- The Vatican, The Third Temple, And The Burdensome Stone
by SkyWatch Editor, https://www.skywatchtv.com/
As investigated by myself and Cris Putnam in our bestselling book Petrus Romanus, there is ample evidence to suggest that the Vatican has had a long-running interest in controlling Jerusalem and, by extension, the Temple Mount—with possibly the objective of a Third Temple.
Over the last ten years alone, surreptitious negotiations have included Netanyahu seeking to give David’s Tomb to the Vatican,[i] claims that the Vatican is hoarding Second Temple treasures until geopolitics allow for a rebuilt Temple under their control,[ii] and even efforts by the United States via Secretary of State John Kerry involving plans “for eastern Jerusalem that calls for an international administrative mandate to control holy sites in the area” including the Temple Mount. Kerry’s plan recommended a coalition under Vatican oversight with Muslim countries such as Turkey and Saudi Arabia.[iii]
The possible Vatican connection to a rebuilt Temple is intriguing when one considers Peter Goodgame’s convincing argument that the Roman prince seen in Daniel 9:27 who sets up the Abomination of Desolation is the False Prophet rather than the Antichrist.[iv] He cites Revelation 13:14, in which the False Prophet “deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live” (emphasis added), and Daniel 11:31, which prophecies, “And arms shall stand on his part, and they shall pollute the sanctuary of strength, and shall take away the daily sacrifice, and they shall place the abomination that maketh desolate” (boldface added; italics added). These passages clearly show it is the confederates of the Antichrist who set up the desolating image connected to a rebuilt Temple. Goodgame also argues that because Daniel refers to the Antichrist as a king (Hebrew melek) in 7:24, 8:23, and 11:21–35, it seems unlikely that he would call him a prince (Hebrew nagiyd) in 9:26–27. We can safely assume that he is Roman by the phrase, “And the people of the prince who is to come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary” (v. 26; boldface added), which necessarily refers to the Roman sacking of Jerusalem in AD 70. Goodgame’s exegesis and reasoning are sound and compelling.
In line with Daniel 9:27’s prediction of a covenant for one week, Goodgame argues that this infers that a pope will broker an agreement over Jerusalem.