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

[robert derrick]

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.

True. The OT and law of Moses are dead and gone.

The covenant of peace and law of the Millennial priesthood has yet to come.

 

[WPM]

True. The OT and law of Moses are dead and gone.

The covenant of peace and law of the Millennial priesthood has yet to come.

• Is this blood sacrifice arrangement you promote under the old covenant, the new covenant or a new old covenant?
• Please explain what these animal sacrifices accomplish in your future millennium?
• 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]

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

But that is how it will be. Jesus will defeat Satan at Armageddon and then chain him up for the next thousand years.

Bible Prophecy is quite clear; there will be a new Temple built before Jesus Returns. Isaiah 56:6-8, +

 

[robert derrick]

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 Do you even accept that the new covenant superseded the old?

True.

The covenant of peace with nations and the law of the Millennial priesthood, will not supercede the NT law of Christ.

Animal sacrifices were abolished at the cross

They were made unnecessary to stay condemnation for sinning.

and are no longer part of God's eternal plan of atonement.

The blood of bulls and goats never was, and never will have any part in eternal atonement for sinning.

Your comparison to the blood of the Lamb, that washes away sins, with that of bulls and goats, is akin to the OSAS lie of making the blood of Jesus no better than a bull or goat, by saying He only covers our sinning from condemnation.

Christ became our final atonement for sin,

Our one and only atonement.

Your doctrine of making the Lamb of God, the 'last' of blood sacrifices, is the corruption of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world.

Your OSAS doctrine of comparing Jesus with bulls and goats, is false.

thus superseding the repeated imperfect unsatisfactory Judaic religious system of sin offerings.

Jesus didn't supercede nor replace bulls and goats, no more than He replaced or superseded Adam.

The Son coming down from heaven, is the one and only sacrifice for washing sins away, and has nothing to do with that of any sacrifice, that only covers sinning from judgment.

The Lamb of God is not the last of sacrifices, but the one and only sacrifice to purge sin and the conscience.

The only blood sacrifices Scripture ever condemns, is that made to devils, and gods that are no gods.

On the new earth, Christ will be the exclusive eternal aide memoire of God’s only satisfactory and effective sin offering for mankind.

If you mean the Lamb's book of life, then just say so.

Learned puffy scholar speak gives me a belly ache.

There will no longer be any need for reminder-sacrifices or supplementary sin offerings,

There is no reminder now. Nor in future.

Trying to justify prophecy of sin offerings in the Millennium, is silly and unnecessary.

No prophecy of Jesus needs justifying, nor even believing: He will do it, because He says He will.

– when the cross totally rendered them obsolete.

They never were as the blood of the Lamb, that washes sins whiter than snow.

Christians now and in the Millennium need no blood offerings to not be condemned for sinning. Then as now, we just stop the sinning.

But if we do sin, then we can still be forgiven by the blood of the Lamb by confession of faith.

Only the unsaved people during the Millennium will have blood sacrifices to be stayed from punishment for sins, unless and until they repent and believe the Lord as Savior, and not just King and Judge.

Though, there will be no stays of execution. Those sacrifices are only for sins, that are not unto death.

 

[robert derrick]

But that is how it will be. Jesus will defeat Satan at Armageddon and then chain him up for the next thousand years.

But that is not the prophecy of Ezek 43.

It's some other prophecy.

The only profaned temple of His, that He speaks of, was the 1st.

Bible Prophecy is quite clear; there will be a new Temple built before Jesus Returns. Isaiah 56:6-8, +

I've offered my objections and proofs of Scripture otherwise. Since they are not corrected, then they stand.

The Lord builds His own temple.

He does so from the heaps of rubble that was Jerusalem, including any temple buildings therein.

There is no temple built by the corrupted and decieved, that God calls His temple.

There will be no temple built by man alone, that will have waters to heal seas, because man cannot heal seas with their own waters.

 

[WPM]

Only the unsaved people during the Millennium will have blood sacrifices to be stayed from punishment for sins, unless and until they repent and believe the Lord as Savior, and not just King and Judge.

Though, there will be no stays of execution. Those sacrifices are only for sins, that are not unto death.

You seem to make your theology up as you go. Where is all this in Revelation 20 or anywhere else in the Bible?

Where in the Bible teaches that "Only the unsaved people during the Millennium will have blood sacrifices to be stayed from punishment for sins, unless and until they repent and believe the Lord as Savior, and not just King and Judge"?

Where in the Bible teaches that "Though, there will be no stays of execution. Those sacrifices are only for sins, that are not unto death"?

 

[robert derrick]

You seem to make your theology up as you go. Where is all this in Revelation 20 or anywhere else in the Bible?

Why do you keep asking for what you've already been given long ago? You didn't believe the prophecies then, and you won't now.

He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples?

Where in the Bible teaches that "Only the unsaved people during the Millennium will have blood sacrifices to be stayed from punishment for sins, unless and until they repent and believe the Lord as Savior, and not just King and Judge"?

It's the reasoning from the prophecies of Scripture, that you've already rejected.

Where in the Bible teaches that "Though, there will be no stays of execution. Those sacrifices are only for sins, that are not unto death'?

There is no blood sacrifice for murder, other than the blood of the murderer.

Your ignorance of the law shows why you don't know what you are talking about, when you try to speak of the law.

The only thing you've mastered about Scripture, that I have seen, is your own false prophecy twisted out of Scripture.

You have that down pat with much much glorified scholar-speak.

The only time you talk straight, is when you show your ignorance of Scripture, by asking questions, that someone studying Scripture ought to already know.

Especially someone putting themselves forth as great scholars of Scripture, which we find is only with the speech, but not with the knowledge.

 

[Truth7t7]

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

They have alot of people to feed, smiles!

 

[Randy Kluth]

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.

Yes, I'm saying Eze 40-48 is a *vision.* No question about that. And no, I'm not saying the *prophecy* contained in this vision will not be fulfilled. It will be fulfilled in the same way any vision is fulfilled, by what the vision means, whether through symbolism or not. Determining that the temple is symbolic is the question, and I come down on the side of "symbolic" for the reasons given. NT doctrine definitely proscribes the re-use of OT order and law.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

 

[WPM]

It's the reasoning from the prophecies of Scripture, that you've already rejected.


There is no blood sacrifice for murder, other than the blood of the murderer.

Your ignorance of the law shows why you don't know what you are talking about, when you try to speak of the law.

The only thing you've mastered about Scripture, that I have seen, is your own false prophecy twisted out of Scripture.

You have that down pat with much much glorified scholar-speak.

The only time you talk straight, is when you show your ignorance of Scripture, by asking questions, that someone studying Scripture ought to already know.

Especially someone putting themselves forth as great scholars of Scripture, which we find is only with the speech, but not with the knowledge.

Exactly. It is all human reasoning. It is your own imaginations. That sums up your Premil promotion of rival bloody sacrifices to the cross in your imaginary future age.

 

[Randy Kluth]

Exactly. It is all human reasoning. It is your own imaginations. That sums up your Premil promotion of rival bloody sacrifices to the cross in your imaginary future age.

To be clear, not all Premil believe this. I've repeated this often, but I don't recall your having acknowledged it. There are beyond dispute Premil positions that are *not* Dispensationalist. I for one am Premil and *not* a Dispensationalist. I do *not* believe in a restoration of animal sacrifice, temple worship, or Levitical priesthood.

 

[WPM]

To be clear, not all Premil believe this. I've repeated this often, but I don't recall your having acknowledged it. There are beyond dispute Premil positions that are *not* Dispensationalist. I for one am Premil and *not* a Dispensationalist. I do *not* believe in a restoration of animal sacrifice, temple worship, or Levitical priesthood.

I recognize that. But this is not limited to Dispies. Most Premils (here and elsewhere) believe this from my experience.

 

[Michiah-Imla]

 

[WPM]

Why do you keep asking for what you've already been given long ago? You didn't believe the prophecies then, and you won't now.

He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples?

You have a bad habit of making wild extra biblical unsubstantiated claims like this without supporting them with the slightest of Scripture. That is what I am exposing. That is your MO. What is more: your claims impose events and characteristics upon Revelation that do not exist in the inspired text.

Every time Amils ask you for proof you ignore and run.

 

[robert derrick]

Yes, I'm saying Eze 40-48 is a *vision.* No question about that.

True.

And no, I'm not saying the *prophecy* contained in this vision will not be fulfilled. It will be fulfilled in the same way any vision is fulfilled, by what the vision means, hether through symbolism or not

Prophecy is fulfilled by what it says shall come to pass.

Symbols in prophecy can be interpreted for meaning.

The specific prophecies of Ezek 40- is not with symbols, nor by symbolic names as Gog in the prophetic vision of Ezex 38.

. Determining that the temple is symbolic is the question, and I come down on the side of "symbolic"

I.e. no prophecy but symbol only.

Prophecy can have symbols, but not prophecy is symbolic only.

There is no specific measurement of the temple and priesthood and Lord's glory in His house, that can be turned into symbols.

Prophecy that is symbol only, is fable only.

If the temple of the Millennium is symbolic, so is the Millennium.

Amillennialism.

If not, then it's just another version of Christ's Millennium, made by opinions of men.

for the reasons given.

You mean by opinions of yours that you say are required, since your opinion is that the specifics of the prophecy cannot come to pass, since you say Christ's prophecy will violate Christ's gospel.

NT doctrine definitely proscribes the re-use of OT order and law.

Mere opinion with no Scripture stating so.

Your opinion about NT doctrine, leads you to opinion about OT prophecy, which leads you to changing the prophecy, in order to help Jesus not to violate His doctrine by His prophecy.

You destroy prophecy of Scripture to save gospel of Christ.

I believe prophecy of Scripture, and am shown by the Holy Ghost through rightly dividing Scripture, how the prophecy does not violate the gospel.

1. The law of Moses cannot be the law of the Millennium.

2. Offerings for sin are not outlawed by the Lord, except those offered to idols.

3. Burnt offerings were a smell of sweet savour to the Lord before the law of Moses, and they will be again during His Millennium.

4. The prophecies of Zek 40- will come to pass exactly as written, even as the prophecies before Ezek 40.

And so we conclude with my teaching of Scripture, which your reject, and your opinions about Scripture, which are yours alone.

 

[robert derrick]

You have a bad habit of making wild extra biblical unsubstantiated claims like this without supporting them with the slightest of Scripture. That is what I am exposing. That is your MO. What is more: your claims impose events and characteristics upon Revelation that do not exist in the inspired text.

Every time Amils ask you for proof you ignore and run.

Every time I answer a challenge, you ignore and mantra on.

But so long as you keep coming up with things to correct, I'll do so.

Your teaching of the Lamb of God, as being just last in line of bulls and goats, is false.

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

The blood of the Lamb is not just the last blood sacrifice of those gone before, but is the one and only sacrifice of God Himself that ever washed away sins from the foundation of the world, and ever will through the new heaven and earth.

 

[robert derrick]

Proof that Ezek 40- prophecies have not yet come to pass, is that NT Scripture does not say they have.

Other prophecies that have come to pass in Christ, are said so by the apostles in the gospels and books and letters of the NT.

 

[WPM]

Every time I answer a challenge, you ignore and mantra on.

But so long as you keep coming up with things to correct, I'll do so.

Your teaching of the Lamb of God, as being just last in line of bulls and goats, is false.

And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.

The blood of the Lamb is not just the last blood sacrifice of those gone before, but is the one and only sacrifice of God Himself that ever washed away sins from the foundation of the world, and ever will through the new heaven and earth.

Is Jesus not enough for you? He is for Amils! Hebrews 10:9-10 directly and explicitly nails the lie to this theory that men will be one day in the future be sanctified by the restoration of more the abolished animal sacrifices: “He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second. By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.”

Why would believers need anything else? The Premillennial theory undermines every element of the work of the cross, rendering it unsatisfactory. Because if it was fully and finally satisfactory as the New Testament intimates then there was no need for the restoration of the old ordinances. This popular Premil belief that men will be sanctified by animal sacrifices does great injury to the glorious Gospel of Christ which shows that we are eternally sanctified by the Lord Jesus Christ. 1 Corinthians 6:11 states, “ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.”

The only means of entry into the presence of God is the Lord Jesus Christ. There is no other way. Calvary has rendered the animal blood sacrifices totally obsolete. The Old Testament system is redundant. The cross removed the Old Covenant and ushered in the new superior eternal and final covenant. It is through Christ alone that we enter into God's presence.

Why do men need animal sacrifices to cover their sin on the new earth when the blood of Jesus is still active and efficacious? In fact it is an eternal sacrifice.

Speaking of Jesus, Hebrews 2:11 says, “For both he that sanctifieth and they who are sanctified are all of one: for which cause he is not ashamed to call them brethren.”

Hebrews 13:11-12 records, “For the bodies of those beasts, whose blood is brought into the sanctuary by the high priest for sin, are burned without the camp. Wherefore Jesus also, that he might sanctify the people with his own blood, suffered without the gate.”

Who or what is it that sanctifies Israel on the new earth? Or is it a joint effort between Christ and Zadok priesthood to sanctify God’s ancient people? Or is it a competition between the two as to which will sanctify them the best?

The word interpreted "sanctifieth" and "sanctified" here is the Greek word hagiazo meaning to purify, consecrate, sanctify or cover. All men that wish to approach God (whether now, in the past or in the future) come exclusively though and by Christ. There is no other covering. Christ is the final covering for sin. He is the fulfilment of every sin offering. There is therefore absolutely no biblical warrant for resurrecting the old covenant Judaic sacrificial system outside of rebelling against the fact that Christ is the final sacrifice for sin. This is a very serious matter. Christ has made that one final satisfactory sacrifice for sin. The old ordinances were nailed to the tree with Christ. The old covenant was removed with the introduction of the new, yet Premils insist on the re-starting of these abolished sacrifices.

1 Corinthians 1:30-31 also tells us: “of him (God) are ye in Christ Jesus, who of God is made unto us wisdom, and righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption: That, according as it is written, He that glorieth, let him glory in the Lord.”

The sinner's covering or sanctification today is Christ. This Premillennial hope totally undoes the exclusive efficacy and sole propitiatiatory (or substitutionary) qualities of the blood of Jesus. I'm sorry but I am of the strong view that this belief totally undermines the still active work of the cross. Jesus alone is man's final offering, sacrifice and hope of escaping the wrath of God.

Those who suggest mortal sinners will inhabit the new earth and will be rendered clean by reintroduction of the abolished old covenant sacrifices have no grasp of the mission and achievement of Christ, the character of the new covenant and repeated New Testament teaching about the cross.

 

[WPM]

Proof that Ezek 40- prophecies have not yet come to pass, is that NT Scripture does not say they have.

Other prophecies that have come to pass in Christ, are said so by the apostles in the gospels and books and letters of the NT.

You talk such nonsense. The reality is: the shedding of His blood satisfied the Father and reconciled the sinner to God, securing eternal redemption (1 John 1:7). By attempting to reintroduce animal sacrifices, Premillennialism does great injury to the work of Christ on the Cross, undoes the once all-sufficient sacrifice that Christ made for sin, undermines the eternal nature of the atonement, and disregards numerous New Testament passages that conclusively prove that Christ’s blood sacrifice was final and eternal. The Old Testament system that employed animal sacrifices was nailed to the Cross and blotted out according to the New Testament.

Colossians 2:14 plainly and unambiguously declares, that Christ's atonement resulted in the “Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross.”

The Greek word for “Blotting out” here is exaleiphō (eks-ä-lā'-fō) meaning: ‘to wipe off, wipe away, to obliterate, erase, wipe out, blot out’

These old covenant ordinances (rites and rituals) pertaining to the ceremonial law were obliterated at the cross.

For those that still anticipate the renaissance of the old abolished ordinances we need to ask: When did (or will) the “blotting out the handwriting of ordinances” occur? From this passage it is clear, Christ “took it out of the way” by “nailing it to his cross.” These ordinances embraced the old covenant civil, ceremonial or ecclesiastical law. They were finished at the cross.

Colossians 2:16-17 tells us: “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.”

The Greek word translated “holyday” here is heorte meaning feast or festival. Of 27 mentions of this word in the normally precise KJV, it is interpreted “feast” in all of them apart from here.

New American Standard interprets: “Therefore let no one act as your judge in regard to food or drink or in respect to a festival or a new moon or a Sabbath day -- things which are a mere shadow of what is to come; but the substance belongs to Christ.”

The Living Bible says, “So don't let anyone criticize you for what you eat or drink, or for not celebrating Jewish holidays and feasts or new moon ceremonies or Sabbaths. For these were only temporary rules that ended when Christ came. They were only shadows of the real thing-of Christ himself.”

Paul is saying here that the old covenant feasts and festivals simply served as types and shadows of things that were to come. They looked forward to the new covenant arrangement and the reality and substance in Christ. The Jews of Ezekiel’s day and Zechariah’s day would never have understood this.

Colossians 2:20-22 finally sums up the sums up the biblical position today: “Wherefore if ye be dead with Christ from the rudiments of the world, why, as though living in the world, are ye subject to ordinances, (Touch not; taste not; handle not; Which all are to perish with the using) after the commandments and doctrines of men?”

This is not talking about the moral law, it is talking about the ceremonial law. It is a redundant system. Christ took the whole old system away. The old Mosaic ceremonial law is completely gone. It is useless.

Christianity took us away from the old Mosaic ceremonial law completely. Those who argue for a return to the old system fail to see that it has been rendered obsolete through the new covenant.

Hebrews 7:18-19 makes clear: “For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God.”

This word “disannulling” is taken from the Greek word athetesis meaning cancellation.

The phrase “weakness and unprofitableness” used here to describe the old abolished system actually reads asthenes kai anopheles literally meaning: feeble and impotent useless and unprofitable.

It is hard to believe that Christians would promote the return, on the new earth of all places, of such a hopeless discarded arrangement.