The result is true in general.
We may assume a counterexample is given in the form of a domain $R$ satisfying the second property but with nontrivial Jacobson radical, i.e. the closed points of Spec $R$ are not dense. Let D be an affine open neighborhood of $(0)$ in Spec $R$ which contains no closed points. Since D is affine, there exists some $x\in$ D which is closed in D. That is,
$\overline{\lbrace x\rbrace}\setminus x\subset\text{Spec }R\setminus D$.
Since $D$ is open, this implies
$x\not\in \overline{\overline{\lbrace x\rbrace}\setminus x}$,
but this contradicts the requirements of the second property.
ADDED: here is a proof of the statement you need (namely the square free monomial ideal $I$ is a intersection of primes generated by subsets of parameters) without using the modularity property. We will use induction on $N=$ the total numbers of times the parameters appear in the generators of $I$. For example if $I=(xy, xz)$ then $N=4$. The statement is obvious if $N=1$.
Suppose $I$ has a generator (say $f_1$) which involves at least $2$ parameters. Pick one of these parameters, say $x$ and WLOG, we can assume $I=(f_1,\cdots, f_n, g_1,\cdots,g_l) $ such that $x|f_i$ for each $i$ but $x$ does not divide any of the $g_j$s. Let $F_i=f_i/x$. We claim that:
$$ I = (I,x) \cap (I,F_1)$$
If the claim is true, we are done by applying the induction hypothesis to $(I,x)$ and $(I,F_1)$. One containment is obvious, for the other one we need to show if $xu \in (I,F_1)$ then $xu\in I$.
Write $$xu = f_2x_2 + \cdots f_nx_n + \sum g_jy_j + F_1x_1$$ which implies
$$x(u- F_2x_2 +\cdots F_nx_n) \in (g_1,\cdots, g_l, F_1) = I' $$
$I'$ has minimal generators which do not contain $x$. By induction, $I'$ is an intersection of primes generated by other parameters, so $x$ is a NZD on $R/I'$. So $(u- F_2x_2 +\cdots F_nx_n) \in I'$, and therefore $xu \in I$, as desired.
REMARK: note that for this proof to work, you only need that all subsets of the sequence (not necessarily parameters) generate prime ideals. I guess it fits with your other question.
So from the comments I will take your question as proving $J\cap (K+L) = J\cap K + J \cap L$ for parameter ideals (by which I mean ideals generated by subsets of a fixed regular s.o.p).
It will suffice to understand $I\cap J$ for two such ideals. To be precise, let $g(I)$ be the set of s.o.p generators of $I$. Let $P$ be the ideal generated by the intersection of $g(I),g(J)$, and $I', J'$ generated by $g(I)-g(P), g(J)-g(P)$. Then we need to show:
$$I \cap J = P + I'J' $$
Since $R/P$ is still regular we can kill $P$ and assume that $g(I), g(J)$ are disjoint, and we have to prove $I \cap J = IJ$. This should be an easy exercise, but a slick and very general way is invoking Tor (which shows that this is even true for $I,J$ generated by parts of a fixed regular sequence).
Best Answer
No. What abx said is exactly correct.
Consider the ring of polynomials in countably many variables over $\mathbb Q$. Consider a surjective homomorphism to the localization of $\mathbb Q[x]$ at $x=0$. The kernel is prime, but is not an intersection of maximal ideals, so the ring is not Jacobson.
However, the Jacobson radical is the zero ideal, which is the nilradical. Indeed, any nonzero element of this ring is a polynomial in finitely many variables. Take a $\mathbb Q$-rational point in affine space that is not a solution to that polynomial equation, and assign those variables to the coordinates of that point. Then assign the other variables to $0$. This gives a homomorphism to $\mathbb Q$ where the polynomial is nonzero, hence a maximal ideal that does not contain that element.