Ezekiel 40- is prophecy, and is of God's 3rd temple only
- Thread starter robert derrick
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
The old has gone. Hello! Scripture describes the old covenant sacrificial system as “that which is done away” (2 Corinthians 3:11) and “that which is abolished” (2 Corinthians 3:13). It makes clear: “the old testament … vail is done away in Christ" (2 Corinthians 3:14). Hebrews 10:9 confirms: “He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.” Hebrews 10:2 confirms they “ceased to be offered.”
You want us to move from the realization back to the shadow.
You want us to move from the perfect back to the imperfect.
You want us to move from the all-sufficient back to the inadequate.
You want us to move from the spiritual back to the physical.
You want us to move from the internal back to the external.
You want us to move from the supernatural back to the natural.
You want us to move from the eternal back to the temporary.
You want us to move from the heavenly back to the earthly.
You want us to move from the international back to the national.
You want us to move from the unconditional back to the conditional.
The problem here is that Jerem 30 is talking of the governors, that will be promoted from among the people, which you rightly point out will occur.
But the Lord Himself first enters His house, to sanctify His throne with His glory in Ezek 43. He then only allows certain ones to enter and draw near to Him, whether Zadok priests, or the princes and governors that follow.
To remove this fact from prophecy of His Millennial temple, is to reject His earthly Millennium altogether.
The amils say He will not personally on earth, judge and rule over the nations of earth.
No one is denying personal visits from Jesus today. We are talking about during His Millennium in His palace.
And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:
Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
The King will be Priest upon His throne. His Millennium is that also of a priesthood on earth, with priests to draw near and minister to Him for the people.
They will be them of Zadock.
Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.
The King will be Priest upon His throne. His Millennium is that also of a priesthood on earth, with priests to draw near and minister to Him for the people.
They will be them of Zadock.
Do you even recognize the covenant under which this promise was made under and the ancient context of the matter? Do you even accept that the new covenant superseded the old? Do these absolutes even matter to you? Or are you so besotted by the old arrangement that you cannot let it go? You are obviously unable to enter into the bliss of the new better eternal covenant where Christ abolished the old ceremonial system forever.
Hebrews 9:8-11 says, "while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation. But Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building"
The fact is: the old covenant and all its trappings are gone forever. The blood sacrifices simply pointed forward to Christ! All of the sacrifices, ceremonies, and methods of worship, which related to the law of commandments in the temple, were mere shadows of the reality that God provided in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ coming. These old covenant ordinances could never satisfactorily fulfil the eternal plan of God for mankind. This is seen in the fact that Jesus abolished these through His work on the cross. Everything was accomplished through Jesus' death. These Old Testament rites simply served as a shadow of Christ and His real and final sacrifice. All of these types came to an end at Calvary when the ancient covenant was completely fulfilled. The New Testament makes it very plain that the old covenant, including its temple ritual and its priesthood, pointed to a greater reality in Christ.
The Hebrew writer is constantly pointing the Jews away from the now worthless abolished old arrangement and towards Christ who is the fulfilment. Once the reality and substance came the type and shadow were rendered useless. Christ is the substance, the true and the real. Colossians 2:16-17 confirms: “Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of an holyday, or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ.”
Hebrews makes it clear that the Old Testament sacrifices were a shadow of “good things to come” not ‘a millennial memorial of things that have already been’ as Premil requires.
By their very nature they looked forward to the cross in the old covenant.
To bring back the old covenant is to undermine the new covenant reality. I am suggesting that your location and interpretation of Ezekiel is in error and cannot be located after the cross that abolished sin offerings.
Christ has removed the whole purpose of animal sacrifices. They were simply a signpost to the cross. Hebrews 10:1-2 makes it perfectly clear, “For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.”
Calvary completely finished the Old Testament shadow and type. That is why there is no more sacrifice for sin. I find your belief extraordinary. Honestly! This belief should not be allowed on an evangelical site. It is a direct assault upon the cross. It undermines the finished work of Christ. It abrogates the new covenant.
Notably, there are no so-called ‘millennial memorial sacrifices’ mentioned or inferred anywhere in the New Testament. There are none mentioned in Revelation 20 – the supposed foundational proof text for the Premillennial paradigm. This eschatological hope that they will be restored as memorials is therefore misplaced.
Where does it say in Ezekiel, Zechariah (or anywhere else) that these sacrifices are memorial blood sacrifices? This is the crucial question on this matter. Significantly, it is the question that brings a deafening silence from our Premillennial brethren. Premils need to furnish Scripture (Old Testament or New Testament) that say that these sacrifices were or will be a memorial. The fact is there are none.
The reality is this is a theory that has been foisted upon the sacred text and which is absent in Scripture (old and new). This concept cannot be found anywhere in the Word, it was most likely created by men that wanted to justify their futurist understanding of Old Testament passages. The fact is whilst it is taught in the Premillennial pulpits, colleges, and manuals, it is nowhere to be found in Holy Writ.
There is nowhere that these abolished sin offerings are said to be restored by God. If Premillennialists are so sure of their ground on this matter, it would help if they would furnish us with solid Scripture that explicitly supports this notion, instead of leaving us to guess or speculate as to their evidence. Saying all this, I believe it is a term invented Premil theologians that needed to support their futurist interpretation of Ezekiel 40 – 48 and Zechariah 14. Sadly most Premils have run with it without questioning it or ascertaining whether it enjoys any biblical warrant. It reminds me of the ‘Prosperity gospel’ that is deluding many today. No one dares to question it, but it is a clear distortion of truth.
Animal sacrifices were abolished at the cross and are no longer part of God's eternal plan of atonement. Christ became our final atonement for sin, thus superseding the repeated imperfect unsatisfactory Judaic religious system of sin offerings. On the new earth, Christ will be the exclusive eternal aide memoire of God’s only satisfactory and effective sin offering for mankind. There will no longer be any need for reminder-sacrifices or supplementary sin offerings, Christ will be all in all. One look at Christ hands will be the only reminder we need of Calvary. There is no need for the re-starting of countless, pointless, ineffective, unsatisfactory, futile sin offerings – when the cross totally rendered them obsolete.
Last edited:
Where does this text mention your imaginary future millennium? Nowhere! You twist Scripture to support your error. You add unto text after text to allow your beliefs to fit. Where does Revelation 20 (your only proof text) mention the return of the old covenant blood sacrifices? Nowhere. Where does Revelation 20 (your only proof text) mention the rebuilding of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem? Nowhere. This is reprehensible man-made delusion that does offence to Christ, the cross and the new covenant.
Your doctrines are getting demolished here and you have no answer to the New Testament. You explain it away with your misguided view of the Old Testament.
Last edited:
1. Is this blood sacrifice arrangement you promote under the old covenant, the new covenant or a new old covenant?
2. Please explain what these animal sacrifices accomplish in your future millennium?
3. Where in Revelation 20, anywhere in the NT or anywhere in the OT does it says that (1) God will re-institute the slaughtering of animals on the new earth, that (2) it will be for sin, that (3) it will start again in another dispensation (namely your alleged future millennium), and (4) that they "will look back"?
Keraz
Well-Known Member
- Jun 20, 2018
- 6,197
- 1,072
- 113
- 83
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- New Zealand
This is what I pretty much agree with. Gods Shekinah glory will go into the new Temple. Ezekiel 43:1-4
The AMill believers think the Millennium is now. Jesus is not present because He hasn't Returned yet. When He does Return, He will be seen by all. Rev 1:7, and will reign for the next thousand years.
Only in about a dozen scriptures! I have presented then to you and others many times. Seems you are incapable of reading and understanding the truths of Bible Prophecy.
I see you say; 'on the new earth'. Of course there won't be sacrifices then, as there will be no Temple! Revelation 21;22
But there will be here, for a short while before Jesus Returns, proved by Daniel 9:27, and in the Millennium Zechariah 14:21
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
You've judged me as a liberal and accused me of brushing aside your arguments in your 1st two posts. I didn't even read your 2nd post--I only read and responded to your 1st post, as best I can recall. So I wasn't "brushing aside" your arguments--just speaking to the idea that the Ezekiel prophecy was anything more than a symbolic vision to be taken ultra-literally.
You really need to correct yourself on this. I did *not* respond to your 2nd post at all! So how could I have "brushed the arguments in that post aside?"
You don't need to. I already gave you my response to it. You're leading to a predetermined answer, namely that if God's word of prophecy can never fail, and if that prophecy calls for a rebuilt temple of Ezekiel's specifications, then it *must take place in the future.* Again, as I argued, this assumes the vision is not a vision, is not symbolic, and did not speak of the future in contemporary terms that would ultimately be fulfilled by Christ.
A number of clues tell you this, but you ignore them.
1) It's a vision.
2) It speaks of the Law, which in the NT is fulfilled.
3) It speaks of a temple high up on a mountain, which is not where the temple is located.
4) We are told it is a "pattern," speaking of symbolic fulfillments in the future.
5) The 12 tribes received equal territories, which is not according to the Law. Nor can there be 12 separate tribes in the future.
I could go on....
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 12,148
- 3,823
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Ezekiel Chapter 43 represents the 2nd Zerubabbel temple built in 536BC after the Babylonian Captivity, you have nobody fooled Keras
Many Claim Ezekiel Chapters 40-46, Represents A Future Temple In A Millennium On Earth, Is This True?
As clearly shown, Ezekiel Chapter 43 showed the temple "Pattern" to the House of Israel in the Babylonian Captivity let "Them" measure, Ezekiel was instructed to write the ordinances and law in "Their" sight, that "They" keep them, not some future generation as many "Falsely" claim
The temple seen in Ezekiel Chapters 40-46 is nothing more than the 2nd Zerubbabel Temple built 536BC after the Babylonian Captivity, where animal sacrifice for "Sin" was was instructed by "God", prior to the shed blood of Jesus Christ on Calvary, don't be deceived
Ezekiel 43:10-11 & 19-21KJV
10 Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern.
11 And if they be ashamed of all that they have done, shew them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof, and the goings out thereof, and the comings in thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof: and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.
19 And thou shalt give to the priests the Levites that be of the seed of Zadok, which approach unto me, to minister unto me, saith the Lord God, a young bullock for a sin offering.
20 And thou shalt take of the blood thereof, and put it on the four horns of it, and on the four corners of the settle, and upon the border round about: thus shalt thou cleanse and purge it.
21 Thou shalt take the bullock also of the sin offering, and he shall burn it in the appointed place of the house, without the sanctuary.
True. That's all you've done, but until now you have not addressed the first argument I make from Scripture, which is the basis for all my arguments about prophecy of Scripture.
Scripture is, not me. I don't write Scripture, but just quote it, so that Scripture can speak for itself and lead to obvious conclusions about the prophecy of God.
You are acknowledging here, that you know exactly what God is saying about what is prophecy: That which He says shall come to pass is prophecy of God.
Now you are addressing the first point I make, and though you know exactly the point Scripture is making, you reject it where you don't want it to apply.
You are acknowledging here exactly what you know God says prophecy is: That which is He says shall come to pass.
And finally you are saying here, that you don't care what God says prophecy is, but only what you say prophecy is: Your personal rule of prophecy is by how God gives it to His prophets, which does not include visions.
And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
And once again, God says otherwise, that He gives His prophecy to His prophets by visions and dreams.
And since you rule out any vision as being prophecy, then you also must rule out dreams, since they are even less firm than visions.
Now the rest of the acts of Hezekiah, and his goodness, behold, they are written in the vision of Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz, and in the book of the kings of Judah and Israel.
Since all of Isaiah is vision only, then none of it is prophecy.
Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, and that it brake in pieces the iron, the brass, the clay, the silver, and the gold; the great God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter: and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof sure.
This prophecy of Messiah does not come to pass, because it not prophecy, but only a dream.
And now you say that which is not prophecy, but only vision, is prophecy that would come to pass in Christ.
Christ will fulfill His prophecy given to Ezekiel, exactly as the vision shows: The Christ will build His own temple and palace for His own Millennium, out of which shall flow waters becoming a river to heal the sea.
And therefore not a prophecy, because no vision is prophecy of God.
Nor dreams.
You speak of the law of Moses, where Scripture does not speak of Moses at all.
So now you say every law spoken of in Scripture, is that of Moses, when the law is not named.
For whosoever shall keep the whole law, and yet offend in one point, he is guilty of all.
James is telling us to keep the law of Moses in all points.
And so now Isaiah is joining in false prophecy with Ezekiel.
I reject your Symbol Man's Bible, where people either reject prophecy altogether, or alter it to their own satisfaction.
And now you reject prophecy, by making the prophecy say what it does not.
Best not to. So far, you reject what God says about His prophecies, and make your own rule of prophecy, so that you can reject any of His prophecies you don't like.
And you also add to or insert in Scripture your own words, to change their meaning.
Your problem is you think in teaching of Scripture and prophecy of Scripture, we only answer to one another.
We don't. We answer to God.
"We begin with our own thoughts with the limited resources we've been given, faulty reasoning, insufficient education and historical input, etc. Opinions can be a doorway to exploration that yields more information by which we can determine truth. Opinions can be a hypothesis that begins a quest to deeper searching."
This is the very definition of first turning to our own thoughts and opinions about prophecy of God, rather than turning first to what prophecy of Scripture plainly says.
It is the exact oppostie of what Scripture says not to do, in reading and teaching prophecy of God:
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
The prophets and teachers that speak from the Lord, do not do so from their own thoughts and minds, but only from what Scripture says is so.
And Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that the LORD hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of mine own mind.
Being faithful to the Scriptures, begins with first believing what is written in Scripture.
Turning instead to our own thoughts rather than what Scripture plainly says, is the definition of unbelief in all Scripture, as being the only revealed truth of God, that is plainly written for all men to read and believe: Not to disbelieve and turn to our own thoughts instead, because we don't like what we plainly read at the time.
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Rightly dividing the word of truth, first begins with rightly dividing between what is written in Scripture, and what is not written, But is only our own thoughts with limited resources.
We limit our thoughts from the truth of Scripture, by not first believing what Scripture says, and instead turn to our own thoughts to continue believing what we like, in our own minds.
Doing the word of truth, can only begin by conforming our thoughts and minds to the word, that is plainly written for us in Scripture of truth.
This is the very definition of first turning to our own thoughts and opinions about prophecy of God, rather than turning first to what prophecy of Scripture plainly says.
It is the exact oppostie of what Scripture says not to do, in reading and teaching prophecy of God:
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
The prophets and teachers that speak from the Lord, do not do so from their own thoughts and minds, but only from what Scripture says is so.
And Moses said, Hereby ye shall know that the LORD hath sent me to do all these works; for I have not done them of mine own mind.
Being faithful to the Scriptures, begins with first believing what is written in Scripture.
Turning instead to our own thoughts rather than what Scripture plainly says, is the definition of unbelief in all Scripture, as being the only revealed truth of God, that is plainly written for all men to read and believe: Not to disbelieve and turn to our own thoughts instead, because we don't like what we plainly read at the time.
Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.
Rightly dividing the word of truth, first begins with rightly dividing between what is written in Scripture, and what is not written, But is only our own thoughts with limited resources.
We limit our thoughts from the truth of Scripture, by not first believing what Scripture says, and instead turn to our own thoughts to continue believing what we like, in our own minds.
Doing the word of truth, can only begin by conforming our thoughts and minds to the word, that is plainly written for us in Scripture of truth.
This is of course the problem: we first declare what law is in the prophecy, that of Moses, so as to do away with the prophecy, and then we play humble by saying it's only our opinion of the prophecy.
And the worst part of it is, when we are so used to inserting our own opinion into prophecy, we can't even tell the difference anymore between scripture and our opinion anymore, so that we declare it's the law of Moses in Ezekiel as fact, when it's only our opinion, since none of Ezekiel says so.
But if we actually believe the prophecy as written in Scripture, and allow the Spirit of truth to guide us in understanding exactly what is being prophesied, then we can teach it accurately.
First off we see claiming it is the law of Moses, is false opinion based upon unbelief in the prophecy.
Secondly we see, that it cannot be the law of Moses His Millennium, because His natural priesthood is not that of Aaron, but is changed into another for the King.
1. The Levites not of Zadok are no more priests, and only ministers of the gates and sacrifices. Only the Levites of Zadok do the office of priests and aproach near to the King with His holy things.
2. Any and all of the Zadok priests may draw near to the Lord and King in His most holy place, at any time. In Aaron's priesthood, only the high priest could draw near once a year.
Since the priesthood is changed, there is also a change of law:
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law.
This is Paul teaching in Heb 7 about the fixed relationship between the law and the priesthood of God.
He is showing how the law is changed, when there is a change of the priesthood. He applies it to the changing of the law of Moses into that of Christ, since the priesthood is now of Christ, and not of Aaron.
The same rule applies to the priesthood and law of the Millennium prophesied in Ezekiel. Since the priesthood is changed, then so must the law; therefore it cannot be the law of Moses in the Millennium, since it is not the priesthood of Aaron, but of the King.
And so, we see how faith in the Scriptures, produces true teaching of Scripture, by the Scriptures themselves.
The Spirit of truth only guides them that believe all His Scriptures, into all true teaching of Scripture.
Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.
Those who don't believe all Scripture, but at times will only hear their own thoughts, are stuck with only their own opinions.
Which obviously, at times, they like more than Scripture of truth.
Truth7t7
Well-Known Member
- Jan 2, 2014
- 12,148
- 3,823
- 113
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
Randy Kluth
Well-Known Member
I'm not "playing humble." It appears that you resort to judging by appearances?
It is not, in my opinion, wrong to have opinions. In fact it seems downright hypocritical for those who assert their own opinions to then complain that others offer their own opinions.
In reality, we are all giving our opinions--some may be right, others may not be, but we have to judge the best we can, based on Scriptures. Just declaring your views as "non-opinion" and "Bible" does not make it any less an "opinion" than my opinions.
Now that we got that out of the way....
I do not find it a "problem" to declare what is obviously "Law" in Eze 40-48 the "Law of Moses!" That is precisely what it is! The Law of Moses required temple, sacrifice, and priest. Ezekiel's temple had all three.
And I don't thereby destroy the prophecy, as such, simply because I view the element of Law as outmoded in the NT era. As I said, I believe the Law is used as a representation of worship under the covenant of that time to convey truths about the future, before the fulfillment of the Law is even known.
The whole temple idea was given by God as a pattern of heavenly realities. So I didn't come up with this--God did!
Heb 8.5 They serve at a sanctuary that is a copy and shadow of what is in heaven. This is why Moses was warned when he was about to build the tabernacle: “See to it that you make everything according to the pattern shown you on the mountain.”
An adjustment to the Law of Moses does not make it any less the Law of Moses. The whole idea of the temple and sacrifices and the priesthood comes from the Law.
In reality, Solomon built the temple in an expanded form of the original specifications for the tabernacle. But it didn't make his temple any less the Law of Moses.
Neither is Ezekiel's temple any less than the Law of Moses. After all, God was scolding Israel for having failed to keep the Law, and was showing them how it was intended to project into the future the Hope of Israel.
Eze 43.10 “Son of man, describe the temple to the people of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their sins. Let them consider its perfection, 11 and if they are ashamed of all they have done, make known to them the design of the temple—its arrangement, its exits and entrances—its whole design and all its regulations and laws. Write these down before them so that they may be faithful to its design and follow all its regulations.
This temple did not exist. But it was suggested they follow it as if it was another form of the Temple Law under the Law of Moses. In reality, Israel would follow the Temple Law once again, when Zerubbabel rebuilt the temple. But Ezekiel's temple was just a vision to convict Israel for having failed to appreciate the Temple Law--for having failed to obey it with a right spirit.
Drawing near in service to the Lord is not necessarily serving as High Priest. Perhaps their qualification as candidates for the position of High Priest enabled them to minister closer as such?
Last edited:
Ok, I was trying to be nice. You are being hypocritical, by saying it's only your opinion, while also declaring it as the truth of Scripture.
You really do think your opinions matter, so that you teach them for prophecy of God, instead of only teaching what is written by God.
No, it isn't a problem, until you start preaching them as Scripture of truth.
Your opinion about the law of the Millennium is false, because it contradicts Scriptural rule of the priesthood's relationship with the law.
True. Which is why I never teach something, that I assert as my opinion. I teach Scripture, that I assert to be true.
I have given no opinion here, nor said so. I teach from Scripture, and if no one can correct it, then it remains true.
Nor have I asked for opinion, but only Scriptural truth and correction.
Opinions are not based on Scripture, but as you say, your own thoughts. Which is why you teach your own opinions, while making the words of prophecy false, by saying what shall come to pass, shall not come to pass.
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.
No prophecy comes by will of man, nor does any interpretation of prophecy come by opinion of man.
Obviously, you don't know the difference, since you so freely intermix your opinion with Scripture, and sometimes instead of Scripture.
God says it shall come to pass. Your opinion says it won't.
Of course you don't. You love declaring your own prophecy of opinion.
The law of Moses required a priesthood, sacrifices, and tabernacle, not a temple:
Go and tell my servant David, Thus saith the LORD, Shalt thou build me an house for me to dwell in?
Whereas I have not dwelt in any house since the time that I brought up the children of Israel out of Egypt, even to this day, but have walked in a tent and in a tabernacle.
In all the places wherein I have walked with all the children of Israel spake I a word with any of the tribes of Israel, whom I commanded to feed my people Israel, saying, Why build ye not me an house of cedar?
Prophecy never calls the millennial temple, house, and palace, a tabernacle nor tent.
You see then how you continually intermix your own opinion into teaching of Scripture, because you rate yourself as authoritative as Christ?
But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.
By opinion, man mishandles the word of God. Men think too much of their opinions, and not enough of Scripture.
Yes, you do, distinctly as such. By saying prophecy of God shall not come to pass.
All prophecy of God shall come to pass:
Then said he unto me, These waters issue out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, and go into the sea: which being brought forth into the sea, the waters shall be healed.
And it shall come to pass, that every thing that liveth, which moveth, whithersoever the rivers shall come, shall live: and there shall be a very great multitude of fish, because these waters shall come thither: for they shall be healed; and every thing shall live whither the river cometh.
That's because your opinion is, that all prophecy of God shall not come to pass.
That will be built by the Lord Himself on earth.
Yes, you do. The prophesied temple only being an idea, is your idea, not God's word.
And so also Christ will see to it that the pattern He gave to Ezekiel, will be made perfectly according to the prophesy of it.
Then you are still under the law of Moses, which is adjusted to that of Christ today.
Which is why Paul says, with a changing of the priesthood, there must also be a changing of the law.
The national priesthood of the Millennium is not that of Aaron, and so has it's own law of the King Himself, not of Moses.
It's not the changing of the temple, that requires a changing of the law, but a changing of the priesthood, which is not that of Aaron in the Millennium of Christ.
Your opinion that a temple is commanded by law, is false.
Since you say that temple is an idea only, then no doubt you also make the law an idea only.
As I said, just as I see how you prophecy by your own ideas and opinions, I would not be interested in your idea and opinion preached for salvation and justification of Christ.
Nice idea. Lousy prophecy.
Still doesn't. It wasn't the second, and it won't be any temple built before the Lord comes again.
God don't give suggestions, That's your idea and opinion of your own prophecy and doctrine of Christ.
True.
You opinion that visions are not prophecy, is false.
And he said, Hear now my words: If there be a prophet among you, I the LORD will make myself known unto him in a vision, and will speak unto him in a dream.
Prophecy is by vision of God, of what shall come to pass.
After these things the word of the LORD came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.
Not just a vision, but a prophecy of Isaac born of Sarah.
And thine house and thy kingdom shall be established for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever. According to all these words, and according to all this vision, so did Nathan speak unto David.
Not just a vision, but a prophesied promise of God to David.
The vision of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah, kings of Judah.
Not just a vision, but prophecies of Isaiah of what shall come to pass.
And after he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavoured to go into Macedonia, assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us for to preach the gospel unto them.
Not just a vision, but a prophesy of promise waiting for Paul in Macedonia.
Your opinion that visions are not prophecy, is false.
Entering into the most holy place by the high priest alone, was in the priesthood of the law of Moses.
That will no more be the law of the Millennial priesthood, when the High Priest sits on His throne in the house He builds for Himself, and allows all His levites of Zadok to freely enter into His most holy place.
The King's law will not be the law of Moses, because the King's priesthood will not be of Aaron.
Since it is only prophecy of scripture in Ezekiel, then you don't look to it for any answers, but only continue with your own insightful opinions.
And the Levites that are gone away far from me, when Israel went astray, which went astray away from me after their idols; they shall even bear their iniquity.
Because they ministered unto them before their idols, and caused the house of Israel to fall into iniquity; therefore have I lifted up mine hand against them, saith the Lord GOD, and they shall bear their iniquity. And they shall not come near unto me, to do the office of a priest unto me, nor to come near to any of my holy things, in the most holy place:
But the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok, that kept the charge of my sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from me, they shall come near to me to minister unto me, and they shall stand before me to offer unto me the fat and the blood, saith the Lord GOD: They shall enter into my sanctuary, and they shall come near to my table, to minister unto me, and they shall keep my charge.
They enter, because they are the descendants of faithful Zadok, while the rest of the Levites remain at the gates, because they are the descendants of the unfaithful priests.
I've given simple Scriptural teaching, and you only double-down on opinion of your own.
Unless you come up with something new, we're concluding the argument, so that it won't be just another uselessly endless one.
While I appreciate learning the truth of prophecy more clearly, by the necessity of correcting your errors, there comes a point where there is nothing new to correct, and so becomes nothing but dull repetition to closed ears.
Similar threads
