Temple construction: a question for Leolaia and the board's scholars

by behemot 22 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • behemot
    behemot

    A book that I'm reading (J. Alberto Soggin, "Israel in the Biblical Period. Institutions, Festivals, Ceremonies, Rituals", 2001), talking about the Jerusalem Temple, states that "certain authors have seen in the dates of the beginning and of the end of the construction works elements of the yearly cicle of the Cananean ba'al", but no bibliographic reference is given supporting the statement. What does he refer to? Can someone point me to sources of information on this matter? Thanks a lot. Look forward to your replies. Behemot

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    This may be only loosely related so I won't expound.

    But the final temple is spiritual. Christ at the second coming does not build another physical temple but the spiritual one, the one foreshadowed by the physical one.

    Having noted that, the rebuilding is related at the second coming for the 490 years which begins the first-coming temple construction in 455 BCE, the 1st of Cyrus, with the period of 1506-1996.

    That is, nobody questions 455 BCE to 36 CE as the 490 years relating to the first coming. Only 455 BCE, when it is assigned to the 1st of Cyrus gets connected with the rebuilding of the temple.

    If you count 490-year periods down to our day, which is 4 x 490 = 1960 + 36 CE you get another 490-year period ending in 1996 and beginning in 1506 AD. Thus to parallel the rebuilding and restoration of the temple from a spiritual standpoint, Martin Luther fulfills this reference. He became a monk around this time and, of course, started the Protestant Movement. So the Prostestant Movement was seen as the beginning of the rebuilding of the temple, which had become totally apostate via pagn Catholicism. Even so, the "temple in its right condition" which is the witnesses/Bible students would not be in place until the last 110 years of the last 1260 years. But, Martin Luther's advent in 1506 virtually assures that the temple organization would come out of a refinement of Prostestantism, which it did.

    The spiritual temple was recently completed so now the door is closed to the kingdom. Apparently all 1,440,000 members are accounted for (the 144K represents natural Jews and only the "root" of 10% of the whole number. Isa 6:13)

    If this is similar to Canaanite ritual it may be coincidental or mimical.

    JC

  • Nathan Natas
    Nathan Natas

    JCanon, aren't you Popeye the Sailor man? ...oh, I'm sorry, you're Jesus Christ returned. I keep getting those two mixed up.

  • Eyes Open
    Eyes Open

    And thus another thread is hijacked by the messiah.

    (If it wasn't so funny it would be annoying.)

  • JCanon
    JCanon
    And thus another thread is hijacked by the messiah.

    (If it wasn't so funny it would be annoying.)

    I have NOT hijacked this thread. My comment was short and "informative" and I'm not going to respond to Nathan in this thread who is the one who introduced an off-topic issue. This thread is not hijacked. This thread is about the temple construction and I was giving the JIOR perspective, to take or leave. I know a lot of people are watching to see the actual temple in Jerusalem be rebuilt to fulfill prophecy, but the last temple is a spiritual one. Just reflecting on that thought briefly. That's all. So DON'T comment on this comment. Wait until Leolaia comments. I have no further need to comment further. JC

  • Eyes Open
    Eyes Open

    So DON'T comment on this comment.

    May I enquire as to the consequences of my commenting on your comment on the Nathan Natas comment and my comment above? For example, will I face divine wrath at the hands of you and your heavenly father or anything major like that?

  • Awakened at Gilead
    Awakened at Gilead
    This thread is about the temple construction and I was giving the JIOR perspective, to take or leave.

    JC,

    I followed your logic much better on your other thread you started recently. (http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/10/156330/1.ashx)

    In this thread you lost me. Sounds like something Fred Franz could have written (although it's not too late to submit to the always inventive FDS.. the 1996 date could work out nicely)...

    BTW what is the JIOR perspective?

    [email protected]

  • behemot
    behemot

    ... still looking forward to a proper answer ...

    Behemot

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    ... still looking forward to a proper answer ... Behemot

    Sorry for the attempt to hijack your tread with their silliness. I did a quick search and there was "nothing" which is a clear indication that probably there is no easy link to pagan tradition. But what scholars might have focussed on is the similarity of the two pillars of the temple which has some pagan resonance (see below) in later Freemasonry traditions. Some might have thought the two pillars were based somewhat on pagan tradition...

    http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/images/members/15207.jpg

    But also it is possible the author is loosely linking Solomon's temple, not with pagan ritual but similar building constructions for that period in general, for instance this statement:

    Temple at Tell Tainat

    I t is abundantly clear that there was a powerful Phoenician influence in the construction of the temple. Therefore, the most reliable archaeological evidence concerning Solomon's temple can be determined from a comparative study of contemporary temples. The most interesting discovery was the sanctuary at Tell Tainat in Northern Syria. The interesting features of this structure is the rectangular shape and its division into three area. The Jerusalem temple contained the entrance hall, main hall and the Holy of Holies. The pillars are under the roof of the Syrian sanctuary which was 2/3 smaller than Solomon's temple was primarily a royal chapel attached to the palace, much as were the royal temples of Nineveh and Khorsabad. From 1 Kings 9:15 we find that Solomon also built the cities of Hazor, Megiddo, and Gezar. From the remains of a large building at Megiddo, samples of ashes were taken and analysed to be cedar, indicating that the super structure was built with a half timber type construction like Solomon's buildings. Lining the walls of buildings with wood was a very common practice in the Iron Age

    It is possible this could be what he is referring to. That is, the claim that Solomon's temple was similar and common to the construction of other buildings and temples of that period and thus the claim it might have been actually based on "pagan" design.

    As far as the cyclic festivals of Baal, there was a focus on the spring and winter solstice and that is not significant for the building of this temple, which began in the second month, etc. I believe if there were consistent similarities it would not have been difficult to actually find a commentary on it, but I didn't find anything except the above. In addition, the fact that Solomon became apostate and set up pagan places of polytheistic worship nearby suggests the Jewish temple was unique and in no way just a parody of what the Jews were borrowing from the pagan Canaanites. Instead, when they were influenced it was distinctly apart from the temple. If anything, Leolaia would know more specifics, but she hasn't weighed in yet that I can see.

    I do generally recall a comment in passing that some archaelogists have said the Jewish temple was of typical construction similar to those among the pagans but, even the reference above simply shows similarities in the actual construction methods and only loose similarities. But even so that doesn't mean it necessarily was based directly on those pagan temples.

    So maybe this comment is specific to some references he has and has been misinterpreted. You know, you can always write the author and ask him what he meant. Many times authors will oblige and give you some specific references if not cited in the book. But I saw no consistent or propagandistic discussions linking the temple rituals to those of Baal, specifically. In fact, just the opposite.

    JC

  • JCanon
    JCanon

    So DON'T comment on this comment.

    May I enquire as to the consequences of my commenting on your comment on the Nathan Natas comment and my comment above? For example, will I face divine wrath at the hands of you and your heavenly father or anything major like that?

    No. Don't comment further on this because it highjacks the thread!!! That's how threads are highjacked. The majority of the posts talking about issues other than what the topic is about. SO DON'T COMMENT FURTHER out of respect for the thread. Start a new topic of messiah bashing and let this topic remain about the temple. I'm not the one "highjacking" this thread but Nathan started it. He's to blame. My comments were pertinent to the topic. So I'm not going to comment further on any non-temple/Baal related issues and I kindly request you do not do so either. I will not reply to you further. JC

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit