Category Archives: Ministry And Outreach

Should Christians Provide Financial and Political Support for a New Jewish Temple?

Jesus’ enemies charged that He said He would destroy the temple (Mark 14:58; 15:29-30; Acts 6:14). This charge was false in the sense that He certainly led no political movement calling for the temple’s physical destruction, but it was true in another sense. His death on the cross brought an end to an old covenant and His resurrection initiated a new one.

Although Jesus never said that He would personally oversee the physical destruction of Herod’s temple, He made it clear that it was under God’s judgment (Matthew 23:38; Luke 13:35).1

Jesus claimed messianic authority to fulfill the old covenant, judge the temple, and replace it. During the last week of His life He in effect “signed his own death warrant” by dramatically interrupting temple sacrifices2 during the time Jerusalem was full of Passover pilgrims (Mark 11:15-18).3

The temple would be destroyed because it had become an idol, the central symbol of a violent nationalism that had nothing to do with God’s purposes.

One of the main purposes of Old Testament law was to make the people of Israel conscious of the great gap between their own weakness and corruption and the expectations of a holy God (Romans 5:12-20). Sacrifices in the temple were intended to make Israel conscious of her need for divine grace and forgiveness. They were not sufficient to atone for sin. They were sufficient only to point forward to the coming of the Messiah who would die for the sins of the world.

In a number of explicit passages written specifically to Hebrew Christian congregations, the epistle to the Hebrews declares how temple worship and sacrifices were rendered obsolete by the blood of Jesus Christ:

By that will we have been sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all. And every priest stands ministering daily and offering repeatedly the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins. But this Man, after He had offered one sacrifice for sins forever, sat down at the right hand of God, from that time waiting till His enemies are made His footstool. For by one offering He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified. But the Holy Spirit also witnesses to us (Heb 10:10-15 NKJV; also see 9:11-15; 10:4,15-18).

Atonement for sin was made once and for all through Jesus Christ’s perfect life and death. Only the infinite sacrifice of the Son of God could reconcile our natural and moral evils with a holy Creator (Luke 22:20; John 6:53; Romans 3:25; 1 Corinthians 10:16; Ephesians 2:13; Hebrews 9:14; 1 Peter 1:18-19).4 Because Jesus Christ was the supreme and sufficient sacrifice, the church, His body, became the new, living temple (2 Corinthians 6:16-17; Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Peter 2:5-7).

There are disagreements among premillennialists over the role of a physical temple in Jerusalem during the millennium. However, no Christian should disagree that restoration of blood sacrifices in a temple of unbelief would be an abomination. Blood sacrifices in a premillennial temple would certainly “trample the Son of God under foot, treat the blood of the covenant as an unholy thing, and insult the Spirit of grace.”5Tragically, religious Zionists have already initiated a process to build a new Jewish temple. So far the Israeli government hasn’t allowed it to happen. They have two main reasons. The first is that two of the most important Muslim structures in the world are located on the spot where the temple would have to be built, and their destruction would amount to an Israeli declaration of religious war on Islam (the entire Muslim world). The second reason is that most Orthodox Jewish scholars oppose the rebuilding of the temple before the coming of Messiah because they believe they will need supernatural instructions regarding exactly where and how it should be built.6

In spite of these perils and uncertainties, in 2001 the Israeli Supreme Court permitted a cornerstone for a temple to be symbolically laid. Meanwhile, religious Zionists have been proceeding with the preparation of temple furnishings and utensils as well as genealogical research to establish a “legitimate” new priesthood.Many thousands of Christians have seen presentations, both in Israel and North America, by Zionist groups seeking to restore the temple. Christian churches and media ministries have collected hundreds of millions of dollars for their cause.

Christian supporters of a new Jewish temple apparently seek to assist and hasten Christ’s return.7 In an age of weapons of mass destruction and total war, Christians and Jews in the 21st century are risking even more in trying to force God’s hand than were the Jewish Zealots of the first and second centuries.

Even apart from the disgrace it brings on the name of Jesus Christ, Christians should realize that supporting the construction of a third Jewish temple will not force God to act or bring the age to a close. The temple can be rebuilt, destroyed, and rebuilt again.

The hope of a premillennial rapture should offer no comfort to Christians who encourage violence by funding the rebuilding of the temple. Knowing how badly his disciples misinterpreted biblical prophecy concerning His coming, Jesus made it perfectly clear that we will not be able to predict when the endtime will unfold.

But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect (Matthew 24:43-44 NKJV; also see 25:10-13).

Many Christians in the past have mistakenly supported violence on the basis of a conviction that they were participating in endtime events.8Contemporary evangelicals have no reason to believe that God would not condemn such complicity in the violence of the age (Matthew 7:23), and allow them to reap the whirlwind (Hosea 8:7) they have sown.

  1. Lo, your house is left to you desolate.

    He threatens the destruction of the temple, and the dissolution of the whole frame of civil government. Though they were disfigured by irreligion, crimes, and every kind of infamy, yet they were so blinded by a foolish confidence in the temple, and its outward service, that they thought that God was bound to them; and this was the shield which they had always at hand: “What? Could God depart from that place which He has chosen to be His only habitation in the world? And since He dwells in the midst of us, we must one day be restored.” In short, they looked upon the temple as their invincible fortress, as if they dwelt in the bosom of God. But Christ maintains that it is in vain for them to boast of the presence of God, whom they had driven away by their crimes, and, by calling it their house (lo, your house is left to you), he indirectly intimates to them that it is no longer the house of God. The temple had indeed been built on the condition, that at the coming of Christ it would cease to be the abode and residence of Deity; but it would have remained as a remarkable demonstration of the continued grace of God, if its destruction had not been occasioned by the wickedness of the people. It was therefore a dreadful vengeance of God, that the place which Himself had so magnificently adorned was not only forsaken by Him, and ordered to be razed to the foundation, but consigned to the lowest infamy to the end of the world (Calvin’s Commentaries).

    Jesus’ predictions of the destruction of Jerusalem and its Temple are too many and varied to be dismissed as vaticinia ex eventu. Often they are expressed in Old Testament language which implies a typological use of the Old Testament closely related to what we have so far examined. . . .  The destruction of the Temple and capital of the nation . . . finds its types in the Old Testament history. They are now to be repeated on a scale more drastic even than the Old Testament catastrophes. The destruction of Jerusalem, 587 BC. In the words “your house is abandoned to you desolate” there is a probable allusion to Jeremiah 22.5 (LXX) (R. T. France, Jesus and the Old Testament, p. 71). Back To Article

  2. Without the Temple-tax, the regular daily sacrifices could not be supplied. Without the right money, individual worshippers could not purchase their sacrificial animals. Without animals, sacrifice could not be offered. Without sacrifice, the Temple had lost its whole raison d’etre. The fact that Jesus effected only a brief cessation of sacrifice fits perfectly with the idea of a symbolic action. He was not attempting a reform; he was symbolizing judgment. We may remind ourselves of the horror with which Jews contemplated the cessation of the regular sacrifices (Dan. 8:11f.; 11:31; 12:11; 1 Macc. 1:45f.; Jos. War 6:94f; mTaan. 4:6). Jesus’ action symbolized his belief that, in returning to Zion, YHWH would not after all take up residence in the Temple, legitimating its present administration and its place and function within the first-century Jewish symbolic world. Rather, as Josephus himself claims to have realized, the cessation of sacrifice meant that Israel’s god would use Roman Troops to execute upon the Temple the fate which its own impurity, not least its sanctioning of the ideology of national resistance, had brought upon it (Jos. War 6.96-110). The brief disruption which Jesus effected in the Temple’s normal business symbolized the destruction which would overtake the whole institution within a generation. . . . Jesus’ action in the Temple was intended as a dramatic symbol of its imminent destruction; that this is supported by the implicit context of Zechariah’s prophecy, and the quotations from Isaiah and Jeremiah and that Jesus’ specific actions of the overturning tables, forbidding the use of the Temple as a short-cut, and the cursing of the fig tree, were likewise all designed as prophetic and eschatological symbolism, indicating both the arrival of the kingdom and the doom of the city and Temple that refused it. The reasons for this total action are to be sought in Jesus’ agenda, and his critique of his contemporaries, which we have explored in earlier chapters. What he did in Jerusalem was completely consistent with what he had done and said throughout his public work (N. T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, pp.415-16). Back To Article
  3. “Virtually all the traditions, inside and outside the canonical gospels, which speak of Jesus and the Temple speak of its destruction. Mark’s fig-tree incident; Luke’s picture of Jesus weeping over Jerusalem; John’s saying about destruction and rebuilding; the synoptic traditions of the false witnesses and their accusation, and of the mocking at the foot of the cross; Thomas’ cryptic saying (‘I will destroy this house, and no-one will be able to rebuild it’); the charge in Acts that Jesus would destroy the Temple: all these speak clearly enough, not of cleansing or reform, but of destruction. I submit that these cannot all be retrojections, ‘prophecies’ after the event. Further, the destruction-theme is sufficiently unlike the early Christians’ practice of continuing to worship in the Temple for the motif to be regarded as simply a feature of early Christian theology.
    “All this, I suggest, creates a context within which the conclusion is irresistible: when Jesus came to Jerusalem, he symbolically and prophetically enacted judgment upon it—a judgment which, both before and after, he announced verbally as well as in action. The Temple, as the central symbol of the whole national life, was under divine threat, and, unless Israel repented, it would fall to the pagans. Furthermore, Jesus, by making this claim in this way, perceived himself to be not merely a prophet like Jeremiah, announcing the Temple’s doom, but the true king, who had the authority which both the Hasmonaeans and Herod had thought to claim. In acting the way he did, ‘he conjured up the nation’s most compelling traditions at a moment when receiver-competence was at its peak,’ i.e. when the lookers-on, Passover pilgrims with their hearts set on YHWH’s kingdom, would have been most likely to comprehend the multiple symbolic meanings of his action” (N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God, pp.416-17). Back To Article
  4. Jesus Christ was a human sacrifice, but not a sacrifice offered up by fallen mankind to God. Jesus offered himself freely as a sacrifice by God to God for mankind (John 3:16; Romans 8:32; 1 John 4:9). Back To Article
  5. “If we deliberately keep on sinning after we have received the knowledge of the truth, no sacrifice for sins is left, but only a fearful expectation of judgment and of raging fire that will consume the enemies of God. Anyone who rejected the law of Moses died without mercy on the testimony of two or three witnesses. How much more severely do you think a man deserves to be punished who has trampled the Son of God under foot, who has treated as an unholy thing the blood of the covenant that sanctified him, and who has insulted the Spirit of grace?” (Heb 10:26-29 NIV). Also see Hebrews 6:1-7.) Back To Article
  6. The Bible contains no instructions for the rebuilding of the temple, and the temple mentioned in Ezekiel is the temple that will be rebuilt during the millennial reign, not the temple that is implied in Revelation 11. (Some premillennial Bible students think the temple in Ezekiel’s vision should be taken in a symbolic, rather than a literal, sense.)

    In addition, most Jewish-Orthodox scholars reject any attempts to build the Temple before the coming of Messiah. This is because there are many doubts as to the exact location in which it is required to be built. For example, while measurements are given in cubits, there exists a controversy whether this unit of measurement equals approximately 1.5 feet or 2 feet. (For the most part, however, even those who advocate the 2-ft. interpretation do so only as a stringency, and accept the 1-1/2 ft. understanding as normative.) Without exact knowledge of the size of a cubit, the altar could not be built. Indeed, the Talmud recounts that the building of the second Temple was only possible under the direct prophetic guidance of Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. Without valid prophetic revelation, it would be impossible to rebuild the Temple, even if the mosques no longer occupied its location (Wikipedia). Back To Article

  7. One of the Jewish radicals, Gershon Salomon, stated at a Christian Zionist conference:“The Israeli Government must do it. We must have a war. There will be many nations against us but God will be our general. I am sure this is a test, that God is expecting us to move the Dome with no fear from other nations. The Messiah will not come by himself, we should bring him by fighting” (Sam Kiley, ‘The righteous will survive and the rest will perish,’ The Times, 13 December 1999, p.39). Back To Article
  8. See the ATQ article, How Often Have People Misapplied Prophecy? Back To Article
Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...

What Does Jesus’ Life Reveal About How to Treat Unbelievers?

Jesus’ entire adult life was characterized by a deep concern for the spiritual condition of the nonbeliever. He saw them as desperately lost, and His heart was broken because of that. His compassionate purpose for their well-being was deep-rooted, and He showed this concern specifically in the way He met them where they lived, fed them, taught them, and healed them (Matthew 9:9-11; Mark 1:33-34; 6:30-42; Luke 5:1-11).

The example Jesus set for us is to build relationships with people who don’t know Him. When we meet a person who has not yet experienced God’s saving grace, we are to have the heart of Jesus and extend a helping hand at their point of need. If they are thirsty, we can give them a cup of water; if they’re hungry, we can feed them (Matthew 25:35-40).

Let’s not forget that Jesus came to our rescue when we were lost. So now, out of gratitude and love, we can find opportunities to do what we can to help others who are separated from God. Isolating ourselves from sinners misses the point of sharing the good news of Jesus, and it feeds into a self-righteous attitude.

Nonbelievers are spiritually sick (like we were), and they need saving faith in Jesus. They need His love, forgiveness, mercy, and grace. And it’s important to remember that the only difference between a believer and a nonbeliever is the condition of the heart. He who has a redeemed heart should be broken over the one who has the sin-sick heart. Matthew 9:10-13 reads,

“While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew’s house, many tax collectors and ‘sinners’ came and ate with Him and His disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked His disciples, ‘Why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and “sinners”?’ On hearing this, Jesus said, ‘It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” For I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.’   ”

We won’t be much good to the spiritually sick, however, if we ignore our own spiritual health. Just like getting enough rest, exercise, and nutritional food will help build strong physical bodies, meditating on God’s Word, praying, and listening to God will strengthen our spiritual lives. It’s equally important to make sure our closest friends are Christians who encourage us in the faith. It matters who we spend most of our time with, because friends can either make us stronger or bring us down (1 Corinthians 15:33).

I think it’s clear that we, in countless ways and opportunities, can and should reach out to non-Christian people. We can show them love by offering them a meal, a job, or friendship, and most importantly, we can introduce them to Jesus, the Savior of our souls.

Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (4 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...

How Can I Serve Others Without Feeling Like a Doormat?

No one wants to be a doormat. But if we haven’t put healthy limits in place, we can easily end up feeling used up and stepped on.

Biblical service is not mindless, robot-like obedience to the demands of others. It is intentional and life-giving. The giver and receiver are better people because of the act of compassion. It cultivates unity, closeness, and goodness in others that moves relationships in a positive direction.

It doesn’t always work that way, though. Occasionally, other people won’t appreciate us or they’ll take advantage of our kindness. We can ignore some of these instances, but we shouldn’t close our eyes to a pattern of disrespect or abuse.

We should be honest and, out of love for ourselves and others, refuse to give in to selfish demands or egotistical attitudes. Let’s not mistake Jesus words about turning the other cheek (Matthew 5:39) to mean that we overlook sin. We should refuse to accept disrespectful or abusive treatment so that we can restore our dignity and the other person has hope for change through repentance (Romans 6; 1 Corinthians 5:1-5).

Both Jesus and the apostle Paul are known for standing up for what is right and resisting evil. Jesus didn’t passively stroll through the temple while it became a “den of robbers” (Matthew 21:12-13). Paul exercised his rights as a Roman citizen and asked for a public display of regret when he was illegally arrested without a trial (Acts 16:36-40). He also advised the Corinthian church to kick a man out of their congregation who was sleeping with his father’s wife! We can’t pretend that a pattern of serious sin won’t affect our ability to serve.

Jesus set limits on his service to others by paying attention to his own needs as well as the needs of others. He healed the sick and fed the hungry, but he also made sure he got the food, rest, and time with his heavenly Father he needed so that he would be healthy to care for others (John 4:5; Mark 11:12-13; 6:30-32).  We simply can’t ignore our own needs if we want to be available to help others. We must have physical nourishment, exercise, rest, relationship, and time for personal reflection on the Word of God. If we regularly neglect these areas as we serve others, we may begin to resent the very people we want to help.

Another way to limit the chances of becoming someone’s doormat is to keep in mind the scope of our talents, opportunities, and time that we’ve been given, and to seriously think twice about those things that do not fit into the unique purposes of our lives (1 Corinthians 12:1-31). Volunteering for things that you aren’t capable of or gifted for may not be a sensible stewardship of your time or resources. Find opportunities that accommodate the position in which God has placed you and that fit with the dreams and passions God has set on your heart. Performing only obligatory duties will drain us because they aren’t in line with who we were created to be.

And yet, we can’t base our service solely on how comfortable we feel. There are times when we feel the nudging of the Holy Spirit, asking us to do something completely out of our comfort zone. Often, the Lord is asking us to trust Him. On these occasions, pray fervently about it and ask God to confirm the direction. If you go ahead with a heart of gratitude and faith, the Lord will be delighted with you. He loves it when we trust Him.

Serving others involves personal sacrifice, but it is not without appropriate limits. We have physical requirements for life that we can’t ignore, and gifts and opportunities that distinguish us from the next person. But equally important is the disrespect or abuse from another person that may require us to limit our service.

 

Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (2 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...

How Important Is Good Personal Character to Effective Leadership?

Some people don’t think it is very important. Since leadership requires flexibility, some think that a person with high ideals and deep moral convictions will be less pragmatic or realistic than a person with fewer scruples.

In the short term it’s undeniable that unscrupulous people sometimes have an advantage. People often find personal accountability and a long-range vision less appealing than immediate advantages and an opportunity to fall in line behind a charismatic leader.1

The psalmist eloquently described the temporary success of the wicked ( Psalm 37:35; 73:3 ). Jesus also recognized the short-term advantages of the unprincipled ( Luke 16:8 ). But although unprincipled people in power may gain quick success, they and their followers always reap the consequences of their immorality and opportunism. The Old Testament writers vividly described the results of evil leadership ( Psalm 7:11-16; 9:15; 37:7-15 ; Proverbs 28:10; 29:6 ; Ecclesiastes 10:5-9 ), as did Jesus ( Matthew 6:23; 15:14; 23:15 ; Luke 6:39-40; 11:34 ).

In the long term, however, a person of integrity has the advantage. Good character may limit a person’s options at times, but wisdom flows from good character (In the long term, however, a person of integrity has the advantage. Good character may limit a person’s options at times, but wisdom flows from good character ( Job 28:28 ; Psalm 1:1-4; 111:10 ; Proverbs 3:3-4 ). Furthermore, a good person doesn’t have to be naive. Jesus told His disciples to be “as wise as serpents but gentle as doves.” Because they live as sheep in the midst of wolves ( Matthew 10:16 ), Christians need to be able to understand the mind of a predator (“wise as a serpent”), while remaining gentle and uncorrupted within (“harmless as a dove”). A truly effective leader — and especially a Christian leader — won’t be characterized by inflexibility but by his steady, underlying motivation ( Matthew 20:25-28; 23:8-12 ). Dedication to principle and genuine concern for others may on occasion be a short-term disadvantage, but in the long run it will attract loyal followers, create lasting success, and earn the blessing of God (Psalm 37:34 ; Isaiah 40:31 ; Galatians 6:9).

  1. This is why the people of Israel insisted on having a king, against the counsel of the prophet Samuel ( 1 Samuel 8:7-8,19-20 ). Back To Article
Did this answer your question?
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...