The Temple and Elijah

0. Introduction

I shall argue that if the Messiah has not appeared before the destruction of the temple in 70 CE then he will never appear, and therefore this is evidence for Christianity against Rabbinic Judaism. On the Christian hypothesis, we would expect that Jesus of Nazareth would be a successful Messiah claimant who appears before the destruction of the temple, but on Rabbinic Judaism the absence of the Messiah and the temple jointly ought not to be expected. 

1. The Temple and Elijah

There are traditions which say the Jewish people must be in a period of mass heresy and apostasy when the Messiah arrives. It is recorded in Sotah 49b that Rav Eliezer said "the meeting place of the Sages will become a place of promiscuity" when the Messiah arrives. [Compare Sanhedrin 97a.] Rabbi Jochanan said, "The Son of David shall not come, until all be either just or all be unjust." (Sanhedrin 98a) The prophets foretold that a period of great apostasy among the Jews must occur when the Messiah is revealed and did not leave it as a conditional matter.

"Do not trust in a neighbor. Do not have confidence in a friend. From her who lies in your bosom guard your lips. For son treats father contemptuously, Daughter rises up against her mother, Daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; A man’s enemies are the men of his own household. But as for me, I will watch expectantly for the Lord; I will wait for the God of my salvation. My God will hear me." (Micah 7:5-7) 

Micah 7:6 is applied to the Messianic era in many places in Jewish tradition. [Sanhedrin 97a; Sotah 49b; Shir HaShirim Rabbah 2:13.] The book of Enoch (56:7) notably cites Micah 7:5-6 regarding the last days before the advent of the Son of Man and says "A man shall not recognize his brother, nor a son his mother, until there shall be a number of corpses from among them." The Messiah would arrive at a time of godlessness and apostasy, Hosea 2:2 prophesied, 

"Plead with your mother, plead— for she is not my wife, and I am not her husband— that she put away her whoring from her face, and her adultery from between her bosom."

The Midrash understands this passage to signify that Israel would be redeemed at its lowest point, as though God were saying, "when you descend to the lowest level, at that moment I will redeem you." (Midrash Tehillim 45:2) The late second temple period was filled with numerous Jewish factions and sects each with their own peculiar doctrines. The Gospels repeatedly detail incidents of extreme arrogance and apostasy among the sect of the Pharisees. The apostles argued that the Jewish rejection of Jesus was a fulfillment of Scripture rather than something which conflicted with it. Indeed, in places such as Psalm 118:22 it is prophesied that the Messiah would be rejected by his own people, "the stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." Again in Malachi 3:1-5 prophesied that the Messiah would cleanse the temple in Jerusalem when he arrived, this implies that the temple was corrupt due to the misconduct of the Levites. 

"I shall send my messenger, who shall prepare the way ahead of me. And suddenly, the Lord whom you seek shall arrive at his sanctuary—the messenger of the covenant in whom you delight," proclaims the Lord Almighty. "But who can endure the day of his arrival? Who shall withstand his appearance? For he shall be like a refiner's fire or a launderer's soap. He shall assume the role of a refiner and purifier of silver, cleansing the Levites like gold and silver, until they present offerings of righteousness to the Lord. Then shall the offerings of Judah and Jerusalem find favor with the Lord, as they did in days of old and former years. "So, I shall come to put you on trial. I shall swiftly testify against sorcerers, adulterers, and perjurers, as well as those who exploit laborers, oppress widows and orphans, and deprive foreigners among you of justice. Yet, despite these transgressions, you do not fear me," declares the Lord Almighty."

The Messenger mentioned in Malachi 3:1 is identified with the "Elijah" mentioned in Malachi 4:5 in Pirkei De-Rabbi Eliezer c. 29 and it is he who prepares the way for the arrival of the Messiah. According to this text the Messiah had to appear before the second temple was destroyed. How can Elijah and the Messiah arrive at the temple if there is no temple? If the Messiah did not come during the second temple, then there will be no Messiah and the word of God has failed because the temple has fallen. [Haggai 2:9 may indicate that the Messiah must come during the time of the Second Temple by saying that this greater glory indicates the glory of the Messiah.] How can the Messiah cleanse a temple which no longer exists? But the Lord Jesus preached in the temple frequently, and it is recorded that he cleansed the temple of merchants on several occasions. (Joh. 2:14-21; Matt. 21:12-13) He spent much of the final years of his ministry teaching in the temple, he said to the crowds, ""I sat daily with you teaching in the temple." (Matt. 26:55) At Matthew 11:11-15 Jesus claimed that John the Baptist filled the role of Elijah who was prophesied in Malachi 4:5. Some Rabbinic apologists complain that John the Baptist was not literally Elijah and therefore he could not have fulfilled Malachi 4:5. John the Baptist had a similar appearance to Elijah and came in his spirit and power. In a similar way Jeremiah 30:9 and Ezekiel 34:23 say that the Messiah himself will be David although no one thinks the Messiah will literally be David. The king Messiah will be a great ruler similar to David and because of the similarity between the two he is prophetically called David. Any objection or complaint about John the Baptist prophetically being Elijah can be applied to the Messiah being called David. The Aramaic Targum of Psalms 118:26 assumes that the Messiah must arrive while the temple still stands, 

"Blessed is the one who comes in the name of the word of the Lord," said the builders; "They bless you from the house of the sanctuary of the Lord," said David." 

The sanctuary has already been laid to waste and not even a single stone of it remains. If this scripture was not fulfilled when the crowds blessed Jesus as he rode into Jerusalem on a colt, then it will never be fulfilled because there is no such temple in our day. Targum Jonathan of Exod. 12:42 speaks of four holy nights, the nights of creation, the night of the Abrahamic covenant, the night of the first Passover and the night when Moses came out of the desert and concludes by saying, 

"As Moses came out from the midst of the desert; but the King Messiah comes from the midst of Rome."

Exactly on schedule, Jesus was born during the second temple period and during the time when the Roman Empire still existed. According to Daniel the Son of Man must be presented to the Ancient of Days while the Roman empire still exists. (Dan. 7:9-11) But the world powers or "beasts" of this period have all fallen or been replaced by modern governments or republics. His prophecy was specifically concerning the Roman empire which can be proven by the identification of the "beasts" given in chapter 8. Now, I shall say very little of the 70 weeks of years presented in Daniel chapter 9 because the interpretation of the passage is complicated, controversial, and seldom understood by the average Christian or Jew. To argue that the Messiah must arrive before the destruction of the second temple, one need only cite Malachi 3:1 as proof, but the prophecy of the 70 weeks recorded in Daniel chapter 9 might also be used. However, I would suggest that for apologetic purposes one should avoid arguing from complicated chronologies and calculations whenever possible. It would be far simpler to only refer to Malachi 3:1 and similar passages without recourse to calculating weeks of years. In short I shall say that Rashi says the 70 weeks span from 587 BC to 70 CE and correspond to the two destructions of the temple but this ignores the importance of the decree mentioned in Dan. 9:25 which marks the start of the 70 weeks. Further, these 70 weeks of years could not refer to Cyrus, because his decree does not refer to the "building of Jerusalem" (Dan. 9:25) but only to the restoration of the temple. (2Chron. 36:22, 23) Only the decree of Artaxerxes includes orders to rebuild the temple and the holy city and only this decree was successful. (Ezra 1:1-4; 5:13, 17; 6:3)