The Reconstruction of
the Edifice: A Glimpse at the Attempts of Christian and Jewish Fundamentalists to
Reconstruct Their Figurative and Literal Temples.
As
a direct reaction to secularism and modernity within the world society, fundamentalist
groups have implemented extreme movements to reintroduce religious principles
into that same milieu. Each particular
fundamentalist enclave initiated a specific response to the paucity of religion
and pervasive decadence of the secular world.
While some fundamentalist responses manifested outward militancy as well
as internal communal dependency, many fundamentalist groups responded to
secularism by enabling the return of a messiah, millennialism, or eschatology,
by physically participating in the completion of these prophecies. Thus, the Christian fundamentalist leader
Jerry Falwell and his Moral Majority as well as the Jewish fundamentalist group
Gush Emunim both believed in physically participating in the pre-millennial and
redemption process to further the coming of their appropriate messiah.
This
post investigates the active participation of Jerry Falwell and the Moral
Majority coalition as well as Gush Emunim in the reintroduction and
reconstruction of fundamental religious principles vis-à-vis the world
milieu. With the burgeoning secularism
in the United States of America
and the disregard for her American Foundation Myth, the Moral Majority
attempted to reconstruct the “city upon a hill” as a figurative temple to
persuade the American populace to emulate the morality of the past in which the
United States of America
was founded. This resurgence of
righteousness would once again demonstrate the Manifest Destiny of the United
States and the importance of Christian values, which in turn would help
initiate the rapture, the second coming of Jesus Christ, and the
millennium.
Also, Gush Emunim initially
instituted support for the Political Zionist movement as a method in which the
Jewish people could physically participate in the Redemption. In addition, this support provoked a
Religious Zionist movement which further propagated the active participation
within the Redemption by instigating control and entry of the Temple Mount
as well as the belief for the third, literal reconstruction of the Jewish Temple. Moreover, leaders within Gush Emunim taught
it was essential to actively participate in the Redemption, for the Redemption
would enable the return of the Jewish messiah.
Hence, the attempt to reconstruct the figurative and literal sanctified
edifices by the fundamentalist Christian and Jewish groups not only was an
attempt to purify secularism with the reemergence of religious morality, but it
was also an active participation in the endeavor to further invoke the end of
days, Redemption, and the glorified return of each group’s particular messiah.
The Construction of the City on a Hill as the American Foundation Myth
With the
establishment of colonies on the North American continent by pilgrims in the
early years of the seventeenth century, a great myth proliferated concerning
the consecration of the land by God for the cultivation of his people and the
opportunity to worship Him freely.
This
American Foundation Myth maintains a great sense of authenticity and conviction
even today.
A myth is a particular
dogma armored and protected by tenacious belief.
For it is not especially relevant if a myth
is actually true, but rather, the relevance lies in the support by which the
myth is believed in.
Thus, the authenticity
of a myth rests specifically in the creeds of the people.
Within the American Foundation Myth, the
authenticity of being a nation founded and established by men who were inspired
and led by the Manifest Destiny of God, retains significant relevance within
the outlook of the American milieu today and throughout its history, as well as
in regards to America’s role within the world as being a “city upon a hill” or
even a New Jerusalem.
In other words,
America
is the paradigm society placed on a hill or mount as a beacon for those who are
below and as a bridge to God above.
As
the Puritans arrived in the New World in 1630, Governor John Winthrop
established the importance as well as the significance of the opportunity the
Puritans divinely received in creating a Christian society where no previous
Old World influence existed.
Winthrop
believed that God permitted the discovery and settlement of the American
continent to construct a supreme nation or paradigm for all other nations to
emulate.
Consequently, a covenant was
created between God and the people of the continent, so as long as the people
of this specific covenant fulfilled God’s purpose, He would bless them with
prosperity.
So for
Winthrop,
America merited
as the paradigm “city upon a hill” mentioned in the Holy Bible.
Winthrop avidly portrayed
this rhetoric in biblical sermons to his Puritan followers, exemplifying their
flight from tyranny to God’s deliverance and bestowment of the Promised Land.
In the
TANAKH,
Isaiah articulates this tyranny and flight, “Bowing before you, shall come the
children of those who tormented you; prostrate at the soles of your feet shall
be those who reviled you; and you shall be called ‘City of the Lord,
Zion of the Holy One of
Israel.’”
Winthrop
further enveloped his pervasive rhetoric with biblical references that
instituted
America
in being a beacon to the world and a bridge to God.
Psalms 2:1-6 reads,
Why do nations assemble and peoples
plot vain things; kings of the earth take their stand, and regents intrigue
together against the Lord and against His anointed?
‘Let us break the cords of their yoke, shake
off their ropes from us!’
He who is
enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord mocks at them in anger, terrifying them in
His rage, ‘But I have installed My king on
Zion, My holy mountain!’
Finally,
Winthrop correlated the dynamic role of this new
society with Matthew’s rendition of the Sermon on the Mount which essentially
coined the phrase in which Winthrop
attributed to the Puritan society. Jesus
states,
Ye are the light of the world.
A city that is set on a hill cannot be
hid.
Neither do men light a candle and
put it under a bushel, but on a candlestick; and it giveth light unto all that
ye are in the house.
Let your light so
shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your father
which is in heaven.
Accordingly with this Puritan
rhetoric of the America Foundation Myth being specifically founded by God as
the utopian paradigm set apart as the promised land, Winthrop constructed a
figurative temple in which America stood forth as an unambiguous, sanctified
site of ritual importance with moral obligations to exemplify obedience and
righteousness.
The
American Foundation Myth, being the “city upon a hill,” greatly influenced the
founding fathers as well as political rhetoric in both the eighteenth and
nineteenth centuries.
Even though the
enlightenment ideas, which filtered in from
Europe
to the vigilant American revolutionaries, evolved the central religious
implications of the American Foundation Myth, for the founding fathers still
maintained an anchored link between the myth and God.
Instead of the American nation being a “New
Jerusalem,” it became a new and free society.
Also, the founding fathers disabled the
connection between church and state, patterned after secular European ideas;
yet, the religious ties were still evident when necessary, correlating the will
of the newly formed American nation as being synonymous with the will of God.
Thus,
America
still retained the outlook of being a “city upon a hill” and
Winthrop’s rhetoric to justify certain
domestic and foreign policies that may have been questionable in moral
righteousness.
For
instance, as the “city upon a hill” expanded west with pioneer settlers, the
Native Americans maintained the allocation of being savage and inferior
products of the devil, so God granted the white Protestants the divine right to
retain the land and expand the “city upon a hill.”
In addition, since
America
enjoyed both beneficial geography and God’s divine will,
America played a significant role
in securing peace within a foreign perspective.
Thus
America
initiated foreign policy in the rescue and conversion efforts of the Cubans
from the Spanish, diplomats from the Boxer rebellion in
China, and the
South Vietnamese from communism.
However
with the affluence of intellectualism which proliferated movements such as
nationalism, secularism, and
Darwinism,
America
experienced a sense of adversity in regards to the decline of the moral
implications associated with the American Foundation Myth and in being a “city
upon a hill.”
In particular, Charles
Darwin created a great upheaval in the institution of education with his theory
of evolution and survival of the fittest.
For
Darwin
challenged notions of divinity and advocated a sense of atheism.
But, Darwinism was just another addition to the
already prospering phenomena of secularism.
After
World War I, antiwar sentiments, coupled with growing secularism, grappled with
the idea of the American Foundation Myth to justify
America’s involvement in the war.
Not only did these sentiments reflect
ambivalence in regards to the American Foundation Myth being divinely
instituted, it also brought rise to questions concerning
America’s role in the world.
Does
America have the right to interfere
in world affairs?
For if
America
was so divinely guided, why did God bestow a great depression on the American
nation?
These were the questions posed
after World War I which greatly advocated secularism within the
United States.
In
response to this rise of secularism and skepticism, specifically in regards to
America’s
divine foundation, the response was a polarized opposition with the
organization of a Christian fundamentalist movement.
Sharon Georgianna writes, “The fundamentalist
movement of the early twentieth century was structured and identified as a
reaction to the neglected theological affirmations of the mainline Protestant
churches.”
The best example of this opposition was
demonstrated in the Scopes trial.
Again
as Georgianna states, “The Trial exemplified the polarization of Protestantism
in the 1920’s and many saw the trial in terms of the fight between cognitive
domains of authority: between skepticism and faith.”
Consequently, the battle between skepticism
and faith continued to create a dichotomy within the American society, but with
World War II on the horizon,
America
once again retained the responsibility in being the “city upon a hill” in both
rhetoric and action.
Again
America
found itself in a battle between good and evil, with the armies of God battling
the armies of Hitler or the Anti-Christ.
Notwithstanding,
America
quickly remembered itself as a nation founded by God and righteousness,
subsequently, it was
America’s
duty to emulate this to the world.
Since
World War II was so decisively won by the Allied forces, most importantly the
United States, the American society saw, not only a reconstruction of the
American Foundation Myth, but
a reemergence
of religious morality.
These sentiments continued with the American
involvements in
Korea and
Vietnam in regards to
America’s role as a protector and
proselytizer of righteousness and democracy in contrast to the ever so
threatening, satanic communist movement.
Also, in the times of decline, such as the civil war and the depression,
these times were a direct result of secularism or more specifically
America’s
abandonment of religion and righteousness.
Nevertheless,
as
America persisted to
exaggerate involvement with the war in
Vietnam,
a growing element of apprehension stewed in the American milieu, especially
following reports of
United
States government officials involved with
collusive fallacies.
As a consequence,
again the cycle revolved in favor of the growing element of secularism and
vehement doubt of the American government and her role within the world.
Furthermore, the American society, as well as
government leaders in general, began to more openly demonstrate an infestation
of hedonism with the adoption of the right to be unmoral.
Abortion, pornography, and excluding prayer
and the teaching of religion and God in schools, for the Christian
Fundamentalists, demonstrated the evolution and adaptation of the individual’s
civil liberties within
America.
The reaction of the fundamentalists,
particularly Jerry Falwell and the coalition of the Moral Majority, attempted
to actively influence politics to safeguard religion and moral obligations that
come from being the “city upon a hill.”
As
in the Bible, Christian fundamentalist adopted the imminence of using extreme
measures as Paul had done to reach the heathen Roman masses.
One of the central figures who opposed the
liberal government, liberal clergy, and secularism in general was Jerry Falwell
and the Moral Majority.
Initially,
Falwell disagreed with the idea to politically influence the government, but
since extreme measures deemed to be imperative, Falwell changed his ambitions.
Thus Falwell participated in the formation of
the Moral Majority in June of 1979 with the aims to curb all that they deemed
the American people believed to be immoral.
Again as Georgianna states, “Though engagement in political activism has
not been valued in the past, today it becomes apparently permissible for
born-again fundamentalist to fight government policies which are perceived as
immoral or against traditional values.”
So, it was Falwell’s design to reemerge
religion and morals into the political sphere of government.
Falwell also
desired to promote morality and religion on a public level. Thus in order to redeem America’s
covenant to God as a “city upon a hill,” the Moral Majority supported the
fundamental beliefs founded by the American Foundation Myth and opposed the
decadence that became prevalent in society.
Falwell writes,
We are Americans who share moral
convictions.
We are opposed to abortion,
pornography, the drug epidemic, the breakdown of the traditional family, the
establishment of homosexuality as an accepted alternate lifestyle, and other
moral cancers that are causing our society to rot from within.
Moral Majority strongly supports a pluralistic
America.
While we believe that this nation was founded
upon the Judeo-Christian ethic by men and women who were strongly influenced by
biblical moral principles, we are committed to the separation of church and
state.
In his writings, Falwell supports
that which the founding fathers instituted when forming the
United States of America, namely
the separation of church and state.
Falwell agrees that there is no need for a
theocracy within the American government.
Albeit, he does establish that with the reemergence of morality within
government, especially pertaining to its leaders,
America may retain the essence of
divine guidance.
Likewise,
the creation of the Moral Majority and the reemergence of Christian
fundamentalism within the influence of the political sphere in the 1980’s was an
attempt to reconstruct the “city upon a hill.”
For the American Foundation Myth still emanated
influence within society and even though secularism diminished religious
morality within America, there was still remnants of moral resolve that
believed America still maintained the Manifest Destiny of God and exemplified a
light for all others nations to see.
Since the idea or rhetoric of the “city upon a hill” implied that
America
stood as a beacon or light for all other nations to see, for Falwell, it was an
essential tool in which to disseminate morality and religion to the world.
This
mission also played particular relevance with the rapture and second coming of
Jesus Christ. For the reconstruction of
the “city upon a hill” underlined the establishment of a figurative temple, or
a holy edifice to physically entice the Christian messiah, Jesus Christ, to
return. Falwell explains,
If we are going to reach millions of
Americans with the gospel, we must live the message we proclaim.
Personal integrity is a must in our own
lives, in our families, in our churches, and in our communities.
As we stand for the truth, we must also show
compassion for a lost world in need of our Savior.
Our mission is to see, not how many people we
can hate, but how many we can love for Christ’s sake.
Further, we must extend our vision to
evangelize the world.
Hence, America has the opportunity to
stand as a paradigm of correct worship as the “city upon a hill,” and not only
influence itself, but also influence those who stand below the city and in the
world.
Notwithstanding,
it is also essential to note the possibility that the reconstruction of the
“city upon a hill” may also exude a literal establishment of a transcendent
edifice in reference to the rapture and salvation of the true believers. John states in Revelations,
And I John saw the holy city, New Jerusalem,
coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for a
husband.
And I heard a great voice out
of heaven saying, behold, the tabernacle of God is with men, and he will dwell
with them, and they shall be his people and God himself shall be with them, and
be their God.
And God shall wipe away
all tears from their eyes; and there shall be no more death, neither sorrow,
nor crying, neither shall there be any more pain: for the former things are
passed away
Even though this
scripture may be interpreted differently, such as describing the city of Enoch returning to the
earth, for Falwell, it may also illustrate the descent of the true believers,
after the rapture, back to the celestialized earth to live out the millennium
in the presence of Christ. In this
scenario, the New Jerusalem is a physically constructed place, and if this
interpretation is somewhat correct, it highlights the importance of the
reconstruction of the “city upon a hill” as the New Jerusalem, for it being the
literal kingdom in which will be inherited by the righteous. Furthermore, the reconstruction of the “city
upon a hill,” as the American Foundation Myth, played an essential role within
Christian fundamentalism especially pertaining to Jerry Falwell as a Baptist
minister and the coalition of the Moral Majority, since both their beliefs
benefited from a figurative and literal reconstruction.
Zionism as a Tool of the
Redemption and the Reconstruction of the Temple
After the destruction
of the second Temple
in the year 70 CE, the Jews suffered an immense Diaspora at the hands of the
Romans, which dispersed the Jews all over the world. Within Jewish theological considerations,
this Diaspora inherited the idea of the Galut
or exile from the Land
of Israel. The Galut
explained the destruction of the Jew’s most holy edifice, as well as why God
seemed to have abandoned His people. For
the Galut obviously punished the Jews
for certain wickedness, or more specifically, a lack of remembering of God.
However
the Galut was not the ultimate
destiny for the Jews, within Jewish theology God would remember the Jews and
redeem their monarchy as well as their sovereignty within the Land of Israel. This redemption was known as the Geula and would come to pass by the hands
of God, through his miracles, and through the Jewish Messiah. In addition, the full redemption enabled the
reconstruction of the third Jewish Temple, or literally, the most holy edifice.
Notwithstanding, after the Balfour
Declaration of 1917 and the flourishing Political Zionist movement, many
conservative Jews saw Political Zionism as taking the Geula out of the hands of God and establishing a state of Israel by
the hands of men. Yet some Jewish
fundamentalists maintained that Political Zionism was in fact a tool God used
to initiate the Geula. One of the main proponents of Political
Zionism was Rabbi Kook and his son Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda Kook, who led the Jewish
fundamentalist enclave of Gush Emunim and adamantly believed that Political
Zionism was actually the hand of God initiating the Geula. Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda
proclaims,
We are fortunate to have merited
this, to be witnessing the word of
Hashem
[God] being realized in our time.
This
is the way the
Geula unfolds, a
little at a time, and one must recognize and see the hand of Divine Providence
in it.
The world has a Master.
The Creator of the Universe hasn’t abandoned
us, and in the End of Days, our return to the Land is promised.
This is happening in our midst, through our
actions, now.
The end of the
Galut comes in this developmental way,
bringing the beginnings of
Geula.
In
response to Political Zionism, Rabbi Kook preached that not only was the
Geula in fact taking place in their day
and age, but also required all Jews to return to
Israel to specifically complete the
prophecy and finalize the redemption to bring forth the messiah.
Albeit, this Zionists movement experienced
adversity within the Orthodox Jewish communities and their desire to wait for
the land to be prepared by the messiah.
Yet the Kooks explained that to stop the exile, all Jews would have to
return to
Israel.
For as Rabbi Kook taught,
Am Kadosh
[holy nation] and
Eretz HaKadesh [holy land] were both
sanctified and Jews should consider themselves in having the divine right to
the land and nation of
Israel.
With
the horrid remains of the lingering destruction of the Holocaust, those same
Orthodox Jews who opposed Political and Religious Zionism found difficulty in
explaining the specific reasons and cause for such a tragedy.
The Orthodox Rabbis chose to attribute the
Holocaust as a punishment for the secular trends inherited by Reformed Jews.
Although Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda taught that just
as “
Hashem is One, the nation of
Israel is one,” he maintained that the blame for the Holocaust did not rest on
the Reformed Jews, it rested on the nation of Israel as a whole because they
refused to participate in the
Geula.
In other words, the anti-Semitism that exhibited
within the twentieth century directly resulted from the disobedience of the
Jewish nation and was a method in which God would bring the Jews to the
Land of Israel and initiate the coming of the
messiah.
After
World War II and the establishment of the state of
Israel
in 1948, many Jews returned to
Israel
in regards to both aspects of Political and Religious Zionism.
Conversely, many Jews remained in the
United States and
Western
Europe.
Once more, Rabbi
Tzvi Yehuda proclaimed that many Jews “fell in love with
Galut and refused to return to
Israel,” yet the exile cannot last
indefinitely, so God will sever those who refuse to actively participate in the
redemption and the messianic process.
For everything including Zionism and the Holocaust was part of the
redemption and that was why the state of
Israel was established immediately
after the end of World War II.
Additionally, it was God’s will to create the state of
Israel, through
the hands of men, just like it is the work of men that will also bring forth
the redemption.
The
redemption continued to manifest signs of divinity with the immediate success
of the state of
Israel.
Even when Arab nations united in
confrontation against
Israel
in the Six Days War,
Israel
dominated and further annexed territories and ameliorated the resolve for the
redemption.
However with the victory of
Jerusalem following the Six Days War, the question arose
concerning the status of a newly acquired benefit, the most holy Jewish site or
the
Temple Mount.
Chief Army Chaplain Shlomo Goren, who was greatly influenced by the Gush
Emunim leader Rabbi Kook and was friends with Rabbi Tzvi Yehuda, reveled at the
new opportunities enabled by the recapture of the
Temple Mount.
Goren significantly understood the
implications of the recapture of the
Temple
Mount, especially in
being a part of the worldwide process of the redemption.
Therefore, the Jews must have retained the
Temple Mount
to enable the future construction of the third
Temple by the Jewish Messiah when the
prophecy would be completed.
Nonetheless,
even with the recapture of the temple mount, which Shalom Freedman describes as
the “Heart of Jewish longing for 2,000 years was not the Western Wall, but the
Beit HaMikdash
on
HarBayit, the Temple on the Temple
Mount,” there was immediate controversy in regards to keeping the Temple Mount
under Jewish sovereignty.
Defense Minister Moshe Dayan believed the
center of Jewish longing was not the
Temple
Mount, but rather the
Western Wall.
Also, Dayan attempted to
alter a permanent conflict with Islam by finally restoring Islamic control over
the
Temple Mount and al-Aqra Mosque.
As a student of the Kook Rabbis, Goren
refused to give up any of the holy places because of the sanctity of the land,
but Dayan maintained the appeasement of Islam was more important than the
sanctity of the land when trying to avoid war.
With
the abandonment of the
Temple Mount and the attainment of the Western Wall, this
confusion inspired further fundamentalist movements in
Israel including the movements to establish both
prayers on the
Temple Mount as well as the reconstruction of the
Temple.
As Motti Inbari writes,
The underlying ideology of the Movement
for the Establishment of the
Temple
is based on the perception that historical developments form part of a Divine
plan for this world, with the objective of bringing redemption.
Redemption is interpreted as the
establishment of an independent political entity that acts in accordance with
Jewish law, reinstating the sacrifices on the
Temple
Mount and rebuilding the
Temple.
Since the redemption of the land began
with the Jews physically participating in ending exile to begin the redemption
process in regards to the proliferation of Zionism, a growing opinion to
physically participate in establishing prayer on the
Temple
Mount as well as the construction of
the third
Temple
deemed possible as well.
Even though
Rabbi Tzvi Yehudah vehemently prohibited the idea of Jews entering the
Temple Mount,
after his death, Gush Emunim demonstrated a growing opinion to in fact permit
entry into the
Temple
Mount to pray in accordance
to
halakhic restrictions.
Additionally, the
movement for the reconstruction of the
Temple on
the
Temple Mount also maintained steady growth
particularly pertaining to ultra-Orthodox Jews and traditional sectors.
The growth of these movements linked directly
to the
Oslo
process and demonstrated the Jewish desire for redemption. Due to the loss of
Jewish control over the Temple Mount following the Six Days War, many Jews
feared the same ramifications of the Oslo process, thus changes in the Jewish
religious law at the requests of Jewish fundamentalists groups, such as the
Gush Emunim, were instigated to enable Jews to actively participate and aspire
for the reconstruction of the literal Temple, as well as in the entry and
worship on the Temple Mount.
This change in tradition, showed the growing
sentiment to complete the redemption and bring forth the Messiah.
Consequently, the contributions of Gush
Emunim, in actively participating in the redemption, may cause these growing sentiments
to one day actually attempt to reconstruct the
Temple.
Due to the efforts
of Jewish fundamentalists groups like Gush Emunim, religious movements like
Religious Zionism, as well as the contemporary growing movements to reconstruct
the Temple,
maintained the essence and necessity of active participation by the Jews. Therefore in other words, the process of
redemption could be initiated by the active participation of Zionists and those
who are willing to adapt and change halakhic
in order to facilitate the coming of the Jewish Messiah, including the physical
reconstruction of the Temple on the Temple Mount.
Jewish Zionism and Construction of the Third Temple
as a Tool for the Millennium
It is interesting
to note that the Political and Religious Zionists movements of the Jews, as
well as the construction of the Jewish state of Israel and the reconstruction
of the Jewish Temple maintains a strict relevance within Christian
fundamentalism. The Jews play an
essential role in regards to the rapture, second coming of Jesus Christ, and
the millennium; for within the “End of Days” scenario as well as the Battle of
Armageddon, it is vital for the Jews to establish their nation and temple.
As
a reaction to the growing secularism within the last dispensation of time, Christian
fundamentalism maintained a heighten emphasis on their premillennial-dispensationalism,
particularly in the destruction of evil.
However, the role of the Jews within
Christian dogma became an apparatus in ensuring the second coming.
The two most inherent elements of the role of
the Jews within the second coming of Christ are the establishment of a Jewish
state and the reconstruction of the Jewish Temple.
In hind site, Jews retained the special role
as being the chosen descendants of Abraham and in bringing forth the return of
the messiah.
As
ideas of Political and Religious Zionism warranted an appeal to Jews in
creating a nation state, Christian fundamentalists realized the support of
these movements would benefit in completing the millennial prophecies.
Thus not only was the Balfour Declaration a
means to undo the Sykes-Picot Agreement between the Anglo-Franco partisans, it
also revealed and underline desire to further the second coming of Christ.
This support for the creation of the Jewish
state as well as support for Zionism emanated from the deeply rooted “Gentile
Zionism” which derived from the British evangelical revival of the eighteenth
century.
In particular, Lloyd George of
the English government ascribed to this belief and thus initiated Balfour to
publish his declaration to Lord Rothschild on November 2
nd of 1917.
After the Balfour Declaration, as previously
mentioned, many Jews returned to
Israel to establish their
independent state and participate in the redemption.
This fulfilled the Christian fundamentalist
prophecy in regards the restoration of the state of
Israel.
Next
the Jews need to reconstruct the Temple on the Temple Mount,
this is essential for the second coming of the Christ. As Hal Lindsey writes,
There is only one place this
Temple can be built,
according to the Law of Moses.
This is
upon
Mount Moriah.
It is there that two previous temples were built…There is one major
problem barring the construction of a third
Temple.
That obstacle is the second holiest place of the Moslem Faith, the Dome
of the Rock.
This is believed to be
built squarely in the middle of the old temple site.
Obstacle or no obstacle, it is certain that
the
Temple will
be rebuilt.
Prophecy demands it.
With the construction of the
Temple, the great
destruction of the world will get so severe all true believers will be sucked
into heaven within the rapture.
The Jews
will be left to defend their nation and the earth in the Battle of Armageddon
where Christ will return to save them.
After the second coming of Christ and the return of the believers, the
Jews will finally accept Christ and again enjoy the blessings of their
heritage.
The
role of the Jews thus continues to sustain as indispensable within the second
coming of Jesus Christ. This role
retains great support by Christian fundamentalism regarding Jewish Zionism, as
well as in the growing Movement to Reconstruct the Temple
on the Temple Mount.
Yet it still remains to be seen if the third Temple can be constructed and the prophecy
fulfilled.
In
the reaction to the rise of secularism and modernity principally within the
twentieth century, Christian and Jewish fundamentalist groups found it was
necessary to combat this pervasive and diminishing phenomenon with a
counter-offensive reaction. Hence,
fundamentalist groups like Gush Emunim as well as leaders like the Jerry
Falwell and the Kooks, initiated an active participation in the reconstruction
of their figurative and literal edifices with the reemergence of the Puritan
rhetoric of the “city upon a hill” and initiation of the redemption which would
bring about the coming of the Jewish Messiah and construction of the third
Temple. This reaction manifested the
active role in which needed to take place in order to help prophecy along. Therefore, the Christian and Jewish
fundamentalist believers were no longer just going to wait for the “End of
Days,” in fact, they were going to participate in its completion.
Bibliography
Bible. The
Holy Bible. Salt Lake City: The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints, 1979.
Cobb, Jr.,
William W. The American Foundation Myth in Vietnam: Reigning Paradigms and
Raining Bombs. New
York: University Press of America, 1998.
Falwell,
Jerry. “An Agenda for the 1980’s.” In
Class Essay. NEJS 193b. Brandeis
University, Waltham, MA, 2008.
Freedman, Shalom.
Rabbi
Shlomo Goren: Torah Sage and General.
Jerusalem:
Urim Publications, 2006.
Georgianna,
Sharon Linzey. The Moral Majority and
Fundamentalism: Plausibility and Dissonance. Lewiston:
The Edwin Mellen Press, 1989.
Karsh, Efraim and
Inari Karsh. Empires of the Sand: The Struggle for Mastery in the Middle
East, 1789-1923. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1999.
Lindsey, Hal. The Late Great Planet Earth. Zondervan Books, 1970.