SHOULD Israel Rebuild The Temple?

IANAJ, so please feel free to correct me if I am wrong. It has been about 1930 years since the Romans (under Titus) destroyed the jewish temple in Jerusalem. Why shouldn’t it be rebuilt? From what i see, this would solidify Israel’s claim to Jerusalem. It would also gladden the hearts of some of the wackier versions of fundamentalist Christians(they would see this as the beginning of the “end times”, that they are so anxious to have happen. It would also tell the palestinians that this pieceof real estate is non-negotiable; you might get back a few villages, but this place stays with us.
The Arab leaders would fume and hiss, but after a few years, who would really care?
Plus, wasn’t this in the plan? Eventually, the Jews had to think that a little renovation was in order…you can’t hang around the “wailing wall” and just wail forever!
To me, it would be a bit like the restoration of colonial Williamsburg-just a bit of the past, brought back tolife!
Anyone disagree? :confused:

As if Jewish weddings dont take long enough…

The Dome of the Rock is on the Temple Mount, and World War III would be bad.

Explain to me again why this would be a good thing?

Oh. And, while I’m open to correction, from the point of view of an observant jew wouldn’t it be a blasphemy? Isn’t the restoration of the Temple a matter for the Messiah? Whatever other claims the State of Israel makes, it does not claim to be the Messiah.

Possibly a stupid question, but even were you to rebuild it, what would you put in it? Without the ark of the covenant, what’s the point? Wouldn’t it just be another synagogue?

Err…Because the dome of the rock would have to be demolished? Because many observant Jews would be opposed to it?

And why would this be necessarily a good thing?

Here, I can’t begin to understand how it could not be a bad thing.

And once again, it would be a good thing because…?

Which most certainly would be extremely helpful in the current situation.We’re dearly in need of more infuriated muslims…

Don’t know…the kind of people who demolished a 500 years old mosque in India because it has been allegdly build on an hinduist site? Ot the kind of people who still feel concerned about the Jerusalem temple 2000 years later?

Given that a large part of the original zionists were secular, I don’t think it was part of the plan.

Forever, no. But until the messiah comes to do his job of rebuilding the temple, maybe…

Except that you don’t have do demolish a 1300 years old major monument (the temple of the rock) to restore Williamsburg. And restoring Williamsburg probably isn’t a big, huge “casus belli”, either.

Anyone disagree? :confused:

No; the Vatican should, and the temple would be the Pope’s throne chamber.

I’m all for rebuilding the Temple. Only, in order to make things easier on everyone, they should rebuild it in a much less controversial location. For example, New York City. :cool:

and now it begins! :smiley:

Now to respond to the OP with random thoughts-

Except for a natural disaster resulting in the collapse of the Dome. it would be total folly for Israel to act in rebuilding the Temple UPON that site. If the Dome
would collapse due to a natural act, all bets are off.

Jews do differ on if the Messiah personally is needed to rebuild the Temple. Isaiah calls Cyrus of Persia “moshiach” tho he was certainly not “Moshiach”.

It would be REALLY interesting to see the PETA & Pals reaction to the animal sacrifices.

While some Fundist C’tians would be delighted to see the Temple with
priesthood & sacrifices fully functioning, the NT letter to the Hebrew Church
explicitly teaches that a return to that is essentially a repudiation of the finished
work of Jesus.

There is a remote possibility, according to some Bible scholars, that the Temple could be built without disturbing the Dome. Other Bible scholars see that as totally wishful thinking.
Btw, the Dome was built upon the ruins of a Christian church which was built upon the ruins of a Pagan Roman temple which in turn was built on the ruins of the Jewish Temple site, so maybe we Christians should try another grab at it. G

Isn’t there already a temple in Beth, Israel? :confused:

Didn’t they say that about the formation of the state of Israel? Guess it’s a good thing that nobody really cares anymore. Oh, wait a second…

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: We (i.e., the U.S., or any nation that is sufficiently equipped and gives a fuck) should nuke Jerusalem. Evacuate it, compensate all the residents for lost property (plus $100 each for the inconvenience), and nuke it. With dirty bombs. So thoroughly that nobody can go near the site without a radiation suit for another thousand years. In the interests of world peace and quiet. Nothing left to fight over.

Such a disaster is generally called an Act of God. Wouldn’t *that * be fun to interpret?

The rebuilding of the temple would be an interesting project indeed. Are there ANY representations of it as it appeared in ca 70 AD? How DO we know that the “wailing wall” is really the foundation of Herod’s temple?
And, contact Indiana Jones about that Ark thing…it is in a government warehouse, somewhere (or in a Christain church in Ethiopia)!

Actually the Wailing Wall is not part of the Temple, it was a retaining wall.

I don’t know the sources, but there has been enough research from Scripture & other Jewish sources that adequate models of both Solomon’s & Herod’s Temples have been developed.

Btw, the Ark is not essential for Temple worship. Herod’s Temple didn’t have it.

Brain Glutton:

Hey, I’ve had that same idea for many years!

I’m sure that pissing off 3 of the world’s major religions is going to help anything.

Sorry, that should have been:

I’m NOT sure that pissing off 3 of the world’s major religions is going to help anything.

No, it would not be a good idea. It would be insane. I can’t really add much of greater use than what has already been said above, but I would suggest you get your head examined.