Do Protestants believe that the Temple will get rebuilt?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 504Katrin
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
KP3243 said:
If the Romans brought the Temple treasures to Rome, why would they have given it to the Christians? We were persecuted and tortured for another 250 years after the Temple fell so I am completely lost as to why people believe that the Temple treasures are stored in the Vatican today or believe that the Temple treasures still exist. The Romans we notorious for destroying Christian churches, art, sculpture and replacing it or forcing Christians to worship the Roman pagan gods, so I personally find it unlikely that the Romans kept the Temple treasure or kept them in intact for even a little while let alone for another 250 years and all of a sudden became generous and gave it to the Christians. Also, the Vatican that exists today wasn’t even constructed until the 1500’s and finally completed until the 1600s before that, it was a church on a large plain and during the Roman persecution we hid in the Catacombs and worshiped in people’s houses for a very long time so there was no room for a large Golden Menorah and frankly our Early Christians brothers and sisters would have associated something like the Golden Menorah with the Old Covenant, our lamp stands are completely different, they are six individual candles during a high mass with the 7th being Jesus in the Tabernacle or the priest acting in Persona Christi during the sacrificial offering.
Click to expand...
I would have to respectfully disagree here. And also, even though your lamp stands are completely different, it’s probably not so that the Menorah didn’t mean anything and especially to the early Christians, as some could probably still identify somewhat with their origin. It’s for everyone to see that the Arch of Titus shows a menorah, and why should the Romans destroy the symbol of their victory out of all things. It’s very possible that the Roman Emporar kept at least some of the Temple treassures that were “dearest” (:banghead:) to him and sold everything else so that he had money to go to war and build Rome. At that time, the Lateran Palace already stood. It’s the palace where the Popes later resided until the Vatikan was build. It’s possible that the treassures went from there to the Vatikan, as the Laterani family later lost their property to Emporor Constantine who gave it to? the Catholic Church.
It’s also possible that Pope Linus (the 2nd pope) who lived at that time and who was pope from 68 to 79 CE bought it or aquired it somehow. There’re many possiblities, at least I see more possibilities than just the one you give which says that the Romans destroyed that treassure.

Last year the Vatikan had an exhibition called “Lux in Areana” where the vatican’s secret archive partly revealed itself. They have a picture of Jesus of Nazareth they venerate that an angel is supposed to have painted, and which is said to have been property of the Evangelist Marcus ca. 2000 years ago. So how did this picture survive some 2000 years and become property of the Vatikan if it’s so likely that things Christian and Jewish from Temple time were destroyed by the Romans?
 
504Katrin said:
I would have to respectfully disagree here. And also, even though your lamp stands are completely different, it’s probably not so that the Menorah didn’t mean anything and especially to the early Christians, as some could probably still identify somewhat with their origin. It’s for everyone to see that the Arch of Titus shows a menorah, and why should the Romans destroy the symbol of their victory out of all things. It’s very possible that the Roman Emporar kept at least some of the Temple treassures that were “dearest” (:banghead:) to him and sold everything else so that he had money to go to war and build Rome. At that time, the Lateran Palace already stood. It’s the palace where the Popes later resided until the Vatikan was build. It’s possible that the treassures went from there to the Vatikan, as the Laterani family later lost their property to Emporor Constantine who gave it to? the Catholic Church.
It’s also possible that Pope Linus (the 2nd pope) who lived at that time and who was pope from 68 to 79 CE bought it or aquired it somehow. There’re many possiblities, at least I see more possibilities than just the one you give which says that the Romans destroyed that treassure.

Last year the Vatikan had an exhibition called “Lux in Areana” where the vatican’s secret archive partly revealed itself. They have a picture of Jesus of Nazareth they venerate that an angel is supposed to have painted, and which is said to have been property of the Evangelist Marcus ca. 2000 years ago. So how did this picture survive some 2000 years and become property of the Vatikan if it’s so likely that things Christian and Jewish from Temple time were destroyed by the Romans?
Click to expand...
The Basilica of Saint John Lateran wasn’t built until 324 AD, Lateran Palace belonged to Laterani Family who served as administrators to Roman Emperors, it wasn’t given to the Christians until the reign of Constantine in the 4th century and it was destroyed by a fire in the 10th century and it was rebuilt and then altered to what we see now in the 16th Century. I don’t think you really understand how persecuted Christian were,for the first 300 years of Christainity.Every Pope was martyred for the first 300 years and we hid in Catacombs -----I will defer you to the Prophet Daniel chapter 7: 23-28.The Romans constantly took any wealth or anything of value we had. Poor Saint Lawerance was cooked to death because when the Romans wanted the Church’s wealth he showed them the poor whom he gave whatever wealth we had and the Roman’s find it at all amusing. Also, you show know the only thing the Early Christians in Rome were absolutely adamant about keeping and preserving were the remains of the Apostle Peter. After discovering Saint Peter’s remains in the 1940s, scientists discovered they had been moved around several times and VERY carefully hidden and not hidden in a tomb like we would assume, they hid them inside an archway with graffiti all over it and it was by accident that we even found them. The same can be said for Saint Paul’s remains as they are the two wittnesses spoken about in the Book of Revelation. It kind of scared the universal Church to find out that Jesus was speaking both in transcendent and literal terms when he said to Peter upon this rock I will build my Church. Just because the Arch of Titus which has nothing to do with Christians, shows the Romans looting the Temple Treasure it is a serious stretch to assume they are still even intact and that the Vatican has them now and again, why would the Early Christians want them they werent dying to perserve the Old Covenant which denied Christ or even where they had places for these relics and I still don’t see why the Romans would keep them, they literally hated both Jews and Christians.The most likely thing is that they were melted down and used for something else, which I know would be heartbreaking for all Jewish people. The only thing I can think of that we took after Rome fell, were the doors of the Roman forum where the Roman Senate would meet to symbolize the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophesy and that Jesus is the true ruler of the world and His Kingdom will have no end.
 

Last year the Vatikan had an exhibition called “Lux in Areana” where the vatican’s secret archive partly revealed itself. They have a picture of Jesus of Nazareth they venerate that an angel is supposed to have painted, and which is said to have been property of the Evangelist Marcus ca. 2000 years ago. So how did this picture survive some 2000 years and become property of the Vatikan if it’s so likely that things Christian and Jewish from Temple time were destroyed by the Romans?​

If it was a painting painted by an angel and belonged to Saint Mark would be significant to us and should be venerated, Christians wouldn’t venerate Temple treasure. The painting of Jesus belonging to Saint Mark would be as signifant as the Miraculous painting of Our Lady of Good Council that was dropped in by a cloud in 1467 on Saint Mark’s Feast day, April 26 or Our Lady of Guadalupe that showed up on the tilma of Juan Diego. Interesting to note, both miraculous paintings, and all eyewitness to Marian apparitions, depict Jesus’ mother Mary, who we refer to the Ark of the New and Eternal Covenant always dressed like a First Century Jewish woman despite her ethnicity sometimes being the same as to whom she was appearing to which was the case of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
 
KP3243 said:
The Basilica of Saint John Lateran wasn’t built until 324 AD, Lateran Palace belonged to Laterani Family who served as administrators to Roman Emperors, it wasn’t given to the Christians until the reign of Constantine in the 4th century and it was destroyed by a fire in the 10th century and it was rebuilt and then altered to what we see now in the 16th Century.
Click to expand...
The Lateran family has a long line of genealogy that you can look up everywhere. They had several properties around Rome one of them which became the Lateran palace and for generations they were Consuls, starting at around 60 AD. It’s possible that this family kept Temple treassures and that they got from there to the Palace and to the Vatikan later. But this is just one possiblity of many. It could also be possible that the Emperor kept Temple treassure, or parts of it. It’s unlikely in my opinion that all of it got destroyed. I concur that the Vatikan or Christianity is interested in Jewish treassures. Chosen Jewish scholars were allowed to view Jewish artefacts, books and manuscripts. A couple of years ago they let some Jewish scholars view there scripture, as they let them borrow the Maimonides book, which is kept in the Vatikan. The Vatikan has “the largest repository of ancient Hebrew and medieval Hebrew manuscripts in the world,” according to one of these scholars who were allowed to view it, and I don’t question his credibility. They are also said to have an acient Torah scroll.
KP3243 said:
I don’t think you really understand how persecuted Christian were,for the first 300 years of Christainity.Every Pope was martyred for the first 300 years and we hid in Catacombs -----I will defer you to the Prophet Daniel chapter 7: 23-28.The Romans constantly took any wealth or anything of value we had. Poor Saint Lawerance was cooked to death because when the Romans wanted the Church’s wealth he showed them the poor whom he gave whatever wealth we had and the Roman’s find it at all amusing. Also, you show know the only thing the Early Christians in Rome were absolutely adamant about keeping and preserving were the remains of the Apostle Peter. After discovering Saint Peter’s remains in the 1940s, scientists discovered they had been moved around several times and VERY carefully hidden and not hidden in a tomb like we would assume, they hid them inside an archway with graffiti all over it and it was by accident that we even found them. The same can be said for Saint Paul’s remains as they are the two wittnesses spoken about in the Book of Revelation. It kind of scared the universal Church to find out that Jesus was speaking both in transcendent and literal terms when he said to Peter upon this rock I will build my Church. Just because the Arch of Titus which has nothing to do with Christians, shows the Romans looting the Temple Treasure it is a serious stretch to assume they are still even intact and that the Vatican has them now and again, why would the Early Christians want them they werent dying to perserve the Old Covenant which denied Christ or even where they had places for these relics and I still don’t see why the Romans would keep them, they literally hated both Jews and Christians.The most likely thing is that they were melted down and used for something else, which I know would be heartbreaking for all Jewish people. The only thing I can think of that we took after Rome fell, were the doors of the Roman forum where the Roman Senate would meet to symbolize the fulfillment of Daniel’s prophesy and that Jesus is the true ruler of the world and His Kingdom will have no end.
Click to expand...
It’s not that I didn’t see that Christians were prosecuted, it’s just that I don’t see a link between their prosecution and the survival of Temple property. If it was (and I’m sure it was) kept by the Romans until Constanine and then given to the Church I find no argument as to why prosecution played a role here.
 
504Katrin said:
The Lateran family has a long line of genealogy that you can look up everywhere. They had several properties around Rome one of them which became the Lateran palace and for generations they were Consuls, starting at around 60 AD. It’s possible that this family kept Temple treassures and that they got from there to the Palace and to the Vatikan later. But this is just one possiblity of many. It could also be possible that the Emperor kept Temple treassure, or parts of it. It’s unlikely in my opinion that all of it got destroyed. I concur that the Vatikan or Christianity is interested in Jewish treassures. Chosen Jewish scholars were allowed to view Jewish artefacts, books and manuscripts. A couple of years ago they let some Jewish scholars view there scripture, as they let them borrow the Maimonides book, which is kept in the Vatikan. The Vatikan has “the largest repository of ancient Hebrew and medieval Hebrew manuscripts in the world,” according to one of these scholars who were allowed to view it, and I don’t question his credibility. They are also said to have an acient Torah scroll.

It’s not that I didn’t see that Christians were prosecuted, it’s just that I don’t see a link between their prosecution and the survival of Temple property. If it was (and I’m sure it was) kept by the Romans until Constanine and then given to the Church I find no argument as to why prosecution played a role here.
Click to expand...
I have no doubt we have an insanely large amount of ancient Hebrew and Koine Greek Jewish manuscripts because the Church complied the Jewish scripture and the Christian scripture into one book and created the Holy Bible, they couldn’t afford to have it wrong!!! We also have Saint Jerome’s notes as he was the scholar tasked translate scripture and created the Latin Vulgate. I believe Saint Jerome had to have an older Jewish scholar translate the Book of Tobit because it was in Aramaic and he didn’t know the language.

So your premise of the Temple treasure it that was taken to Rome, kept intact by Imperial Rome for 250 years then was given to the Christians by Constantine? You might want to ask yourself why the Latin Rite or Roman Catholic Church doesn’t recognize Constantine as a Saint and the Orthodox Christian Churches and the Eastern Catholic Maronite Churches do. Constantine tried to do something that he shouldn’t have and if Temple Treasure was kept intact for all 250 years after the Temple fell, it would have most likely made its way to Constantinople where Constantine moved the capital of Rome and order a mega Church to be built, which Emperor Justinian who ended up building the mega Church was to have said that he wanted it to rival Solomon’s Temple.
 
I am still so confused to the certainty that she has that the Romans brought the Temple treasure back to Rome and kept it intact and never destroyed it or turned into something else. Rome was exceptionally good at eliminating any threats to the Empire, destroying the Temple and bringing its contents back to Rome would have caused an uprising of Jews which had already been expelled from Rome two previous times and the third under Claudius is mentioned in Acts 18:2.
 
KP3243 said:
I am still so confused to the certainty that she has that the Romans brought the Temple treasure back to Rome and kept it intact and never destroyed it or turned into something else. Rome was exceptionally good at eliminating any threats to the Empire, destroying the Temple and bringing its contents back to Rome would have caused an uprising of Jews which had already been expelled from Rome two previous times and the third under Claudius is mentioned in Acts 18:2.
Click to expand...
You won’t convince me otherwise and my opinion is set, and so is yours. It really makes no sense to argue whether they have it or not. We can speculate all we want and won’t be able to prove our points. But because you asked let me tell you why I’m so convinced. I believe that they have it because who in their right mind would even engrave the menorah on their arch of triumph only to destroy it later. They destroyed all of Jerusalem and surrounding areas. Jerusalem was flat. They took their war loot with them I believe and the church accquired it later.
 
504Katrin said:
You won’t convince me otherwise and my opinion is set, and so is yours. It really makes no sense to argue whether they have it or not. We can speculate all we want and won’t be able to prove our points. But because you asked let me tell you why I’m so convinced. I believe that they have it because who in their right mind would even engrave the menorah on their arch of triumph only to destroy it later. They destroyed all of Jerusalem and surrounding areas. Jerusalem was flat. They took their war loot with them I believe and the church accquired it later.
Click to expand...
They put the menorah and looting of the Temple treasure in the Arch of Titus so people would remember his victory over Jerusalem. Outside of Judaism no one would have cared about keeping the Temple treasure intact. Most people agree that the Temple treasure was sold to build the Colosseum, when was the Temple destroyed 70 AD, when was construction of the Colosseum started, 70 AD. Stop blaming the Catholic Church when you have no proof that the Vatican has it or that the early Christians were ever given it.
 
KP3243 said:
They put the menorah and looting of the Temple treasure in the Arch of Titus so people would remember his victory over Jerusalem. Outside of Judaism no one would have cared about keeping the Temple treasure intact. Most people agree that the Temple treasure was sold to build the Colosseum, when was the Temple destroyed 70 AD, when was construction of the Colosseum started, 70 AD. Stop blaming the Catholic Church when you have no proof that the Vatican has it or that the early Christians were ever given it.
Click to expand...
well I’m very sorry then that I presponded to his question:
KP3243 said:
I am still so confused to the certainty that she has that the Romans brought the Temple treasure back to Rome and kept it intact
Click to expand...
as this was a great thread so far.

Please keep it friendly. I have an opinion, too, not just you. Don’t ask for an explanation if you’re trying to then compare me to “medieval Christians blaming Jews for various naughty events in history”.
 
504Katrin said:
well I’m very sorry then that I presponded to his question:

as this was a great thread so far.

Please keep it friendly. I have an opinion, too, not just you. Don’t ask for an explanation if you’re trying to then compare me to “medieval Christians blaming Jews for various naughty events in history”.
Click to expand...
All I know is that this is starting to scare me because it is starting to sound like the Golden Calf.
 
504Katrin said:
Arriving at this point, this discussion definately ended for me here now.
Click to expand...
The golden menorah and the rest of the Temple treasure isn’t what made the Temple holy, the presence of God is what made the Temple holy.
 
Perhaps there is some misunderstanding Christians are told to have detachment from man made earthly things especially things of significant value because those things tend to re place God and our focus should only be on God. So when someone accuses the Church of stealing their treasure and insists the guy who we believe God has chosen to be the earthly shepard of His Church is lying about it and is purposely misleading a group of people we look to as our brothers and sisters and this same person views this as a theft and coverup and a typical response from Catholics despite the fact that they provide no substantial proof that we have these items and ignore the fact there is no record of Catholics having them, it comes off like that these items mean more than the possible sin you might be committing by accusing people of stealing and lying and nothing is worth breaking a Commandment of God and offending Him.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top