Thu. Sep 29th, 2022
    third-temple

    Transcript: Does the Bible teach that a Third Temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem? No, it doesn’t. Ask any Bible teacher or pastor to show you where it says a Third Temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem. They can’t. They’ll spout their dogma laced with Bible verses out of context, never actually citing any specific verses that clearly state a Third Temple must be rebuilt. So where did they get this Third Temple idea from? It actually comes from the writings of the Jesuit priest Cardinal Ribera during the Counter Reformation. After him, it was picked up by Jesuits Alcazar and Lacunza, then by Edward Irving, Charles Nelson, Derby, CI Schofield, Clarence Larkin, and a host of 20th century dispensational futurists. Today it is fully accepted by most institutional Christians who think a rebuilt Third Temple in Jerusalem is an essential prophecy. And it must happen because God’s Word declares it when nothing could be farther from the truth.

    YouTube player

    This may come as a shock to many Christians who have been indoctrinated through the institutional Church system to believe things that simply are not true. Here are the false premises and circular reasoning upon which the rebuilt Third Temple doctrine is based. False Premise Number one, Antichrist is first revealed sometime in the future during a seven year tribulation in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem. False Premise Number two, a Third Temple must be rebuilt because the Bible teaches that’s where Antichrist is first revealed conclusion. Therefore there will be a Third Temple rebuilt in Jerusalem. This is called circular reasoning and it is the foundation of the future rebuilt Third Temple doctrine, primarily promoted by futurists and dispensationalists. So where do futurists turn in their Bibles to support this faulty logic?

    Most will turn to Matthew 24:15 and declare that Jesus said that the abomination spoke of by the Prophet Daniel happens in the future. Let’s read the actual verse

    15When yee therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel the Prophet, stand in the holy place, (who so readeth, let him vnderstand.)

    16Then let them which be in Iudea, flee into the mountaines.

    This verse is usually taken completely out of context by teachers and pastors who insist that the Bible teaches a future Temple must be rebuilt. Seldom do they read verses one through 15, which makes it evidently clear that Jesus is speaking to his disciples and telling them that they will be around when the abomination spoken of by the Prophet Daniel occurs. The abundant use of the pronoun Ye throughout verses one through 15 refers to the disciples. And when Jesus says, When Ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation, he means when the disciples see the abomination of desolation. Thus, the abomination spoken of by the Prophet Daniel had to happen around the first century Ad, otherwise Jesus would be a false Prophet. And indeed that event occurred in 70 Ad when Titus Vespasian sacked Jerusalem and desecrated the temple. Some of the disciples were alive when this happened, just as Jesus prophesied. Thus, there is no proof found in Matthew 24, verses one through 15 to support a future abomination of desolation and the necessity to rebuild a temple where that can allegedly happened.

    The event already occurred in the lifetime of the disciples, just as Jesus said it would and as Daniel predicted. Yet futurists completely ignore the simplicity and plainness of the context in which Jesus speaks, and then they turn to Daniel eleven, verse 31, claiming that this verse also refers to a future rebuilt third temple in Jerusalem, incomplete defiance of what Jesus clearly stated. In Matthew 24, verses one through 15 he said the abomination of desolation spoken of by the Prophet Daniel would be witnessed by the disciples. Again, Jerusalem was sacked in the temple desecrated and destroyed in 70 Ad by the Roman armies under Prince Titus Vespasian. The words of Jesus being insufficient for the temple futurist. He then turns to Daniel 9:26 and 27 and says, See the people of the Prince that shall come will destroy the city and the temple that’s Antichrist and Antichrist confirms the Covenant, causes the temple sacrifices to cease, and commits the abomination of desolation. So there has to be a future temple in which this can happen.

    And since the temple in the first century was destroyed, another must be built so Antichrist can fulfil this prophecy. That’s what they say. Firstly, there is no reference anywhere in this chapter to this being the Antichrist, or it having anything to do with a future third temple to be rebuilt in Jerusalem. Rather, it’s an arbitrary assignment made to fit the presupposition that there has to be a future rebuilt temple, which I have already shown to be false based on the very words of Jesus that the Futurists twist and rip out of context. Furthermore, Antichrist is never in the entire Bible referred to as Prince.

    Yet it was Prince Titus Vespasian, the Prince that shall come, and his people, his armies that desecrated the temple in Jerusalem, exactly as Jesus prophesied what happened in the lifetime of his disciples. Thus, Daniel nine, verses 26 and 27 have nothing to do with Antichrist or a supposed future rebuilt temple, but everything to do with the sack of Jerusalem and the desecration of the Jewish temple in 70 Ad. It’s exactly as Jesus prophesied and referenced Daniel regarding the same event, the abomination of desolation. So again I ask the question, where are the Bible verses that say that Antichrist is first revealed in a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem sometime during a seven year tribulation? And that revealing is the abomination of desolation?

    To answer this question, the futurist invariably turns to two Thessalonians two verses four through ten, which reads as follows,

    Let no man deceiue you by any meanes, for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sinne bee reuealed, the sonne of perdition,

    4Who opposeth and exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God, or that is worshipped: so that he as God, sitteth in the Temple of God, shewing himselfe that he is God.

    5Remember yee not, that when I was yet with you, I tolde you these things?

    6And now yee know what withholdeth, that hee might bee reuealed in his time.

    7For the mysterie of iniquitie doth alreadie worke: onely he who now letteth, will let, vntill he be taken out of the way.

    8And then shall that wicked bee reuealed, whome the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightnesse of his comming:

    9Euen him whose comming is after the working of Satan, with all power and signes, and lying wonders,

    10And with all deceiueablenesse of vnrighteousnesse, in them that perish: because they receiued not the loue of the trueth, that they might be saued.

    And I ask again, where is the future temple prophesied? In these verses, the Futurist typically responds with circular reasoning, agreeing that the temple was destroyed in 70 Ad, which it was. But they say that wasn’t the abomination of desolation. Need I remind the reader that Jesus said it was in Matthew 24, verse 15? He said, When Ye his disciples therefore shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of by Daniel the Prophet stand in the Holy place, completely ignoring the facts. Futures say that Paul in Two Thessalonians chapter Two is speaking of a future temple that must be rebuilt so that Antichrist can be revealed in the temple. And they quote Paul when he says so that he as God sitith in the temple of God. Rightly. The Futurist says this verse refers to Antichrist sitting in the temple of God, and then they make an unwarranted leap of logic that insists Paul is talking about a rebuilt physical temple in Jerusalem. Superficially, this seems reasonable. However, in the New Testament there are two Greek words used for temple.

    They are Hyron and Neos. When a physical temple is meant, the Greek word Hyron is used throughout the New Testament. However, when a spiritual temple is meant, the word Neos is used. Neos throughout the New Testament always denotes a spiritual temple, not a physical temple. Neos is the word used by Paul in Two, Thessalonians chapter two indicating that he is speaking of a spiritual temple and not a physical temple. This is consistent with Jesus teaching that he is the temple and that God does not dwell in temples made with hands. Paul is telling us that the Son of Perdition, the man of sin, and Antichrist takes the spiritual place of Christ, and this is completely consistent with the first century coin Greek understanding of the word Antichrist. It first means a substitute for Christ. Thus, no case for a future rebuilt temple, being a fulfilment of Bible prophecy, can be made from Two Thessalonians Two, verse four. Paul speaks of a spiritual temple, not a physical temple.

    The doctrine that a future temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem is a product of the Counter Reformation and an idea introduced by Cardinal Francisco Ribera, the Jesuit. Because the early persecuted Church and the reformers and post protestant reformers maintained that every Pope was the Antichrist and the Roman Catholic Church was his Antichrist dynasty. Ribera concocted his convoluted doctrine, maintaining that the Bible teaches a future temple must be rebuilt in Jerusalem shortly before Christ’s return and that temple is where Antichrist is revealed. This convenient twisting of Scripture took the Pope and the Roman Catholic Church off the Antichrist hot seat and relegated Antichrist and his dynasty to a short period of time in the middle of a seven year tribulation. For that reason, the Roman Catholic Church could argue that it couldn’t be the seed of Antichrist, as that is all in the future a few years before Christ returns. Unfortunately, the institutional churches of America and the world have bought into this particular delusion hook line and sinker.

    Even those who consider themselves died in the wool reformers by the lie that the Bible prophesies a future rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, where Antichrist will be first revealed near the end of the age. So does this mean that because the Bible does not prophesy a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, that one will not be built? No, it doesn’t. God may very well permit Lucifer to rebuild a temple on the so called Temple Mount. However, that will not be a fulfilment of prophecy, but part of a great deception. The institutional Church will feel vindicated in its false doctrine of a future rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, and when whoever desecrates that temple shows up, they will believe that the Bible prophecy has been fulfilled to a T that is all false.

    The Bible, as I have shown, teaches no such thing. Rather, if God allows that scenario to happen, it will be part of a strong delusion, as Paul says in two Thessalonians two verses 1011, and with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them, that perish because they receive not the love of the truth that they might be saved. And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie, that they all might be damned, who believed not the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness. Those who have carefully studied their Bibles and believe the words of Jesus in Matthew 24 115 know that the Bible does not prophesy the rebuilding of a third temple. And when they see that happen, provided God permits it, they will know it is not a fulfilment of God’s prophecy, but a fulfilment of a prophetic scenario set up by Satan to deceive the world. Make no mistake, Satan issues prophecies and sets up the conditions for their fulfilment, and God allows it, as Paul says, that they might all be damned who believe not the truth. Satan’s ultimate wish is to perpetrate the ultimate deception upon the world, and that deception is to cause the entire world to worship Antichrist, thinking they are worshiping Jesus.

    That won’t happen if the real Antichrist sets himself up in a physical temple in Jerusalem. Revelation, chapter 13, verse eight reads, and all that dwell upon the Earth shall worship him whose names are not written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. If any man have an ear, let him hear. I can assure you that no average, sane institutional Church person will knowingly worship the devil. Yet Scripture says they will worship him through the person of Antichrist. Remember, Antichrist means substitute for Christ. They will believe Antichrist is Christ, all except those whose names are written in the Book of Life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world. And Satan and his Antichrist are not nearly stupid enough to March into a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem where they would be fully exposed to the entire world, and especially to the institutional churchgoers who are waiting with bated breath for a rebuilt temple and Antichrist to declare himself God therein. Because the Third Temple doctrine is a satanic deception and not a fulfilment of Bible prophecy.

    Everything about it is designed to deceive. It is to make institutional Church Christians believe that Bible prophecy is being fulfilled, and they now have identified Antichrist as they falsely declare, sitting in the temple showing himself that he is God. I can assure you that whoever is behind rebuilding the third temple will also place their man in that temple when the time is right, and it will not be the so called Antichrist setting himself up in that temple. It will be a deception, as the entire prophecy is a fulfilment of a Luciferian prophecy that has no basis in Scripture but has been artfully woven into it. The entire thing is a lie. Yet the institutional Christian Church world will believe they have identified Antichrist and will not worship him under any circumstances. However, the one who unseats this false Antichrist him, they will believe, is Jesus destroying Antichrist. But it will be the substitute for Christ that destroys the false Antichrist in the Temple, the very power that placed the false Antichrist in the temple in the first place. And for that reason the institutional Church will turn to the substitute for Christ as though he is the fulfilment of prophecy, what they believe to be Christ. Destroying Antichrist. The entire thing is a set up.

    The very idea of rebuilding a third temple in Jerusalem is blasphemy against God, and a denial of the finished work of Jesus on the cross and the reinstatement of animal sacrifice is an abomination unto God. It denies that Jesus paid the price for sin through his death on the cross. Yet the institutional Christian world believes that a third Temple is somehow a wonderful thing that they should support. They have invested heavily financially, intellectually, spiritually, and emotionally in the false prophecy of a rebuilt temple in Jerusalem, and they desperately want to believe it’s true.

    The real Antichrist of Scripture is the one who is behind the rebuilding of the blasphemous Third Temple in Jerusalem, and he will not sit in that temple, but will place a false Antichrist there, which later he will destroy, and the Apostate institutional Church will believe that the Antichrist has been destroyed. When that happens, they will turn to the real Antichrist, the one pulling the strings, believing he is the real Jesus, when in fact he is the real Antichrist, the substitute for Christ. Antichrist is every Pope, and the Antichrist definite article will be the last Pope on Earth. He will not be so stupid as to personally sit in the rebuilt temple, as he knows no So-called Christian will worship him. If he does that, there’s no deception in exposing himself. The cat’s out of the bag, so to speak. A clear indication that Lucifer’s false Third Temple prophecy is being fulfilled will appear when they begin building upon the so called Temple Mount, which is in reality not where Solomon’s temple stood, but is the Antonia fortress. Built by the Romans. The Antonio fortress covered the entire So-called Temple Mount.

    It was never just the smaller building tacked on the end of the Mount. We know this because Roman historians like Josephus give account of the Antonio fortress, stating that at one point a Legion of Roman soldiers were stationed at the fortress. A Legion is between 60 and 100 soldiers, and housing them in the building at the end of the Mount would have been impossible, as it can only house about 600 soldiers. Furthermore, Roman fortresses were all more or less the same, constructed using the same plans that required a 35 acre or so plot of land which fits the so called Temple Mount to a T. Also, there is evidence of Baths and Cisterns on the Mount, typical of Roman fortresses. Josephus and other historians also commented on various things that could be seen from the real temple in Jerusalem and from the Mount. These accounts make it clearly impossible for the Jewish temple to be atop the Mount.

    Also, in Acts 21 30 to 36, Luke gives account of the Roman soldiers going down to the temple to seize Paul. The only place they could go down from to the temple would have been from the Garrison atop the Mount. Luke’s account reads as follows,

    And all the citie was moued, and the people ran together: and they tooke Paul, and drew him out of the Temple: and forthwith the doores were shut.

    31And as they went about to kil him, tidings came vnto the chiefe captaine of the band, that all Hierusalem was in an vprore.

    32Who immediatly tooke souldiers, and Centurions, and ran downe vnto them: and when they saw the chiefe captaine and the souldiers, they left beating of Paul.

    33Then the chiefe captain came neere, and tooke him, & commanded him to be bound with two chains, and demanded who he was, and what hee had done.

    34And some cried one thing, some another, among the multitude: and when he could not know the certaintie for the tumult, he commanded him to be caried into the castle.

    35And when he came vpon รพe staires, so it was that he was borne of the souldiers, for the violence of the people.

    36For the multitude of the people followed after, crying, Away with him.

    Thus we know that the Jewish Temple was not likely atop what is called today the Temple Mount. But the entire Temple Mount was in fact the Antonia Fortress. The Jewish Temple was in the city and the Roman Garrison occupied the entire Mount. Having to dispatch soldiers down to the temple and bring Paul back up. Personally, I do not believe God will permit the rebuilding of the Jewish temple on the original site within the city, but perhaps we’ll allow the blasphemous structure to be built on the former Roman property known as Antonia Fortress Mount. Since the Futurist doctrine of a rebuilt temple requires that the so called Third Temple be built upon the exact site of Solomon’s Temple, the world must be convinced that the So-called Temple Mount is where Solomon’s Temple stood. This flies in the face of the fact that the foundational building stones of the Mount are not from the period of Solomon’s Temple, but from the Roman period in Jerusalem, indicating that the Wailing Wall, for example, was a Roman construct and never part of Solomon’s Temple. Because of this, Christians who believe the words of Jesus when he said to his disciples that the abomination of desolation would happen in their lifetime. We need to be wary. When temple construction begins atop the so called Temple Mount, it is highly unlikely that we would be witnessing the building of a legitimate Third Temple on the actual historic temple site.

    It is more probable that whatever is being built will be constructed on former Roman property and more likely the fulfilment of the Luciferian prophecy of a rebuilt Third Temple. The idea that the Jewish Temple was never atop what today is called the Temple Mount is not a new or novel theory that I invented. Many credible archaeologists and Jewish historians have validly disputed the Temple Mount as the location of Solomon’s Temple for the very reasons I have previously stated and more. Presenting all the evidence available would require more time than I have allotted for this message. However, I recommend my listeners study this subject further, as I believe it is vital to our understanding of what Antichrist is up to. Because a rebuilt Third Temple is not a prophetic requirement of Scripture, it can only be part of a satanic deception to fabricate a false Antichrist in a false temple to take the heat away from the papacy. The real Antichrist. Remember what John wrote in one John two verses 18 and 19

    18Little children, it is the last time: and as yee haue heard that Antichrist shall come, euen now are there many Antichrists, whereby wee know that it is the last time.

    19They went out from vs, but they were not of vs: for if they had beene of vs, they would no doubt haue continued with vs: but they went out that they might be made manifest, that they were not all of vs.

    Thus we can trust the words of John when he identified Antichrist as not just a single person, but many who were contemporaneous with the early Church. For this reason alone, we know that a future rebuilt temple is unnecessary for the revealing of Antichrist. Antichrist was present in John’s day and is fully revealed today in the Pope of Rome and the Vatican. Not only that, but the early Church taught that when pagan Rome faded, whatever replaced it was Antichrist and the Antichrist dynasty and that was papal Rome. There is no other candidate. So we can be very certain that the Vatican is behind the rebuilding of the Third Temple and that the Pope of Rome is the true Antichrist and that he will not expose himself in the phony Third Temple, but place a substitute for himself and then destroy that man, thereby claiming himself to be the true Christ prophesied in Scripture that destroys Antichrist.

    Make no mistake about it, the majority of institutional Church Christians will fall for it because they don’t know their Bibles and they don’t believe the plain words of Jesus when he said the abomination spoken of by the Prophet Daniel would be fulfilled in the lifetime of the disciples. Negating any need for a future temple where that event could be fulfilled. It already happened. In closing the Third Temple scenario is a deception, a false prophecy woven into the fabric of Scripture. It will be a staged event that God may allow Satan to pull off as part of the strong delusion Paul writes of in two Thessalonians Chapter two verses 10-11. If we think for a moment that Satan and his Antichrist would waltz into a rebuilt temple, declare who they are, and then expect apostate institutional Christianity to worship them, they would be very inept deceivers indeed. Let us not forget that Lucifer’s intellect far exceeds ours. And only by the power of God’s word and the indwelling of the Holy Spirit are we able to recognize Satanic deception otherwise. Like the deceived general Christian population on the broad road, we would easily fall for the Third Temple deception which I believe will soon be brought to bear on the entire world.

    >