page contents

Does scripture anticipate a future Jewish Temple?

future jewish templeThe argument for a future Jewish Temple is as follows:

On the basis of Matthew 24:15 with supporting Scriptures from Daniel, 2 Thessalonians 2, and Revelation 13, it may be concluded that Scriptures anticipate a future temple with a sacrificial system which will be under way at the time “the prince that shall come” exercises his authority, desecrates the temple, and establishes himself as the object of worship.- Walvoord, J. F. (1968). Will Israel Build a Temple in Jerusalem? Bibliotheca Sacra, 125, 99–106.

The above argument is circular, the literal Temple is NOT the only place where both “the Daily” and “the abomination” can exist.

The “daily” and the “abomination of desolation” can exist in the church also, and it is the ONLY Temple that has a valid priesthood in Christ. Its “Antichrist versus Christ” not “Antichrist versus Jewish High Priest.”

Moreover, Temple imagery including Priesthood were transferred to the Church[1] meaning any “Daily sacrifice” must be offered through it, since the resurrection of Christ. This was true even while the literal Temple in Jerusalem existed. Therefore, if Walvoord’s theory were correct, that must be reversed BY GOD so Paul can call this future temple a “Temple of God”! That follows from Paul writing this under the inspiration by the Holy Spirit (2 Tim. 3:16-17. 2 Pet. 1:21). So the dilemma “Would God call a Christ rejecting temple the Temple of God” is a valid one. Of course He would not!

Would Paul call a temple that still rejects Christ the “Temple of God?” Perhaps if still a Pharisee (Ac. 23:6; 26:5), but after Paul became an apostle of Christ he never calls the literal temple in Jerusalem the “Temple of God”. That he reserves for the Church (1 Cor. 3:16-17; 6:19. 2 Cor. 6:16. Eph. 2:21). As Paul was an apostle of Christ when he wrote 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 and not a Pharisee, “temple of God” in that verse refers to the church.

The abomination of desolation in Daniel 11:31 is in the past. The Abomination set up in the end time is very different than the image Antiochus set up. This one is a hestanding where he ought not” (Mk. 13:14 ESV), breathing, speaking and killing all who refuse to worship (Rev. 13:14-15).

The precise phrase Christ used “βδέλυγμα τῆς ἐρημώσεως”[2] (Mat. 24:15; Mk 13:14) is found ONLY in the LXX Daniel 12:11, and the Hebrew it translates is also slightly different than that found in Dan. 11:31:

Part. שׁוֹמֵם the desolator (i.e. Antiochus Epiphanes [?]), Dan. 9:27. הַפֶּשַׁע שׁוֹמֵם (for פֶּשַׁע הַשּׁ׳), ibid. Dan. 8:13, the sin of the desolator, and שִׁקּוּץ שֹׁמֵם abomination of the desolator, Dan. 12:11, i.q. βδέλυγμα ἐρημώσεως, 1 Macc. 1:54; 6:7 (either the altar or the idol which Antiochus caused to be erected over the altar of the temple at Jerusalem.) [But see, Matt. 24:14, as to the “abomination of desolation,” as something even then unfulfilled].-Gesenius, W., & Tregelles, S. P. (2003). Gesenius’ Hebrew And Chaldee Lexicon To The Old Testament Scriptures (p. 835). Bellingham, WA: Logos Bible Software.

The “Continual Sacrifice” ( תָּמִיד08548; ἡ θυσία 2378) διὰ παντὸς (“the sacrifice through all [day]”) ceases from “religious apostasy” (הוּסַ֣ר 05493; ἀποσταθῇ 868 lxx).[3]

In the NT Church, the “continual sacrifice” is the figurative offering of ourselves to God daily, in word and practice—it is the “taking up the cross of Christ daily” (Lk. 9:23):

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that you present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, which is your reasonable service. (Rom. 12:1) NKJ (Comp. Mk. 9:49)


Therefore by Him let us continually offer the sacrifice of praise to God, that is, the fruit of our lips, giving thanks to His name. (Heb. 13:15) NKJ

you also, as living stones, are being built up a spiritual house, a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. (1 Pet. 2:5) NKJ

Therefore the ending of the “continual sacrifice” does not require the Jewish Temple, to be consistent with the rest of the New Testament it requires the Church the Temple of God (1 Cor. 3:16-17; 6:19. 2 Cor. 6:16; Eph. 2:21).

When the already fallen away Church receives Adonikam the “man of sin” as “the Christ” (2 Thess. 2:3-4), sacrifice and offering to the True God has ceased (Dan. 12:11). After he morphs into the Son of Destruction 666 Beast at 1,260 days, it takes another 30 days to fully set up his image the abomination of desolation, 1,290 days. The desolation caused by this “breathing” image is unlike any before it. As it is the image of the Beast, both are the Abomination (Demon filled) causing desolation, the “son of destruction” (2 Thess. 2:3-4) aka the “Desolator” (Dan. 9:27; 12:11).


[1]These passages demonstrate that Paul not merely employs the “imagery” of the temple, but applies the whole theology of holy space and sacrilege to the new temple of the church…

Temple language, by contrast, is frequently applied to the church or to her members. In 1 Cor 3:16–17, Paul reminds the Corinthians that they are the ναὸς θεοῦ. In this passage, the corporate dimensions of the metaphor are in view. Paul is defending his role as the master builder of the church, and warning others not to build with worthless materials that will finally be consumed (vv. 10–15). Here, the temple is the church as a corporate body, and not the individual members. It is evident that this is not “mere metaphor” for Paul, since he applies the entire theology of holy space to the church. The temple was the dwelling-place of God, and it was this indwelling that consecrated it as holy space (see Exod 29:43). According to Paul, the Spirit present among believers constitutes the church as the temple, that is, as holy space (cf. v. 17: ὁ γὰρ ναὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ἅγιός ἐστιν). Further, just as violations of holy space were fiercely punished under the old covenant,35 so in the new, “If any man destroys the temple of God, God will destroy him.” Paul applies the same theology to the individual believer in 1 Cor 6:19–20: Because the Spirit dwells in the believer, he is individually a ναὸς τοῦἐν ὑμῖν ἁγίου πνεύματος (v. 19). Because the believer is consecrated, he is not to allow any pollution (specifically sexual pollution) to defile his body.

In Eph 2:19–22, the church is again described in terms of the temple, and again Paul draws on the Old Testament temple theology to expound on the “mystery” of the gospel (see Eph 3:4–6). Addressing the Gentile Ephesians, Paul reminds them that they are no longer “strangers and aliens” (2:19). These terms have political overtones, and thus suggest that the Ephesians are no longer excluded from the “commonwealth of Israel” (v. 12: τῆς πολιτείας τοῦ ᾿Ισραὴλ). In vv. 19–22, however, the imagery is not immediately political, but instead operates in the realm of temple access and exclusion. The Ephesians were ξένος in the sense that they were excluded from the “household” of the holy ones, the consecrated people of Israel. Previously, they were the “strangers” who would be put to death if they came near (Num 1:51; 3:10). No longer excluded, the Gentiles believers are being constructed εἰς ναὸν ἅγιον ἐν κυρίῳ (v. 21). Again, Paul draws on the temple theology of the Old Testament by adding that the community formed in one man from Jews and Gentiles is a dwelling-place (κατοικητήριον) for the Spirit (v. 22). Practically, Paul moves from this to exhort the Ephesians to unity; if the church is the holy temple, destroying the unity of the church is a pollution of holy ground, an act of sacrilege (see 4:1–9).36

These passages demonstrate that Paul not merely employs the “imagery” of the temple, but applies the whole theology of holy space and sacrilege to the new temple of the church. Paul’s teaching here should be called a “temple ecclesiology” rather than simply a literary employment of “temple imagery.”-Leithart, P. J. (2002). Synagogue or Temple? Models for the Christian Worship. Westminster Theological Journal, 64(1), 130–131.

[2]Our Lord cautioned critical thinking was necessary. Analyzing this from every perspective and picking the solution that manifests elegance.

Jesus is God the Eternal Son, His perspective sees both fulfillments, that in the first century and that in the end time. Hence “let the reader understand” is written not just those hearing, but to US who read.

An abomination of desolation is any event or thing that causes the Temple of God to be desolate of God’s presence and consequently its valid use. It therefore can have dual fulfillment in the literal Temple, and the Church as the Temple.

The first century abomination can be found in two events, the pagan ensigns worshipped by the surrounding Roman armies (Lk. 21:20), Jerusalem being the holy place. Or the acts of the Zealots and Idumeans who took over the Temple and murdered thousands including the High Priest, installing “the clown Phinnas” in his place. Drunk in women’s clothing they celebrated. That was an abomination of desolation.

The abomination in the end time is a person “standing where he ought not.” (Mk. 13:14 ESV) What connection to an image does he have? In Revelation 13:15 the image of the Beast can breathe, kill any who don’t worship. Its given life by the dark arts of the false prophet, an abomination indeed. The 666 Beast himself therefore is the abomination of desolation standing where he ought not, in the holy place of the Church the Temple of God. When the fallen away church accepts him as “the Christ”, all sacrifice and offering to God ends because of their apostasy. At 1,260 days (Dan. 9:27; 12:7) the “man of sin” declares himself above every definition of God (2 Th. 2:3-4) and it takes him 30 days or on the 1,290th day (Dan. 12:11) the Quantum AI connected to every device is set up. This gives the Beast real time “God like” ability to see and hear everything, and react with deadly force anywhere if anyone try to resist. This abomination enforces his 666 Mark membership only economy (Rev. 13:15-18).

[3] Some insist it is unhistorical “the Daily” not refer to a sacrifice of lambs in a literal temple, or the “abomination of desolation” not be an idolatrous image like that of Antiochus. But it follows from Daniel’s not understanding the prophecy the words used have unfamiliar meaning (Dan. 12:9). What is the likeliest cause of Daniel’s confusion AND the unsealing of the meaning of the words in the end time? Only in the end time did reality uncover the additional meaning the words have. Daniel had no knowledge of the Church, that it would become the true Temple of God after the abomination of the crucifixion made desolate the Temple of the Shekhina Glory of God (Dan. 9:24, 26; Mt. 23:37-39; 27:51. 1 Kings 19:11). He didn’t know Temple imagery and Priesthood were now properties of the Church.

Let’s consider this in reverse. The Word of God testifies Daniel had “an excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, interpreting of dreams, and shewing of hard sentences” (Dan. 5:12-16). So why was he confused about “the Daily” and the “abomination of desolation”? When prophesying about Antiochus nothing suggests he was confused then, so why in the end time prophecy are the words causing Daniel confusion? What unseals them in the end time? The only plausible answer to both questions, these words gained meaning unknown to Daniel that becomes known when end time events add new meaning to them.