Not too many years ago, many of us attended a church with more people and in a fancier building. This church (the old Worldwide Church of God) was impressive and wealthy. Its magnificent headquarters was the envy of many outside of our group. It even had the number 1 rated religious telecast in the USA for a short while. Those are impressive accomplishments for a Church that only made up around 2/10this of 1% of the world's population.
Now we see a much smaller church. The headquarters of the Living Church of God, though fine, is not as magnificent as what most of us had become accustomed too. We do have a telecast, but most of the stations that broadcast it are the lessor watched "public access stations". Our membership is only about 1/27th of our former church.
Has God forsaken us or has this type of thing happened in the past? Are we the temple of God? Does a physical temple need to be rebuilt in Jerusalem prior to Jesus returning as some teach or does the necessary temple exist today?
This article will discuss the two temples of the Old Testament and some of their possible relevance to us now and in the future.
The first temple in the Old Testament was essentially a headquarters' work. David saw a need and wanted to build a temple to God, but was prevented from doing so (I Chr 28:2-3). He was allowed to use the wealth of Israel to collect building materials for it (I Chr 28: 14-19), though his son Solomon actually built it (I Kings 6:2). This temple was magnificent and it was completely covered with gold (I Kings 6:19-22).
The second Old Testament temple was different. First of all there was a call to find out which of the children of Israel would be faithful to help do the work of rebuilding it (Ezra 1:2-3). Secondly, those whose spirit God moved from among his people went to do the work (Ezra 1:5). This suggests that not all of God's people responded. Thirdly, this temple was not as impressive as the first one. When the foundations of the second temple were laid, those who had seen the magnificence of the first temple did not rejoice, they wept (Ezra 3:12a). This temple, though, seemed to be quite important to God.
It should be added that those who had not seen the former temple actually rejoiced when the new temple was begun (Ezra 3:12b).
There was a lull in construction due to opposition (Ezra 4). Even though King Darius the Mede eliminated the official opposition and admonished the people to be diligent to rebuild the temple (Ezra 6:3-12), they were not. Apparently many decided that it was not time to rebuild it (Hag 1:2); they seemed to feel that it was time to take care of themselves (Hag 1:4). God felt otherwise and had to tell the people to do the work of rebuilding the temple (Hag 1:5-8).
This building of this temple, although directed by headquarters, involved more of the people directly than did the first temple (Ezra 2) . Many who saw the old temple thought it was magnificent (NKJ "glorious") and that in comparison the new temple was as nothing (Hag 2:3).
But what did God say? God said,
"The glory of this latter temple shall be greater than the former..." (Hag 2:9).
Remember God does not think the same way we humans do; Is 55:8-9. This temple was not more glorious because it was as elaborate. It may have been more glorious because it represented the work of God under adversity. By the way, once this work was finished, God promised to provide blessings to his people (Hag 2:19).
It is obvious to all that this phase of the work of God appears smaller than it was before. We are aware that we do not have the personal and financial support of many who once said they would always support the work of God. But are we aware of the massive work we are actually a part of?
Now, more than in the 1960s,1970s, and 1980s, we need to be a part of the work of God. We still need to accept direction from headquarters, but we need to be a part of the work until Jesus returns; as Jesus said, "Blessed is that servant whom his master will find so doing when he comes" (Luke 12:43).
Being an active member of the Living Church of God means that we need to participate, similarly to the Israelites that answered the call to build the second temple. In some respects we have exceeded the accomplishments of our former church. We got our media plans and support materials produced quicker. Our response may be more effective. Although the actual number of telephone responses is lower, when you consider the actual number of Living Church of God members, our telecast response was actually several times as high as it was in the 1980s on a per member basis! This is even all the more remarkable when you consider that our number of commercial stations is only a small percentage of that of our former church. Also amazingly, the actual number of groups which meet each Sabbath is nearly 1/2 as high as when we had 27 times as many members!
LCG's Tomorrow's World magazine reaches more non-member subscribers on a per member basis as did our former magazine. We are also getting new members who were not familiar with the old work. To them this is the work of God, as it should be to us. Within four years LCG's Tomorrow's World magazine was sent to 104 countries and territories. It took decades for the Plain Truth to get to 100 countries. The LCG's Tomorrow's World magazine did it in less than 4 years.
Many Protestants with an interest in prophecy believe that the Bible teaches that a physical Jewish temple needs to be built before the end will be here.
Even though they believe it will happen after their “pre-tribulation rapture”, Dr. T. LaHaye & J. Jenkins go so far as to declare:
All prophecy teachers who interpret the Scriptures literally agree that a Jewish temple in Israel will be rebuilt…
That there will be a third temple is predicted by the prophet Daniel, the apostles Paul and John, and none other than Jesus Himself (LaHaye T, Jenkins J. Are We Living in the End Times? Tyndale House, Wheaton (IL), 1999, p. 122).
And while a Jewish temple might be rebuilt in Israel, the truth is that Jews can sacrifice on altars without a temple. The Prophet Daniel never recorded that a temple had to be rebuilt. There is simply no verse in Daniel that specifies any third Jewish temple.
Furthermore the “temple” Paul referred to in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is from the Greek word naos, which is a different Greek word than the one normally used elsewhere in the New Testament for the Jewish temple (which is hieron). While the Greek term hieron always refers to the Jewish temple in the New Testament, the term naos does not have to—and clearly often is not (e.g. John 2:21; 1 Corinthians 3:16-17; Revelation 21:22). Thus those who take the Greek literally realize that it is not necessary that it is a “Jewish temple in Israel” that the “man of sin” sits in.
Contrary to the assertions of Dr. T. LaHaye & J. Jenkins, neither John nor Jesus are referring to a Jewish temple (hieron) being rebuilt. While it is difficult to “prove a negative” I did a Greek word search of hieron in the New Testament and could find no verse that backed up the assertions of Dr. T. LaHaye & J. Jenkins in this area. In one of their books, however, they refer to Jesus’ statement in Matthew 24:15 which does not mention a temple and John’s writing in Revelation 11:1-2 (LaHaye & Jenkins, pp. 122-123) which uses the term naos—again the term naos is not exclusively used for Jewish temples. Thus those proponents of a physical temple needing to be rebuilt in Jerusalem prior to Christ's second coming are in error as the scriptures they cite as proof simply do NOT prove what they claim it does.
In the post-resurrection times, it is also doubtful that the expression “temple of God” would refer to a Jewish temple as the Apostle Paul told Christians
“that you are the temple of God” (1 Corinthians 3:16)
Thus 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4 apparently has to do with Christians and/or a place of true Christian worship. As further scriptural proof notice the following:
20 Jesus Christ Himself being the chief cornerstone, 21 in whom the whole building, being joined together, grows into a holy temple in the Lord, 22 in whom you also are being built together for a dwelling place of God in the Spirit (Ephesians 2:20-22).
The Greek term translated as “temple” above is naos. Unlike many in the Protestant world, the late Herbert W. Armstong understood that the temple Christ was to return to was represented by the church as he wrote:
...Christ's Second Coming as the spiritually GLORIFIED Christ, to his spiritual temple (the Church resurrected to spirit immortality) (Eph. 2:21-22) (Armstrong HW. Mystery of the Ages).
But, one may ask, does not the Bible teach that the Antichrist, the son of perdition, will sit in the temple? Let's look at the verses that discuss that 2 Thessalonians 2:3-4:
3 Let no one deceive you by any means; for that Day will not come unless the falling away comes first, and the man of sin is revealed, the son of perdition, 4 who opposes and exalts himself above all that is called God or that is worshiped, so that he sits as God in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.
Also mentioned previously, the Greek term translated as “temple” above in 2 Thessalonians 2:4 is also naos. It does not have to refer to a Jewish temple in Israel.
While it is possible that the son of perdition will physically sit in the headquarters' building of the Living Church of God after most (or all) of the Philadelphians among us flee to a place of protection, again a physical temple in Israel is not required for prophecy to be fulfilled.
Thus, those who insist that a Jewish temple must be built are insisting upon something that the Bible does not insist upon. An altar is fine for the physical sacrifices that Daniel refers to (more information on what Daniel teaches can be found in the article Who is the King of the North?).
Until Solomon built the first temple, the Jews sacrificed on altars. David, Solomon's father, for example sacrificed on an altar (2 Samuel 24:25), as did Aaron and his descendants (Exodus 20:24; Leviticus 1:10-11).
There is nothing in the Bible (certain non-biblical Jewish traditions notwithstanding) that states that sacrifices can only take place if a temple is built. And the New Testament supports the idea that the temple of God has to do with Christians (1 Corinthians 3:16), not simply the Jewish peoples.
So what do we learn about the relevance of the two temples? We learned that even in the Old Testament there was a physically glorious work which was replaced by a spiritually glorious work. We see that it was harder for those who saw the previous temple to be content when they saw the new temple. We have also seen that those who had not seen the former, were grateful to see the latter.
Isn't that what is happening now? Those who saw the our old work are somewhat disappointed by the new work in terms of size. But remember that God's thoughts are not are thoughts, nor his ways our ways.
The temple today is not an Israeli one. The work now is spiritual--although it does have a physical location, which might be considered as a temple. But like the new temple in Haggai's day, it is not as physically attractive as the previous ones. However, since God does not view things the same way as humans do, it is more glorious in His sight.
Perhaps Haggai 2:9 is beginning to come to pass now that "The glory of this latter temple shall be greater than the former." We can all thank God for that.B. Thiel. The Temple and the Work. www.cogwriter.com (c) 1998/2006/2008.