Israel Is A People : Not a Place

Jews are Not Israel : Israel is not "Jewish" - Talmudic Terrorists are "jewish" and jews are talmudic terrorists. Braindeadgoy - gentile - Zionazi Psychozoids are "Enablers" that enable talmudic terrorists to operate a criminal KABAL around the globe funded by goody twoshoes "Jewdeo/Christians - Oxymoronic - Psycho's like the Moron "W". - [http://www.israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/ISAAC-13.htm] -
"Israel's " - Next Temple
5-13-5 - [http://www.israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/StoneofDestiny.htm]

BETH EL IS THE CORRECT SITE FOR ISRAEL'S NEXT TEMPLE

(Appendix A, An Eight Part Peace Proposal for Greater Jerusalem)

The author of An Eight Part Peace Proposal for Greater Jerusalem notes that the tense situation along the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is a constant reminder of the urgent need for peace through better understanding rather than peace through sheer strength.

Ignorance of the Bible is behind the fevered notion of blowing up the Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa Mosque and then putting in their place the next Talmudic "Jewish" temple simply because the Temple Mount is truly the historic place where the first two - Nonjewish - temples were located.

Furthermore, the frequently repeated assertion that the Temple Mount with its Western Wall, or Wailing Wall, is the holiest place in Satanic talmudic Judaism is absolutely untrue. Nowhere in Torah (also called the Pentateuch, or the first five books of the Bible) is there any mention of Jerusalem let alone a temple anywhere in Jerusalem. And to a Talmudic Jew, the Torah isn't God's law and blueprint for all mankind's peaceful existence.

Only the plain truth can set us free: Israel's next temple belongs between Beth El and Hai, about 10 miles north of the old city of Jerusalem. This is where Abraham {who was not jewish} first called upon the Lord and made an altar to Him. (Genesis 12:8) And this is the place that Jacob later called "the house of God" and "the gate of heaven." (Genesis 28:17) This is also where the Almighty subsequently told Jacob that "Israel shall be thy name." (Genesis 35:10) Indeed, the Torah tells us this place called Beth El has been endued with a spiritual significance so sublime that it is beyond compare!

On the other hand, the story of how David came upon and bought the Temple Mount site in Jerusalem is from the Book of Chronicles, which, strictly speaking, is not a book of the Torah and therefore has less authority than a book of the Torah such as the Book of Genesis.

Note well that it was not until after the ancient Israelites had rejected the Almighty Himself as their King (I Samuel 8) and had set a man (Saul) to be king over themselves that their jealous Lord by and by put the idea of a temple into the head of Saul's successor, King David. (I Chronicles 17) Shortly afterwards, David's diabolical decision to take a census of the Israelites - a people foretold in Genesis to be numberless like the stars in the sky or the sands of the sea or the dust of the earth - again provoked the Almighty's long-lasting wrath.

Thus it was the Almighty's wrath that ultimately led David to the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite and it was the Almighty's wrath that caused David to buy this land for a temple site (I Chronicles 21), where his son Solomon was later to build the first temple. The discovery by David of the Temple Mount site, previously known as the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite, was part of the enactment of divine retribution against David and the Israelites.

This is an amazing but true fact recorded in Scripture.

Moreover, the entire chain of events that led David to this place, known then as the threshing floor of Ornan the Jebusite but now known as the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, was the direct result of a choice made by David at the behest of the prophet Gad (I Chronicles 21:11-13); this circumstance is not in accord with the positive command in Deuteronomy 12:5, to seek the habitation of the Almighty, a "place which the Lord your God shall choose."

Biblical scholars are naturally inclined to be skeptical about the future Beth El temple-site - if indeed they are aware of it at all - because they are conditioned to believe that the Temple Mount sitein Jerusalem is theologically as well as historically or archaeologically axiomatic and any attempt to gainsay such conventional wisdom must be the work of a crackpot, an eccentric or even Satan himself; indeed, they point to II Chronicles 7:1, the dedication of Solomon's temple, to clinch their point about the Temple Mount site:

Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the Lord filled the house.

Moreover, II Chronicles 7:12 is even more explicit:

And the Lord appeared to Solomon by night, and said unto him, I have heard thy prayer, and have chosen this place to myself for an house of sacrifice.

However, a caveat concerning Solomon's temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is included at the end of the Almighty's covenant with Solomon (II Chronicles 7:19-22) and it is reproduced here with the author's own emphasis added in italics:

But if ye turn away, and forsake my statutes and commandments, which I have set before you, and shall go and serve other gods, and worship them; Then will I pluck them up by the roots out of my land which I have given them; and this house, which I have sanctified for my name, will I cast out of my sight, and will make it to be a proverb and a byword among all nations. And this house, which is high, shall be an astonishment to every one that passeth by it; so that he shall say, Why hath the Lord done thus unto this land, and unto this house? And it shall be answered, Because they forsook the Lord God of their fathers, which brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, and laid hold on other gods, and worshiped them, and served them: therefore hath he brought all this evil upon them.

History, of course, shows us the doom that was prescribed not only for the first and second temples in Jerusalem, but also for the ten-tribed House of Israel which was carried away and made to disappear by the Assyrians when the first temple was still standing, and for the House of Judah which the Babylonians carried away but later, by the decree of the Persian King Cyrus, was allowed to return to Jerusalem and build the second temple, the remains of which are mistakenly revered by talmudic Jews throughout the world to this day.

It is also important to understand that The Holy Koran makes clear reference to the destruction of the first temple by Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. and of the second temple by Titus in 70 A.D. and the revelation concludes: "It may be that your Lord may yet show mercy unto you." (Bani Isra'il, or Sura 17, Ayat 4-8) These words are spoken to the Children of Israel! If only they would be guided by the Torah and only the Torah and realize their full potential in Beth-el! Unfortunately, as of the date of this writing, 7 March 1996, there is still no temple in Beth El, which still remains the headquarters for the military authority of what is left of the Israeli-occupied West Bank. Are these militant Zionists, whose "Iron Fist" tactics have been successfully countered by the Palestinians' intifada, really the descendants of Abraham, by whom "shall all families of the earth be blessed"? (Genesis 12:3) - [http://www.israelect.com/reference/Willie-Martin/was_index.html] -

Stubborn habits and old traditions die hard. For example, a Lubavitch Rabbi in New York City, Abraham Stone (770 Eastern Parkway, Brooklyn, New York 11213), wrote in a newspaper article published by The Jewish Press of 19 November 1993 (page 64) that the Beth El location cited above from Genesis 28:17 is in fact the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and that this scripture proves that the Temple Mount is where the third temple should be built! Stone acknowledges that this scripture is the authoritative source giving the right location for the temple, which is quite correct. But he insists that Beth El is the Temple Mount location in Jerusalem, which is an assertion that is simply not supported by Scripture! Indeed, Beth El is cited as early as Genesis 12, as pointed out above, well before any mention of Jerusalem in the Bible.

Beth El appears again and again in Genesis, whereas Jerusalem does not appear anywhere in the Torah (or first five books of the Bible)! In I Kings 12:25- 29, Jerusalem and Beth El are mentioned in the same context as two different place names, the latter being the place where the rebel King of Israel set up a golden calf so as to keep his subjects from returning to worship at the first temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem in the rival Kingdom of Judah. Clearly the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and Beth El are two different places, and Genesis 28:17 tells us, as even Rabbi Stone has already affirmed, Beth El is the place that the Almighty chose for his habitation!

Rabbi Stone took a supercilious tone in a telephone conversation on this all-important topic of the correct location for Israel's next temple and did not deign to reply to the author's follow-up letter on the same subject, in which he made the following additional points beyond those already expressed in his first letter to the rabbi:

First, David, in Psalm 48:2, seems to give special significance to the northern reaches of Jerusalem, where Beth El is, when he indited these words: "Beautiful for situation, the joy of the whole earth, is mount Zion, on the sides of the north, the city of the great King." A diplomatic approach to this subject may very well be that the greater metropolitan area of Jerusalem could include Beth El in the final peace agreement between the Arabs and the Israelis. The spiritual significance of Jerusalem the city will not be diminished a whit by recognition and acceptance of Beth El as the next temple site. In this regard it should also be noted that Ezekiel prophesied there would be among the portions finally allotted to the twelve tribes one separate portion comprising land for the sanctuary of the Lord, for the priests of the sanctuary, for "a profane place for the city, for dwelling, and for suburbs," and the remainder for the prince. (Ezekiel 48:7-22) Inasmuch as this extra portion contains a sacred place "for the sanctuary of the Lord" as well as "a profane place for the city, for dwelling, and for suburbs," it cannot be more clear that the sanctuary is not supposed to be located inside the city!

Second, Ezekiel, upon beholding from his vantage point on a high mountain the vision of the future temple, indicates that there was "as the frame of a city on the south," which must be old Jerusalem as the center of the new Jerusalem. (Ezekiel 40:2) Isn't it clear that if Jerusalem appeared just to the south of Ezekiel, then Ezekiel stood just to the north of Jerusalem? And isn't Beth El located just to the north of the old city of Jerusalem? Is it only a coincidence that Ezekiel, in his vision of the future temple, stood in or near Beth El, the very same place that Jacob called the "House of God and the Gate of Heaven" after the Almighty had begun to communicate to Jacob in a dream the spiritual significance of the place?

Rabbi Stone later retreated somewhat from his Beth El is Mount Moriah or his Beth El is the Temple Mount position when, in The Jewish Press of 1 December 1995 (page 9), he quoted from Rashi, the preeminent Biblical commentator who lived in the European diaspora from 1040 to 1105 A.D., that, with reference to the account of Jacob at Beth El in Genesis 28:17, "Mt. Moriah (the Temple Mount) was uprooted and was brought to the site where Jacob was lying." Unbeknownst to Moses himself not to mention modern day geologists and archaeologists, this is sheer nonsense that only compounds ignorance and promotes confusion on a truly vital question on which the peace of Jerusalem hinges and must therefore be totally rejected.

Whereas Jesus did say, "If ye have faith, and doubt not, ...if ye shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; it shall be done" (St. Matthew 21:21), so too is it true that there are none so deaf as those who will not hear. What a pity indeed, for a rabbi to turn away from such an important message enshrined in his very own Scripture! As Jesus said, "Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil." (St. Matthew 5:17)

That the Temple Mount in Jerusalem is associated with Divine retribution echoes throughout history. Beyond the aforementioned destruction of the first temple by the Babylonians and then of the second by the Romans pursuant to the Almighty's promise of punishment as expressed in chapter 26 of Leviticus and reiterated in the previously cited caveat of II Chronicles 7:19-22 right after Solomon's dedication of the first temple, the Evangelist Matthew (St. Matthew 24:1-2) records that the nonjew Jesus Christ himself put a curse on the temple in Jerusalem when, shortly before his arrest, he looked at the buildings of the temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem and told his apostles: [http://www.israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/COM-3.htm]

"See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down." If one were to take Jesus fully at His word as mankind fast approaches the twenty-first century and bears witness to the ever-unfolding progress in the technologies of modern warfare, one must acknowledge that this prophecy of total destruction has not yet been completely fulfilled despite the best efforts of the Jews and their Roman conquerors under Titus; for the Western Wall, being part of Herod's refurbishment of the second temple, was standing when Jesus uttered his malediction against "the buildings of the temple" and it is still standing today! Can it be that the remainder of this curse may be causeless and therefore will not come if there is a change of heart andpeople seek for and go to Beth El, the habitation of the Almighty that He Himself has chosen?

Centuries later, the Temple Mount in Jerusalem became the objective point of numerous military expeditions from Europe, which are known as the Crusades or Holy Crusades; the blood and money and toil expended for these cruel and crazy and futile ventures can only be viewed as the product of ignorance combined with misguided fervor or religious fanaticism. In these dark pages of history, the wrong temple-site became a most worthy goal of Europe's royalty, nobility and aristocracy, and even lent its name to the religious military order called the Knights Templars; thus their acquisition of the Temple Mount in Jerusalem became one of their justifications for war; indeed, it is noteworthy that even today the putative heir to the now defunct throne of the Hapsburgs, Otto von Hapsburg, still styles himself, among many other titles listed in the European edition of Who's Who, "King of Jerusalem"!
- [http://www.israelect.com/reference/WillieMartin/REWARD-1.htm] -
Throughout the remainder of the Middle Ages, ignorance of the correct site for the next Israelite temple remained pervasive. But then in the early seventeenth century, there appeared a glimmer of truth and of hope. John Milton, in his Paradise Lost (Book I, 400-405), clearly indicates two different temple locations - one right and one wrong - when he composed these inspired words about the false god Moloch:

"...the wisest heart Of Solomon he led by fraud to build His Temple right against the Temple of God On that opprobrious Hill, and made his Grove The pleasant Valley of Hinnom, Tophet thence And black Gehenna called, the Type of Hell."

Milton's genius clarifies God's commandment to Ezekiel, "...show the house to the house of Israel..." (Ezekiel 43:10); to obey such a command, the prophet must be able to distinguish between two vying temple-sites that are in close proximity to each other, as are Beth El and th