www.byzcath.org Forums News & Events Church News Sandrehedran assend Temple Mount

Newly formed and ordained Sanhedran assend the Temple Mount, first time in 1,600 years.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=73311

Pani Rose,

I found the article very interesting.

It wonder if it's even possible for the Jews to rebuild the Temple? If they do, then that calls for the reemergence of Levites and temple priests and animal sacrifices, which doesn't square at all with Christ being the Last and Perfect Sacrifice and the fact that Judaism has been fulfilled in the Church.

It seems to me that the rebuilding of the Temple and a reorginization of the Jewish priesthood is an impossibility, since it exists today in Christianity. If this were to happen I'd be absolutely dumbfounded.

Logos Teen

Dear Teen Logo,

Actually, I'm told on good authority that the Orthodox Jews already HAVE a trained and ordained priesthood in place and who go, without the guards knowing about it, to the Temple Precinct, to perform certain minor rites on various Jewish Holy-days.

As I understand it, the Temple could be restored tomorrow, but one big problem is that the Dome of the Rock is on the Temple Precinct and the government is standing firm on its position, etc.

Some say the restoration of the Temple is a 'no-go' unless the Temple is rebuilt on its original grounds and re-dedicated and unless a King of Israel is proclaimed.

Others deny this.

The Ethiopian Orthodox Christian Church, interestingly, has all the Temple orders as an integral part of its clergy.

The "Debteras" are the scribes and there are others.

Alex

Dear Alex,

This is highly interesting. Oh, and by the way, whatever happened to "Debtera" - - - do you remember that User?

Anyway, I don't see how the reemergence of the Temple and a sacrifical Aaronic priesthood can occur with Christianity existing. I guess it could simply be an invalid and illegitimate Jewish priesthood, but still the image it would present to the rest of the world (i.e., that Christianity is not the fulfillment and continuation of Judaism) would be overwhelming.

I thought that, after Christ's Incarnation, when the Temple was destroyed in 70 A.D., that sacrifical Judaism was finished, since it was continued and perfected in Christianity.

Could you shed any light on this? I know you are a scholar on many subject, so why should this be an exception?

I'm actually reading a book right now called How Christ Said the First Mass* by Fr. James Meagher. So far, I'm on page 170 and all Fr. Meagher's talked about are pre-Christian Jewish Temple, synagogue, and home sacrifices and worship. He gives very interesting tidbits about what he terms "the Latin and Greek rites" of the Church (guess he missed the other rites) and how certain traditions and symbols have been passed on from the Temple, synagogue, and Jewish home. It's so much deeper and more intricate than I could have ever imagined; I think even you would find it an enthralling read!

Logos Teen

*Yes, the book has an incredibly Roman Catholic title, but it was written in the early 20th or late 19th century, I believe.

This is off the top of my head and I may not always remember correctly, since it's been a few years since I read the sources of the information. I recall St. Jerome indicating the rebuilding of the Temple to be a sign of the AntiChrist, who would rebuild the Temple and enthrone himself there for worship. As for the Dome of the Rock, I think there was a Christian Church on the site that was demolished to build the mosque. So tearing it down certainly has a precedent.

Dear Garrett,

Well, Judaism itself continues the Temple tradition by substituting daily prayer for the daily sacrifices.

The Orthodox Jews would like the Temple cult restored.

There just might be discord in the religious Jewish community over the role of a new king of Israel (also who is to be that king) and the way in which the Temple is to be restored.

The Dome of the Rock clearly lies on the precinct - others say that shouldn't be a problem - who is right?

I think it is inevitable that the Temple will be restored for the ancient Jewish cult and that a king of Israel is proclaimed - the movement to achieve these objectives is gaining ground all the time and the police guarding the Temple grounds just can't keep the Jewish priests and scribes away from already fulfilling aspects of the prescribed Temple worship.

As for "Debtera," I think he went to another forum, but it was great conversing with him while he was here!

Alex

Charles,

Could you expand on St. Jerome's comment? Like I said, I still don't see how this rebuilding of the Temple and reinsitution of the Jewish priesthood makes any sense after the birth of Christianity- - -of course it is null and void in the face of Christianity, which is now the True Judaism and the continuation of the Old Religion, but I still find it interesting.

Alex,

I think that Hasidim are very much against Zionism and a rebuilding of the Temple, are they not? At the very least, I know that non-Hasidic/Lubavitcher Orthodox Jews are in favor or it and the Hasidim are against it, or vice versa.

Perhaps one of the Jewish converts to Christianity on this Forum (like Sharon Mech) could offer her commentary here.

Logos Teen

Dear Garrett,

Yes, there are Jewish groups who are against it.

Again, I don't see anything wrong with such a restoration.

As Christians, we believe we are the New Israel.

But Judaism rejects that.

If Judaism exists, despite its rejection of Christianity, why can't a restored Temple come into being?

I think that the coming into being of the Temple will help give a renewed religious focus to Jewish identity throughout Israel and the world, especially given the agnostic and liberal Jewish movements.

If to be Jewish will one day come to mean a relationship to the Temple cult, then that spells a solid movement of religious conservatism in Judaism.

And I'm all for that.

Alex

I've never been Jewish but here goes. Generally speaking, chareidi Jews are not zionists. In that they don't believe the state of Israel could be established through secular means. However, there are many chareidi Jews in Israel and a good friend of mine (a chareidi Jew) is very pro-Israel even though she is technically not a zionist.

I used the term "charedi" instead of hasidic because charedi Jews are not all hasidic. They could be called "ultra-Orthodox" Jews although that term is offensive to them. Hasidism is a movement founded by the Baal Shem Tov and is centered around the hasidic courts; Lubavitch, Bobov, etc. At the time of the Baal Shem Tov, Hasidism was very opposed by most within Judaism (I don't say "Orthodox" because all Jews were Orthodox in those days). The descendents of the non-Hasidic "ultra-Orthodox" Jews are known as mitnagdim (sp?) or "litviks," or simply Lithuanians because Vilnius was the center of this movement.

The difference between the mitnagdim and the hasidim are primarily dress and that the mitnagdim don't have a rebbe. Originally the hasidism were anti-intellectual but it's no longer the case that they don't intellectually rigorous yeshivas. I've been told that most "ultra-Orthodox" Jews are hasidic these days. When I was in Boro Park, Brooklyn (the spiritual center of the "ultra-Orthodox" Jewish world in the US) it appeared to me that most people were Hasidic.

The Lubavitch are hasids but they are quite radical and are zionists. The controversy with them is that supposedly some of them believe that their dead rebbe was the messiah. My experience with Lubavitch is that this is a minority position. They're also controversial because they are zionists.

There are other Orthodox Jews, typically called "Modern Orthodox." They are zionists. Modern Orthodoxy encompasses Young Israel, the Orthodox Union and Yeshiva University in New York. Besides being zionists, the major difference between MO and charedi is that MO Jews are more likely to have a secular education. The woman don't all wear dresses and might not cover their hair. And if they do cover their hair, they might not cover it completely (the sheitl, wig, is pretty much only charedi). The men wear the yamulke (kippah) only, no hat, and the kippah is usually not black. If you see someone with a black kippah it usually means they're charedi. Also the MO won't have his tassles (won't even try to spell that correctly in Hebrew) hanging out. The MO Jew might shake a woman's hand. If you live outside of New York (and some particular suburbs of the city) the Orthodox Jews (with the exception of Chabab, Lubavitch) are probably MO and not charedi.
My understanding (and it's hard to really understand this as an outsider - so I'm probably not completely accurate) is that the Jews who want the temple to be rebuilt are affiliated with the settlers in the west bank who are zionists, meaning they are not charedi. I think some of these people serve in the army whereas a charedi Jew would never do that.

Dear Jennifer,

I am very happy to have developed legislation here to declare Yom ha-Shoa, Holocaust Day, as an official day observed in Ontario - and this according to the Jewish lunar calendar!

We are the first jurisdiction outside Israel to have done so, as I understand.

Alex

Garrett, I was thinking about the 15 Signs of Doom quoted by Bede as having come from St. Jerome. The rebuilding of the Temple and the Antichrist comes from St. Cyril of Jerusalem. The Emperor Julian the Apostate tried to rebuild the Temple to discredit Christian belief that a sentence of everlasting destruction had been pronounced by Christ against the Temple. St. Cyril predicted that Julian would fail, since only the Antichrist would rebuild the Temple. Rufinus the historian said, "lime and cement had been brought and all was ready for destroying the old foundation and laying the new." Julian was killed in 363 and the project abandoned. Cyril said the Antichrist would abhor all other idols, wanting himself to be the only idol adored. He would seat himself in his rebuilt Temple as God, coming to the Jews as their Christ and demanding worship from them. Cyril maintained that the final destruction of the Temple of Jerusalem built by the Antichrist would take place at the Second Coming of Christ. Only then would the prophecy of our Lord as stated in Matthew, "not a stone will be left upon a stone," be fullfilled. Much of this is from The Catechetical Lectures of St. Cyril, Archbishop of Jerusalem, particularly Lecture XV which is on the Antichrist and the last things. See also the book, The Antichrist by Vincent Miceli S.J. which is much easier to come by and contains the same information I gave above.

Thank you, Charles and Alex.

Alex, I would also welcome a growth of conservatism in Judaism, as perhaps this will pave the way for the mass conversion to the Church.

Logos Teen

But what is "conservatism" in Judaism? Historically since the time of Christ, Jews have been "conservative" (meaning they observed the 613 laws) but very few converted throughout the ages.

I think it's simplistic to assume that observent Jews are more susceptible to Christianity because they are "conservative." Let me preface this by admitting that it could sound anti-semitic (and believe me, I am not an anti-semite, in fact I'm philo-semitic), orthodox judaism as it is practiced today isn't 'pre-Christianity.' It's not the faith that Jesus practiced. It could more properly be called rabbinic Judaism and developed around the year 200 in response to the destruction of the temple.

Also rabbinic Judaism has more of a foundation on the talmud than the torah so appeals to Scripture to prove the legitimacy of Christ will be ineffective.

As an example of the differences between us, I once asked my charedi friend about abortion. Her response was telling IMHO. She asked "is the mother Jewish?" Basically to her, abortion was terrible (although Jewish law allows abortion under certain circumstances) if the baby is Jewish.

Orthodox Judaism is very insular. By definition it separates them from us which makes it even less likely that they would convert.

Jennifer, I have heard it said that Judaism died as a religion in 70 AD when its heart and soul were ripped out and destroyed by the destruction of the temple and priestly class. Part of this argument is that what passes for Judaism today is a creation of talmudic scholars, not a continuation of the religion at the time of Christ. I take no sides in this, but it is still interesting.

Jennifer,

I can see your point, and I might very well agree.

I think that today's world, though, is morally directionless and shallow. As a Christian, I believe that only Christianity is the complete remedy for that. Perhaps as moral conservatism, instead of "mitzvot conservatism," if you will, grows within Judaism (I don't even know if it will), these Jews might find their way toward Christ. Of course, this is all speculation and might very well not be the case.

Logos Teen