Ezekiel 40- is prophecy, and is of God's 3rd temple only

[robert derrick]

More proof that Ezekiel's prophecy of the house of the the Lord, is after He comes again:

And, behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east: and his voice was like a noise of many waters: and the earth shined with his glory.

This is prophecy of His second coming as lightning, that shineth from the east to the west.

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

 

[Randy Kluth]

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.

You're clearly incapable of being a gentleman and discussing differences of opinion. You think you are the voice of God, and all others have mere "opinions." What utter self-deception and self-exaltation!

 

[robert derrick]

You're clearly incapable of being a gentleman and discussing differences of opinion.

You're write, if I want to discuss opinions, I'll talk about the weather.

You think you are the voice of God,

What you've been reading is called Scripture of God, which proceeds from the mouth of God.

What I've been doing is showing the simple since of what is written, that any child can understand.

So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading. (Neh 8)

That's what Ezra does. He does not read what is written shall come to pass, says it won't come to pass, and then offers his best educated opinion about something else.

and all others have mere "opinions."

You're the one claiming it's your opinion.

Your problem is, you think your opinion is somehow more than 'mere' opinion.

What utter self-deception

True. I've never met anyone boasting about how they only give opinion, and then get offended when someone says it's only opinion.

It truly is remarkable, First you reject the prophecy as even being prophecy, and so you reject what is written as not truly coming to pass, and then you go on to say how you offer your own opinion instead of what is written.

And then you get upset, when someone says it's only your own personal opinion. Is that not remarkable?

And these things, brethren, I have in a figure transferred to myself and to Apollos for your sakes; that ye might learn in us not to think of men above that which is written, that no one of you be puffed up for one against another.

You fulfill this Scripture, by exalting your opinion over Scripture itself, and you are offended when others don't agree your thoughts are above what is actually written in Scripture.

That is truly remarkable indeed.

and self-exaltation!

True. When people offer opinion only, without regard to what is written, and even do away with what God says shall come to pass, That is called exalting one's opinion about Scripture of God.

For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted.

All you need do, is stop teaching your own opinion, and only teach the plain meaning of what is written.

But that can't possibly be done, until you at least cease attacking what God says shall come to pass, as foolishness. You don't even need to believe it, but your antagonism against it, prevents you from even allowing yourself to teach what is actually said by God.

As I said before, just try reading the prophecy as written objectively, without your personal issues and angst about it, and only teach what shall come to pass by what is said shall come to pass, whether you believe it or not. Only then you can at least objectively teach what the Author is saying shall come to pass, rather than your own self-confessed opinionated version.

Do it as a classroom assignment, where the teaching want someone to tell her what the Author is saying. If you begin rejecting what he is saying and offering your own opinion instead, you get an F. You see, this is your problem, You think the teacher wants to hear what you think, and she only wants to hear what the author thinks, by what he is saying in the book.

I.e. have as much respect for the Bible, as you would any other book, and give the Author of the Bible enough credit to know what he is saying in simple words, even if you don't agree. The author of the book is what people are interested in, not our own opinions, that sometimes must reject what the author believes. If we ant people learn what we are thinking about such things, then we can write our own book, and then if anyone cares enough, they will want to hear people talk about what we believe.

You would be greatly offended, if you wrote an book, and then others began to reject some things in your book, and insert their own opinions instead, and then have the gall to say, that is really what you meant.

It's called being a man of the book, no matter what book it is.

And every man that striveth for the mastery is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a corruptible crown; but we an incorruptible.

And so, place yourself in God's shoes, when reading His book. The only way you can possibly mater it, and only teach what He is saying, is by first teaching exactly what He is saying, whether you believe it or not.

The greatest insult to any author, is not just not agreeing, but is rewriting what he says to fit your own opinion, and then have the audacity to tell him and others, that is what he must have really meant.

You are accusing that author of writing with confusion, and doesn't really know his own mind and what he is trying to say. And you';ve come along to blessedly straighten him with your own opinions.

The only thing you've mastered about Bible prophecy, is how to correct it with your own opinion, when you don't agree with it.

Now look, honestly, if you would suspend antagonism against the prophecy, and only teach what is written in it, then you would at least allow others to decide for themselves, whether they believe it or not. At this time you are only trying to get others to agree with your alternative opinion. And you do so under the audacity of saying, that is what God really meant.

You can even put in a side note, that though this is what the prophecy is saying, you don't agree with it personally.

You would at least be honest with yourself and others, and stop getting so offended when others object to teaching your opinion only.

I want to read sound teaching of the Bible, that either adds to the truth for me, or corrects any errors of my own.

I'm not interesting in reading the opinions of men, that 'explore' their own thoughts about prophecy of God, that has nothing to do with the prophecy written in the Bible itself, other than to change it into something else.

If you want that sort of thing, then start a new thread: "Let's Share Opinions", or some such. Believe me, sir, I will not be intruding into it, nor coming anywhere near it. You can have free reign to share with others all the opinions you can possibly think of.

Once again, I'm only taking this long, because I see an intelligence and sincerity in you, that simply errs when it comes to teaching certain prophecy of Scripture, because you think your intellectual opinions, instead of Scripture, are important. I truly would like to see you use your intelligence to stick with Scripture only, and see what you have.

If you begin telling me what this prophecy is plainly saying, in it's own words, then I would certain want to hear it. But so long as anyone tells me, no that shall not come to pass, and here is what I think is really happening.

I'm not interested.

 

[Randy Kluth]

It truly is remarkable, First you reject the prophecy as even being prophecy, and so you reject what is written as not truly coming to pass, and then you go on to say how you offer your own opinion instead of what is written.

Where did I deny that Eze 40-48 is a "prophecy?" Please provide a quotation. To disagree with you about what the prophecy means is not denying it is a prophecy. You misrepresent my position.

And then you get upset, when someone says it's only your own personal opinion. Is that not remarkable?

Every statement, biblical, dogma, doctrine can be viewed as an opinion. It is polite to present it as such in matters of historic controversy among conservative Christians.

Paul said we "see through a glass darkly." Paul said that "if in some matters one thinks differently, God will show him."

If you don't understand humility you are not in a good place to discuss the certainty of Bible doctrine. You are asserting yourself as the authority, and not the Holy Spirit, who interprets the Bible.

When people offer opinion only, without regard to what is written, and even do away with what God says shall come to pass, That is called exalting one's opinion about Scripture of God.

Offering an opinion is just trying to best interpret what the Bible is saying. If you don't believe we should try to interpret Eze 40-48, why are you even discussing it? You act like this passage is like A,B,C or 1,2,3, and it isn't . It is historically difficult for many good Christian scholars. So how is it difficult for good Christian scholars and easy as pie for you? That sounds unbelievably arrogant of you!

Don't you think anything in Scriptures is difficult? Don't you think the book of Revelation is difficult? Peter said that Paul's teaching is sometimes difficult. Why is everything easy for you, and then you condemn anybody who doesn't think it's easy, who simply voices an opinion on what has been historically seen as difficult?

 

[Keraz]

More proof that Ezekiel's prophecy of the house of the the Lord, is after He comes again:

And, behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east: and his voice was like a noise of many waters: and the earth shined with his glory.

This is prophecy of His second coming as lightning, that shineth from the east to the west.

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

Plainly Gods Shekinah glory is not the same as the glorious Return of Jesus.
Ezekiel 11:22 describes the glory of God leaving the first Temple. It was never in the Second Temple, but it will be again in the Third Temple. Ezekiel 43:1-4 in no way describes Jesus' Return.

Your quote of Matthew 24:27, has no relevance to how God will honor the new Temple with His Glory. BEFORE Jesus Returns.
It WILL be God's Temple, as Paul clearly says: 2 Thess 2:4

 

[Truth7t7]

It was never in the Second Temple, but it will be again in the Third Temple. Ezekiel 43:1-4

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.

 

[robert derrick]

Where did I deny that Eze 40-48 is a "prophecy?" Please provide a quotation. To disagree with you about what the prophecy means is not denying it is a prophecy. You misrepresent my position.

You say Ezek 40- is a vision only, that has not come to pass, nor shall come to pass.

They shall enter into my sanctuary, and they shall come near to my table, to minister unto me, and they shall keep my charge.

And it shall come to pass, that when they enter in at the gates of the inner court, they shall be clothed with linen garments; and no wool shall come upon them, whiles they minister in the gates of the inner court, and within.

Has this come to pass on earth? Shall it come to pass on earth?

Moreover, when ye shall divide by lot the land for inheritance, ye shall offer an oblation unto the LORD, an holy portion of the land: the length shall be the length of five and twenty thousand reeds, and the breadth shall be ten thousand. This shall be holy in all the borders thereof round about.

Has this come to pass? Shall it 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.

Has this come to pass? Shall it come to pass?

Saying a prophecy only 'comes to pass' in vision, is to make the prophecy only a fable, because that is what fables are: Things spoken of in vision only. It's only envisioned, not real:

For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.

Ezekiel is eyewitness of His majesty's house and manner of priesthood, as well as cleanser of seas.

Ezekiel believes every word he wrote of his eyewitness account, of what shall surely come to pass on this earth during his Majesty's Millennium.

So do I. Without doubt. Do you?

 

[robert derrick]

Every statement, biblical, dogma, doctrine can be viewed as an opinion.

Scripture is not opinion of men, but revealed truth of God.

Teaching of Scripture is not opinion of men, but simple reading of Scripture.

So they read in the book in the law of God distinctly, and gave the sense, and caused them to understand the reading.

When men offer an honest opinion, they first acknowledge they do not yet know the truth of the prophecy of Scripture.

But when we first object to the prophecy as written, then our following opinion is replacing Scripture with our own opinion.

Ex of honest opinion about Ezek 40-: "I know it's true prophecy, and I must believe it must come to pass as written. However, My opinion is that it could possibly undermine the gospel of Jesus Christ."

That is an honest opinion, without first declaring it shall not come to pass, and then offering opinion on how and why not.

That is not just offering opinion, but offering change to the prophecy as written.

I don't accept any such offerings of unbelief.

And if ye offer the blind for sacrifice, is it not evil? and if ye offer the lame and sick, is it not evil? offer it now unto thy governor; will he be pleased with thee, or accept thy person? saith the LORD of hosts.

Honestly sir, offering our own opinion to justify not believing prophecy of scripture as written, is lame, and is only acceptable among others that do the same.

We know this is true, because it rhymes perfectly. :)

 

[Truth7t7]

Ezekiel believes every word he wrote of his eyewitness account, of what shall surely come to pass on this earth during his Majesty's Millennium.

Your claim is "False"

Ezekiel Chapters 40-46 represent the 2nd Zerubabbel temple built in 536BC after the Babylonian Captivity, as you have been shown many times

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.

 

[robert derrick]

It is polite to present it as such in matters of historic controversy among conservative Christians.

Polite, but not honest.

The only controversy is from those that do not believe the prophecy shall come to pass on earth as written.

That's why they offer so much scholarship on why not.

I offer Scriptural proof of why it will not contradict the gospel.

Paul said we "see through a glass darkly."

True. We don't claim to know all the truth of Scripture and prophecy.

But there is no dark glass to read Scripture's words, that are written in plain speech.

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.

There is nothing dark to see in this prophecy: We either believe it or not, as written.

Paul said that "if in some matters one thinks differently, God will show him."

True. There are matters that are left up to the believer to decide for himself:

One man esteemeth one day above another: another esteemeth every day alike. Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind.

That does not include changing prophecy and doctrine of Christ, to fit one's own opinion.

If you don't understand humility you are not in a good place to discuss the certainty of Bible doctrine.

Humility is submitting our mind, opinion, and imagination to what 'thus saith the Lord'.

Pride is saying the Lord's words cannot be right as written, and so change them with our own opinion.

We must conform our minds to God's written words, not force God's mind to change for our sake.

 

[robert derrick]

Your claim is "False"

Yes, Ezekiel did and still does believe every word of the prophecy, that Christ gave him by vision of God.

Just as much as he believed every word of prophecy by vision at Chebar:

And it was according to the appearance of the vision which I saw, even according to the vision that I saw when I came to destroy the city: and the visions were like the vision that I saw by the river Chebar; and I fell upon my face.

 

[robert derrick]

You are asserting yourself as the authority, and not the Holy Spirit, who interprets the Bible.

You do this, when say the prophecy must be changed to a vision only, and offer opinion on how.

By your own authority you declare it must be changed, and then you humbly submit opinion on how to do so.

Offering an opinion is just trying to best interpret what the Bible is saying.

Not after declaring it shall not come to pass, and so changing Scripture to fit one's own opinion.

You are sincerely trying to do the right thing, the wrong way.

Instead of trying to prove the prophecy is only vision, so as to avoid it undermining the gospel, you need to join me in proving the prophecy does not contradict doctrine of Christ

Unlike at Mai Lai, we don't destroy prophecy to save doctrine.

If you don't believe we should try to interpret Eze 40-48, why are you even discussing it?

I don't interpret Ezek 40-48. There's nothing to 'interpret' about the Lord sanctifying the most holy place of His Millennial house and temple with His glory, and having His ministers and priesthood making burnt offering for sin.

We either believe it, or we don't. I do.

That only difficult part is showing by Scripture, how prophesy doe not contradict doctrine.

That is where the Holy Ghost steps in. He has no help at all, for people who would rather show how prophecy is not prophecy, and what shall come to pass, shall not come to pass.

God does give no aid nor comfort to unbelief.

You act like this passage is like A,B,C or 1,2,3, and it isn't .

It is.

You just don't accept it's ABC's. Because you mistakenly think they undermine the ABC's of the Lamb's gospel.

Once again, by your own opinion, you think you are nobly saving the gospel, by imaginatively destroying the prophecy.

It is historically difficult for many good Christian scholars.

That don't believe the prophecy as written. There nothing good about that kind of 'scholarship'.

So how is it difficult for good Christian scholars and easy as pie for you?

Because I believe all prophecy of Scripture equally.

Don't you think anything in Scriptures is difficult? Don't you think the book of Revelation is difficult?

Not with faith. Revelation is for uncovering all mysteries, noit making things more mysterious.

Difficulty is only minds of men that do not believer all prophecies come to pass, so that they must resort to intellect olone to justify it,

The easy rule of prophecy is simple: First believe the prophecy as written, then go from there.

The difference between Zacharias, who was smitten with dumbness, and Mary who was blessed, was unbelief.

Zecharias asked how he could possibly believe it, but Mary asked how it would come to pass.

Peter said that Paul's teaching is sometimes difficult.

To the unbelievers:

...which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.

It's only hard to understand something, if we do not believe it.

Why is everything easy for you, and then you condemn anybody who doesn't think it's easy, who simply voices an opinion on what has been historically seen as difficult?

As I said. Just step back like any objective reader, and just read the Book as written, and teach it that way, and see how the Author of the Book shows how He does not contradict Himself in any way.

Here is a hint: When we believe all things as they are written, then when He does show us the simple truth of it, we can sit back and say; "Wow, that makes perfect sense. That's so easy to understand now."

For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light.

The best answer is always the easy one. But man likes to make it hard, because sometimes the truth is just to easy to understand:

When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way side.

Have you never heard anyone say, "Nah, that's too easy. It can't be that simple."

Since there is no law of Christ in Scripture saying plainly, that Millennial sacrifices undermine His gospel, then it doesn't. Therefore, Ezek 40- shall come to pass in His earthly Millennium, exactly as written in all things of prophecy, without it being a sin against His own gospel.

Simple.

 

[Truth7t7]

Ezekiel believes every word he wrote of his eyewitness account, of what shall surely come to pass on this earth during his Majesty's Millennium.

Your claim that Ezekiel chapter 43 represents a future Millennium on this earth is "False"!

Ezekiel Chapters 40-46 represent the 2nd Zerubabbel temple built in 536BC after the Babylonian Captivity, as you have been shown many times

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.

 

[Randy Kluth]

You do this, when say the prophecy must be changed to a vision only, and offer opinion on how.

By your own authority you declare it must be changed, and then you humbly submit opinion on how to do so.

No, I'm not--we're doing two very different things. You are stating this vision to be cut and dried, black and white, and as such on a par with Biblical dogma, to be accepted--otherwise, those who disagree with your version are anathema.

I'm not doing this! I'm saying these things are speculative, and matters to be carefully weighed, as God's word. But we're to do it without judgmentalism, among fellow believers who require study, correction, and patience. Prophetic interpretation does not correspond exactly to Biblical Doctrine!

I'm not authoritatively declaring Ezekiel 40-48 to be a Vision, but it appears as such to me-it is my opinion a "Vision." And I gave you the reasons. You can accept those reasons or reject them.

Not after declaring it shall not come to pass, and so changing Scripture to fit one's own opinion.

No, I'm not changing anything. Interpretation is a matter of judging what is said *in context.* Otherwise, taking things ultra-literally can end one is a very bad place. For example, Jesus spoke of "cutting off one's hand" if you are inclined to steal. In context, he was speaking of the grave nature of Sin, and not about cutting off your hand!

You are sincerely trying to do the right thing, the wrong way.

Instead of trying to prove the prophecy is only vision, so as to avoid it undermining the gospel, you need to join me in proving the prophecy does not contradict doctrine of Christ

You need to consider, once again, my reasons for rejecting this prophecy as ultra-literal. We were told, quite matter of fact, that it was for that generation of Israel, who at the time no longer had a temple. And it was a vision of something that did not literally exist, and was high up on a mountain, where it does not typically exist.

I'm not going to go on with your claim that those who disagree with you disagree with Scripture. Christians will disagree on some matters--even Scriptural matters. And Paul acknowledged this as normal.

We are to learn to "prove things" by responsible study. We do not receive divine revelation by "automatic writing" that you type into our brains! ;)

 

[Randy Kluth]

Polite, but not honest.

That's judgmental. Declaring something to be "dishonest" is a moral judgment. And a critical-minded person isn't qualified to make moral judgments.

You think this Prophecy is as easy as "1,2,3," though scholarly and respected Christian scholars would disagree with you. Who am I to believe? Am I to not believe my own eyes?

You do realize, don't you, that Jesus' disciples during his earthly ministry had lots of trouble understanding his words? You do realize that Peter said that some of Paul's teachings were difficult to understand, don't you?

No, Ezekiel's temple vision was not as easy as "a,b,c." It was for an ancient isolated culture that lived under a different legal dispensation, under the Law of Moses. Nothing about that prophecy is easy.

You should be less judgmental and more tolerant of different takes on it, whether you agree or not. It is *not* representative of Christian Doctrine. It does not represent Dogma for Christians to accept or reject.

You are a tad hard-hearted, in my estimation. And I don't mean to be judgmental in that regard...

 

[ewq1938]

More proof that Ezekiel's prophecy of the house of the the Lord, is after He comes again:

And, behold, the glory of the God of Israel came from the way of the east: and his voice was like a noise of many waters: and the earth shined with his glory.

This is prophecy of His second coming as lightning, that shineth from the east to the west.

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

That's not a match. Having one word isn't enough, by far isn't enough.

 

[robert derrick]

Your claim that Ezekiel chapter 43 represents a future Millennium on this earth is "False"!

Ezekiel Chapters 40-46 represent the 2nd Zerubabbel temple built in 536BC after the Babylonian Captivity, as you have been shown many times

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.

I've seen your paste before. Repasting doesn't change anything into something else.

Still wrong.

 

[robert derrick]

No, I'm not--we're doing two very different things. You are stating this vision to be cut and dried, black and white, and as such on a par with Biblical dogma, to be accepted--otherwise, those who disagree with your version are anathema.

I'm not doing this! I'm saying these things are speculative, and matters to be carefully weighed, as God's word. But we're to do it without judgmentalism, among fellow believers who require study, correction, and patience. Prophetic interpretation does not correspond exactly to Biblical Doctrine!

I'm not authoritatively declaring Ezekiel 40-48 to be a Vision, but it appears as such to me-it is my opinion a "Vision." And I gave you the reasons. You can accept those reasons or reject them.

No, I'm not changing anything. Interpretation is a matter of judging what is said *in context.* Otherwise, taking things ultra-literally can end one is a very bad place. For example, Jesus spoke of "cutting off one's hand" if you are inclined to steal. In context, he was speaking of the grave nature of Sin, and not about cutting off your hand!

You need to consider, once again, my reasons for rejecting this prophecy as ultra-literal. We were told, quite matter of fact, that it was for that generation of Israel, who at the time no longer had a temple. And it was a vision of something that did not literally exist, and was high up on a mountain, where it does not typically exist.

I'm not going to go on with your claim that those who disagree with you disagree with Scripture. Christians will disagree on some matters--even Scriptural matters. And Paul acknowledged this as normal.

We are to learn to "prove things" by responsible study. We do not receive divine revelation by "automatic writing" that you type into our brains! ;)

I see now what you're trying to do, and so we can sum things up now:

1. Ezek 40- is not just a vision as is Ezek 1 and Acts 10.

2. Ezek 40- does have prophecy in the vision. What Scripture says shall come to pass, is prophecy of Scripture, whether by vision or dream.

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.

3. To say these prophecies in Ezek 40- are only visionary, and shall not come to pass as written on earth, is to open all prophecies by vision, to being visionary only. Beginning with the prophecy of Isaac born to Abraham by vision of God, the prophecy of the virgin birth by vision of Isaiah son of Amoz, as well as the prophecy of vision to Cornelius of Peter's coming, etc...

5. Therefore, the 'opinion that the vision of Ezek 40- is only vision as Ezek 1, is false, unless we can start picking and choosing which vision of prophecies are only visionary or not.

6. The reason for trying to make Ezek 40- prophesies only visionary, to protect the gospel from being tarnished by offerings for sin in Christ's Millennium, is destructive and unnecessary.

We don't destroy prophecy of Christ to save doctrine of Christ.

No law says such offerings do undermine the gospel, and I have shown arguments of Scripture why they don't in the first place.

Once again, I suggest you become an objective reader of the Book, and see where the words lead as written, without trying to make changes to guard the integrity of the Book, Which needs no such guardianship by way of changes to it.

 

[Truth7t7]

We are to learn to "prove things" by responsible study.

Big Smiles!

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[robert derrick]

Plainly Gods Shekinah glory is not the same as the glorious Return of Jesus.

Cute, but not really creadible.

For as the lightning cometh out of the east, and shineth even unto the west; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

It's not the lightning that is shining His glory, but Himself:

And his brightness was as the light; he had horns coming out of his hand: and there was the hiding of his power.

And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming.

It's not the sun shining the light of His glory: He is.

It's His glorious return, because He comes with His power and great glory.

Ezekiel 11:22 describes the glory of God leaving the first Temple. It was never in the Second Temple, but it will be again in the Third Temple. Ezekiel 43:1-4 in no way describes Jesus' Return.

Yes way. It is.

If you want to say He comes with His glory from the east with only a temporary appearance, like that of Patmos, then you your temple built must have waters becoming a river healing the Dead Sea.

As well as the Israelis now having their borders from Damascus to the Nile.

And yet, that is not the main problem:

It WILL be God's Temple, as Paul clearly says: 2 Thess 2:4

If the that prophesied temple is indeed that of God, and that man of sin sits on the throne of it, then prophecy about the destruction of antichrist and His appearing with glory is false.

1. If Christ only makes an appearance to sanctify His throne ahd most holy place, then He will destroy the antichrist at that time with His glory, that is daring to sit on His throne. Unless you want to say the Lord does so, and then leaves that beast sitting on His newly glorified throne. He came to glorify it for the beast to sit on.

That is part of what He comes again to do, to destroy the last great antichrist and false prophet, by casting them into the LOF.

And he does that first, before slaughtering the armies.

Also, there is no prophecy of the Christ appearing with His glory, and finding an upstart sitting on His throne.


2. Or, He glorifies His throne and most holy place, and then departs, and then that man of sin takes a seat in His glorified throne room.

Which is not only unlikely, but also making His prophecy false, that after His appearing with glory, the gate to His house will be shut to none other than Himself, and His princes and His priests:

Then he brought me back the way of the gate of the outward sanctuary which looketh toward the east; and it was shut.

Then said the LORD unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the LORD, the God of Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut.

It is for the prince; the prince, he shall sit in it to eat bread before the LORD; he shall enter by the way of the porch of that gate, and shall go out by the way of the same.

3. It also makes His prophecy false, that afterward there will be no strangers allowed to enter into His temple, so as to defile His sanctuary and holy things.

So, the only time any man of sin can sit on His millennial throne, will be after construction, and before His appearing with glory, and then leaves him there.

The whole context of the prophecy of His appearing with glory in His Millennial temple and house, is one of staying to reign. A temporary appearance only, finding an antichrist sitting on His throne, is false prophecy, that contradicts prophecy of His appearing and immediately thereafter.

The only christ trying to have temple built before the Lord's coming again, with burnt offerings for sin ministering by natural saved Jews, will be a false one of another cursed Christian gospel.

Any such building will be made an heap with the rest of Jeruslaem, for Him to build His own house and city, with help from afar.