ... and for political purposes will be giving the Aghia Sophia back to Greece ...

i dont know how much this new prophecy is true ...but I trust the prophecies of Saint Kosmas the Aitolian ....

[Metrujectiktus]

Perhaps its the way you phrased this one but I think that this is ONE post were you are wrong, my dear Herman

This return of Aghia Sophia has been prophecied by Kosmas the Aitolian and other notable saints ..it WILL happen but perhaps not in our lifetime. Its gonna happen. Indeed, the newest prophecy to come out is that it will be the Russians who will fight in Turkey against the Asians ... and will be victorious ... and for political purposes will be giving the Aghia Sophia back to Greece ...

i dont know how much this new prophecy is true ...but I trust the prophecies of Saint Kosmas the Aitolian ....

It isn't "true" until it happens. There have been many prophecies. The true meaning of prophet is "one who points the way to God", not someone who predicts the future. In the prophets of the OT and His Apostles in the NT, the "prophecies" were actually addressed to their contemporaries about contemporary things. God just happened to use them to point to future things as well. Then again, we make it rather easy for Him in that respect because the problems of the past keep being the problems of the present, when it comes to sin, there is nothing new under the sun now just as it was it St. Paul's time.

Aghia Sophia is a testament to pride (Justinian: "Solomon I have surpassed thee!) as much or more than it is a witness to God. If its restoration is part of God's heilsgeschicte then to God be the glory, and it will indeed happen in God's good time, regardless of how we feel about it and what we think we need to do about it. Better than to speculate on ancient temples, however, is to concentrate on the building of a holy temple worthy of the Holy Spirit in our hearts, particularly as Great and Holy Lent approaches.

Or so it seems to this bear of little brain.

Herman the Pooh

[mygalinasoo]

It would be very interesting from an archaeological perspective. However, the theological and political implications of such a thing would have to be taken into consideration.

Every Orthodox church is a temple, where the sacrifice of Christ is made present in the Eucharist. The reconstruction of the Temple in Jerusalem would naturally be followed by the reinstituting of animal sacrifice. By declaring such sacrifices necessary, or even acceptable, one would be denying the redeeming work of Christ. The restoration of the Levitical priesthood would likewise be a denial of the Christian priesthood.

Add to that the worldwide anger and inevitable bloodshed that would follow the destruction of the Haram al-Sharif, Islam's third holiest shrine, I don't really see why any Christian would support such a movement.

I have a friend who is an archeologist, who says the Holy Place, etc. was actually to the south of the Dome of the Rock, therefore technically, the temple COULD be rebuilt without disturbing the Moslem site.

[eEwbYjOH]

Aghia Sophia is a testament to pride (Justinian: "Solomon I have surpassed thee!) as much or more than it is a witness to God.

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.

[gogona]

In God's good timing, the priest stuck in the wall has yet to come out and complete the Liturgy. I wonder if when he does if he will notice anything different in his surroundings?

[Qwjyrgij]

I have learnt that God "couples" his prophecies, either from the Old Testament or the New Testament (ie. through a few accepted Saints). Each prophecy made has an immediate revelation but also has a long term revelation. An Orthodox can never say that a prophecy made from an "accepted" Orthodox prophet is NOT a prophecy until it happens ... Saint Kosmas the Aitolian is one of those exceptions where it IS accepted by the Orthodox church that he IS a prophet and that it is not a matter of IF but WHEN ... Saint Kosmas is not a Nostradamus and his prophecies should not be treated that way either.

Also, the Aghia Sophia is a building like no other in the world ... it is truly amazing that it is a living and breathing structure; to this day the Turkish people have attempted to put plaster of the mosaic of the Virgin Mary that is above where the Holy Alter used to be ... each day that they would plaster her they would find the plaster on the ground and the mosaic of the Virgin clean and undisturbed - a miracle that only a few of the Turkish people dare to discuss and admit to.

I heard about this when I visited Turkey a few months ago and a Muslim Turk told me this was the case. There is more than meets the eye about Aghia Sophia and many prophecies attached to her safe return to Orthodoxy - I have photos of the door btw, if anyone is interested in me posting.

[tpdirorg]

It would be very interesting from an archaeological perspective. However, the theological and political implications of such a thing would have to be taken into consideration.

Every Orthodox church is a temple, where the sacrifice of Christ is made present in the Eucharist. The reconstruction of the Temple in Jerusalem would naturally be followed by the reinstituting of animal sacrifice. By declaring such sacrifices necessary, or even acceptable, one would be denying the redeeming work of Christ. The restoration of the Levitical priesthood would likewise be a denial of the Christian priesthood.

Add to that the worldwide anger and inevitable bloodshed that would follow the destruction of the Haram al-Sharif, Islam's third holiest shrine, I don't really see why any Christian would support such a movement.

Dear Rdr Kris, all,

Thank you for the above response, which most directly answers my initial question. I can see these implications too, yet I feel - the operative word here being feeling - that a broader question is involved, one of the relationship between religions of the world and Orthodoxy, and in particular the special status that Judaism may have for the Christian Church. As a person of part-Jewish descent, I'm not very receptive to ideas which imply hostility or mutual cancelling-out of Judaism and Christianity. This, I confess, may predispose me to short-sightedness in some respects, but it may also afford me some insight in others. So much for the emotional aspect of the question however - I'm really interested in the theological implications, to which I consider the politics secondary, if nonetheless important. Your response suggests that the restoration of Solomon's temple is necessarily inimical to the existence and status of the Christian priesthood. My further question is, does this have to be so? Herman hinted at chiliastic Christian notions concerning the Jerusalem Temple, but again he points out correctly that we are not chiliasts, by which I assume he means Protestant supporters of Israel (is that correct, Herman?). Is Orthodoxy, however, necessarily supercessionist?

I have a book about the end times, not to hand at the moment unfortunately, by Dennis Eugene Engelman, called 'Ultimate Things', which suggests that the rebuilding of the temple will in fact be preliminary to the rise of the Antichrist himself, who will draw on Christian, Jewish and Muslim hopes for reconciliation in order to institute his own very worldly 'gospel' of deception. Engelman draws on some of Fr Seraphim Rose's claims for this idea. I find the book dangerously close to being antisemitic, suggesting as it does that 'the Jews' have learned nothing from their years of persecution (mostly, it needs be added, persecution which took place at the hands of so-called 'Christians' or people originating from so-called 'Christian' societies; persecution which historically has been linked to an antisemitism resulting from the gross misuse of our faith by self-concerned people who inevitably have failed to notice that our Lord Himself was a Jew according to the flesh).

My question is, given the more-or-less inevitable existence of extremism and fundamentalism in both Jewish and Christian faith communities, is it possible to adopt a different attitude towards Judaism and Jewish concerns such as the rebuilding of the temple, one which is less hostile and condemning, but nonetheless devoutly Orthodox Christian? I rely on those Christians with power of discernment for an answer to such questions, and the ones I've received so far from all are much appreciated.

Concerning Hagia Sophia, I went there in 2004. I remember the majesty of the building seen from the outside, but also the sense of injustice which, even after more than 500 years of Muslim use, was present for me as an Orthodox Greek, symbolised by the minarets (beautiful as they indeed are) and the plastered-over murals and muslim signs inside the church. It doesn't matter if to Muslims its a holy place too; that plastering is an offence against the truth of the building, and one in very poor taste. Truth is something of an operative word here, too, and I think Solomon's Temple - surely - has its own good truth to tell?

In Christ
Byron

[Galsteinbok]

It isn't "true" until it happens. There have been many prophecies. The true meaning of prophet is "one who points the way to God", not someone who predicts the future. In the prophets of the OT and His Apostles in the NT, the "prophecies" were actually addressed to their contemporaries about contemporary things. God just happened to use them to point to future things as well. Then again, we make it rather easy for Him in that respect because the problems of the past keep being the problems of the present, when it comes to sin, there is nothing new under the sun now just as it was it St. Paul's time.

Dear herman, does this mean that the prophecies in the Bible not fulfilled as yet are not true?

[pitoufsd]

Dear herman, does this mean that the prophecies in the Bible not fulfilled as yet are not true?

Amazing how some people really key in on one off-hand remark.

In one sense, Biblical prophecies are most all already "fulfilled", but in many cases we won't know exactly what is being prophesied until it happens. Most Jews had no idea that Christ was the fulfillment of their prophecies until after the fact. Many prophecies are rather cryptic, meant to be proof of the prophet's authenticity or as a warning of the results if a new direction is not taken. "Keep doing that or something bad will happen" is certainly a prophecy, and my mother was certainly a prophet too.

The fact of the matter is we don't know when, we don't know exactly what, and we don't really know the how or necessarily the where. Is it literal or figurative? Some so-called prophecies have turned out to be forgeries, others may be merely incorrect understanding of what was really said. So how can we know if it is "true" until it happens? Speculation can be fun but rather pointless. We can choose to concentrate on restoring an ancient museum and become curators, or we can concentrate on restoring the true temple of the Holy Spirit inside ourselves and become a living fire. But hey, think what you want and more power to you, but don't hold your breath, I doubt it will happen in our lifetimes and you can call that a prophecy if you like.

To get back to the original subject and off this side-track, the physical Temple in Jerusalem has no more meaning to the Church, so the Church would most likely have no role or position in its restoration, unless the action made life more difficult for the Christians living in Jerusalem (and the likely increased sectarian violence such an action would encourage would certainly do that).

What purpose would the reconstruction of the Temple serve? Would it be salvific? God knows, I don't pretend to. But I bet it won't happen any time soon, all things considered, so I cannot get too worked up over it. I just don't see the point.

Herman the wet-blanket Pooh

[paulaglober]

To get back to the original subject and off this side-track, the physical Temple in Jerusalem has no more meaning to the Church, so the Church would most likely have no role or position in its restoration, unless the action made life more difficult for the Christians living in Jerusalem (and the likely increased sectarian violence such an action would encourage would certainly do that).

What purpose would the reconstruction of the Temple serve? Would it be salvific? God knows, I don't pretend to. But I bet it won't happen any time soon, all things considered, so I cannot get too worked up over it. I just don't see the point.

Herman the wet-blanket Pooh

Dear Pooh,

Thank you for coming back to the point! I may be a scared little Piglet myself, giving this impractical issue so much thought and time of day, but I do feel that my question involves something more than debate on the physical possibilities or political repercussions of the reconstruction of Solomon's Temple, and deserves perhaps a fuller answer from fellow monachos posters. I am not wishing to know only how many angels can dance on a pin-head (as interesting as the matter may be), but I'd also like to know if it is possible to maintain Orthodox belief and piety, and yet not be hostile or arrogant towards other religions, particularly the old tree we know as Judaism. I thought it was an interesting point, but of course not as interesting as your mother's prophecies. Oh well, I shall just have to keep searching for that heffalump by myself, I suppose!

Warm regards,

Piglet

[Alexeric]

Dear Pooh,

Thank you for coming back to the point! I may be a scared little Piglet myself, giving this impractical issue so much thought and time of day, but I do feel that my question involves something more than debate on the physical possibilities or political repercussions of the reconstruction of Solomon's Temple, and deserves perhaps a fuller answer from fellow monachos posters. I am not wishing to know only how many angels can dance on a pin-head (as interesting as the matter may be), but I'd also like to know if it is possible to maintain Orthodox belief and piety, and yet not be hostile or arrogant towards other religions, particularly the old tree we know as Judaism. I thought it was an interesting point, but of course not as interesting as your mother's prophecies. Oh well, I shall just have to keep searching for that heffalump by myself, I suppose!

Warm regards,

Piglet

And perhaps those also interested in that will chime in. Christ has torn down the Temple and rebuilt it in 3 days, as He prophesied. I see "The Temple" in that light. I freely admit that I do not see why the Church would concern itself with archeology so much just as I don't see it getting involved in lunar exploration. But then, I am just as interested as you in what others have to say and I guess I will simply shut up on the topic at this point and let others do so unless I am further called unto account for expressing my opinion.

Herman the curmudgeonly Pooh

[DarrenBent]

By Blessed Hieromon Seraphim Rose

Then there is the sign of the abomination of desolation and all that relates to the Temple in Jerusalem. For the first time in history, this has now become a possibility. The rebuilding of the Temple was tried only once before, in the fourth century. Knowing about this is a very good example of how reading Church history enlightens one. We can find several sources about it from the fourth century: St. Cyril mentions it, as do several of the Church historians at that time. Julian the Apostate, because he had such a passion to overthrow Christianity, decided that, since Christ had prophesied that not one stone of the Temple would be left on the other, if he rebuilt the Temple, he would prove that Christ was an impostor, and therefore paganism could be restored. So he deliberately invited the Jews back to Jerusalem, and they began building the Temple with the blessing of Julian the Apostate. They would build a little in the daytime, and the next morning they would come and all the stones would be on the ground. They tried again and balls of fire began to come out of the earth. All the historians agree on this. In fact, modern rationalist historians, because they see that they cannot deny the texts and that something did actually happen, begin to say things like, "They must have struck oil," or "There were underground gas flues." It was obviously a miracle of God to keep the Temple from being built, because it was not the time—the Temple is to be built only at the very end of the world. Anyway, they finally failed in their attempt and gave up the operation. Of the few stones that remained, not one was left on the other. So the prophecy was fulfilled in the time of Julian the Apostate.

But now, since 1967, the site where the Temple was before is now in the hands of the Jews. Therefore for the first time, it becomes quite possible that the Temple could be built. The only thing interfering is the great mosque which the Moslems have there. If that's destroyed, there will probably be a war.

Only since 1948 has there been a separate state of Jews in the Holy Land. It is to the unbelieving Jews that the Antichrist will come. He will come first to the Jews and then to the whole world through the Jews; and only as this is happening will the faithful remnant of Jews finally be converted to Christianity in the very last times.

So this sign of the Temple is a very big one. When we see the Temple being built, then we know that the time is at hand, because that is definitely one of the signs of the very end. So far, of course, it's not being built, but there are all kinds of rumors that plans have been laid, that stones are being gathered, etc. It's obvious that the Jews are thinking about it.

[LarpBulaBus]

Preparations are going on to build the Third Jewish Temple in Jerusalem as prophesied in Revelation 11:1-2.

BBC documentary:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BCYj8C_aVc

another:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfYVZY6ImHk

[zdoppiklonikaa]

It seems to me that the building of the temple in Jerusalem will be the ultimate, final rejection of Christ by the Jews and the whole world. They'll get their messiah, but he will be Antichrist. And they will worship him in the temple.

[gghrdfffhfyj]

Dear all,

When it comes to the Book of Revelation, I think our Church adopts a sober attitude, in the awareness that it is really God's decision when, where and how events will unfold. Therefore we are discouraged from reading the apocalypse into specific signs, dates and events in our own lifetime. After all, Rev 11:1-2 is hardly a clear-as-daylight statement that we are prohibited from thinking about the rebuilding of Solomon's Temple in a positive light. While I respect the writings of Fr Seraphim Rose, and the rigor and devotion underlying his life and works, I hope I will not sound irreverent or disrespectful when I suggest that Fr Seraphim's speculations, valuable as they are, nevertheless do not amount to Orthodox dogma.

Obviously, the idea that the rebuilding of Solomon's Temple is a sign of the end times preliminary to the rise of Antichrist, is one accepted and acceptable Orthodox position on the matter. As a person with Jewish ancestry, I find the suggestion that Antichrist will be brought to the world through my race is perilously close to antisemitism, or at least it is certainly food for antisemites who will use any excuse to hate and burn us, even if they don't believe in Christ in the first place. Nevertheless, out of respect for Fr Seraphim and other faithful Orthodox Christians who do hold such views, I am willing to consider that such may be the case - after all, Christ came to humanity through the Jews, why not Antichrist?

However, my original question does not concern this particular interpretation of the end times. What I'd like to hear from monachos members is whether any other interpretations / attitudes / perceptions / views / intuitions are possible from within Orthodox Christianity. Can one be an Orthodox Christian and adopt a neutral, or even a positive attitude to the rebuilding of Solomon's Temple?

In Christ
Byron

[Bounce]

please [delete] there is an error and my posts are doubling up.

[Brutton]

Respectfully and do not take this personnaly, however, to be able to honestly answer your question the following question must be asked and answered with Patristic thinking, or even better, with Scriptural evidence:

Is "God", worshipped by the "current" Jewish people, the actual image and likeness of the One and True Triune God?