Should Messianic Jews support Jerusalem Third Temple?

[tampasteve]

I mean not to be blunt, I am a bit under the weather, so I apologize if anything sounds gruff

Now that I've got the 18 hamburger buns made I can pay more attention!

Haha, sounds good

Those men were performing a Nazarite vow--thus the shaved heads.

We actually do not know that it was a Nazarite vow, though it is a reasonable assumption, and I agree it probably was.

Num_6:18 And the Nazarite shall shave the head of his separation at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, and shall take the hair of the head of his separation, and put it in the fire which is under the sacrifice of the peace offerings.
Num_6:19 And the priest shall take the sodden shoulder of the ram, and one unleavened cake out of the basket, and one unleavened wafer, and shall put them upon the hands of the Nazarite, after the hair of his separation is shaven:
Num_6:20 And the priest shall wave them for a wave offering before the LORD: this is holy for the priest, with the wave breast and heave shoulder: and after that the Nazarite may drink wine.
Num_6:21 This is the law of the Nazarite who hath vowed, and of his offering unto the LORD for his separation, beside that that his hand shall get: according to the vow which he vowed, so he must do after the law of his separation.

It was not a sin offering. Most offerings of this nature did not require blood---for there was no sin to forgive. They used meal, flour, oil--All of this is a far cry from instituting animal sacrifices for removal of sins. Christ has done that.

OK, first let me remind that I have been the one pointing out that sacrifice did not require blood, even the sin sacrifice can be grain if one is poor. Remembering that we must think that blood is not what Hashem wants, it is the ritual, the heart. The only sacrifice without a grain option was of the community, so not on the individual.

Further, I have not been saying that animal sacrifice would necessarily continue, simply that sacrifices would continue. Your posts were the ones saying that the sacrifices would not take place again. That said, I personally do think that animal sacrifice will continue, but that might be a different discussion. Let us simply leave it now that I believe the scriptures point towards the belief that sacrifice will continue in the third Temple.

Reinstating animal sacrifice for the propose of removal of sins is not biblically supported and if there were fire to come down from heaven over those sacrifices--it would not be of God.

I believe it is supportable for many sacrifice, please remember that there were many other sacrifices other than sin and guilt. Fire did not come down from Heaven to ignite the sacrifices on a routine basis, it was fire made in a normal way. Fire did come from Heaven at certain times in scripture, but not routinely for normal sacrifice.

I don't know if anyone makes Nazarite vows anymore?

No idea...maybe, but it seems very unlikely.

 

[tampasteve]

Not seeing anything other than his understanding of scripture, causing him to not be able to believe what you believe. Jesus also said it was no longer the place where men would worship God.
Joh 4:21 Jesus saith unto her, Woman, believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father.

The OP said " Ezekiel was tainted by his firm believe..." this implies that the prophesy is tainted which has much deeper implications for the whole of scripture. If this is tainted then what else might be? As MJ believers we generally believe that every word is in the Tanakh for a reason, nothing is extraneous.

 

[ralliann]

The OP said " Ezekiel was tainted by his firm believe..." this implies that the prophesy is tainted which has much deeper implications for the whole of scripture. If this is tainted then what else might be? As MJ believers we generally believe that every word is in the Tanakh for a reason, nothing is extraneous.

I understand concerning his issues with scripture, and I would concur with you on that very narrow point. But it does not mean that Ezekiel is literal. Nor does it make him uncomfortable necessarily, that's all.

 

[tampasteve]

I understand concerning his issues with scripture, and I would concur with you on that very narrow point. But it does not mean that Ezekiel is literal. Nor does it make him uncomfortable necessarily, that's all.

OK, I cannot disagree with that, perhaps in the end it is semantics

 

[ralliann]

OK, I cannot disagree with that, perhaps in the end it is semantics

Maybe it is semantics. I just cannot see the eschatological conclusions being drawn concerning Ezekiel by some in here. IMO, it contradicts Moses law, as well as New covenant teachings.

 

[tampasteve]

Maybe it semantics. I just cannot see the eschatological conclusions being drawn concerning Ezekiel by some in here. IMO, it contradicts Moses law, as well as New covenant teachings.

Care to expound? I am always curious and happy to learn, and possibly change my mind.

 

[ralliann]

QUOTE="tampasteve, post: 72115616, member: 398316"]Care to expound? I am always curious and happy to learn, and possibly change my mind. [/QUOTE]
Sure! According to the Mosaic law (Levitical law) The Levitical priesthood is to the tribe of Levi alone, according to the order of Aaron alone, and is forever so. Hebrews also states this truth.
Just some scripture for reference
Ex 27:21 In the tabernacle of the congregation without the vail, which is before the testimony, Aaron and his sons shall order it from evening to morning before the LORD: it shall be a statute for ever unto their generations on the behalf of the children of Israel.
Ex 28:43 And they shall be upon Aaron, and upon his sons, when they come in unto the tabernacle of the congregation, or when they come near unto the altar to minister in the holy place; that they bear not iniquity, and die: it shall be a statute for ever unto him and his seed after him.
Ex 29:28 And it shall be Aaron’s and his sons’ by a statute for ever from the children of Israel: for it is an heave offering: and it shall be an heave offering from the children of Israel of the sacrifice of their peace offerings, even their heave offering unto the LORD.
In agreement, the new covenant teaching says....
Heb 7:14 For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood.
Heb 8:4 For if he were on earth, he should not be a priest, seeing that there are priests that offer gifts according to the law:
In fact Moses states, the priesthood is Levis inheritance, distinct from the inheritance given the 12 tribes of Israel

 

[tampasteve]

An acquaintance of mine put it this way:

"Animal offerings cover the priests and worshiper(s) to be able to enter the Beit hamikdash in Jerusalem and physically stand in the presence of Hashem.

Yeshua’s death covers the sinner so a person can enter the heavenly Beit hamikdash, or world to come, or eternal life.

Though the idea of covering or atonement is similar in both cases, each serves an entirely different purpose. One to enter the temple here on earth, one to enter eternal life on the other side of death.

Some day, when the temple is built, priests and worshipers will still need atonement via animal sacrifices, and they will offer these as prescribed in the Torah, which cannot be cancelled or annulled, as it says, until heaven and earth pass away."​

Taking that with the remembrance that there are (or will be) actually two Temples, one on Earth, and one in Heaven, of which the one on Earth is a shadow of the one in Heaven, we get a different view of the whole process, I think.

 

[ralliann]

An acquaintance of mine put it this way:

"Animal offerings cover the priests and worshiper(s) to be able to enter the Beit hamikdash in Jerusalem and physically stand in the presence of Hashem.

Yeshua’s death covers the sinner so a person can enter the heavenly Beit hamikdash, or world to come, or eternal life.

Though the idea of covering or atonement is similar in both cases, each serves an entirely different purpose. One to enter the temple here on earth, one to enter eternal life on the other side of death.

Some day, when the temple is built, priests and worshipers will still need atonement via animal sacrifices, and they will offer these as prescribed in the Torah, which cannot be cancelled or annulled, as it says, until heaven and earth pass away."​

Taking that with the remembrance that there are (or will be) actually two Temples, one on Earth, and one in Heaven, of which the one on Earth is a shadow of the one in Heaven, we get a different view of the whole process, I think.

Well, Moses instructions make the High priest, in his vestments to go in to appear before the Lord in representative agency. We can see that any other than the sons of aaron are strangers in Gods household (the very tabernacle itself).

Moses in his reference, of strangers in the sense of being "estranged".
Nu 1:51 And when the tabernacle setteth forward, the Levites shall take it down: and when the tabernacle is to be pitched, the Levites shall set it up: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Nu 3:10 And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait on their priest’s office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Nu 18:4 And they shall be joined unto thee, and keep the charge of the tabernacle of the congregation, for all the service of the tabernacle: and a stranger <02114> shall not come nigh unto you.
Nu 18:7 Therefore thou and thy sons with thee shall keep your priest’s office for every thing of the altar, and within the vail; and ye shall serve: I have given your priest’s office unto you as a service of gift: and the stranger <02114> that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Do you think perhaps there can be various kinds of replacement theologies? Perhaps the replacing of the Leivitcal inheritance might be one such sort?

 

[ralliann]

Well, Moses instructions make the High priest, in his vestments to go in to appear before the Lord in representative agency. We can see that any other than the sons of aaron are strangers in Gods household (the very tabernacle itself).

Moses in his reference, of strangers in the sense of being "estranged".
Nu 1:51 And when the tabernacle setteth forward, the Levites shall take it down: and when the tabernacle is to be pitched, the Levites shall set it up: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Nu 3:10 And thou shalt appoint Aaron and his sons, and they shall wait on their priest’s office: and the stranger that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Nu 18:4 And they shall be joined unto thee, and keep the charge of the tabernacle of the congregation, for all the service of the tabernacle: and a stranger <02114> shall not come nigh unto you.
Nu 18:7 Therefore thou and thy sons with thee shall keep your priest’s office for every thing of the altar, and within the vail; and ye shall serve: I have given your priest’s office unto you as a service of gift: and the stranger <02114> that cometh nigh shall be put to death.

Do you think perhaps there can be various kinds of replacement theologies? Perhaps the replacing of the Leivitcal inheritance might be one such sort?

Anyway, Such teachings appear to be contrary to the law Moses gave from God.

 

[tampasteve]

Do you think perhaps there can be various kinds of replacement theologies? Perhaps the replacing of the Leivitcal inheritance might be one such sort?

Possibly, but it would depend. In general I do not agree with any replacement theology as most take scripture out of context by either ignoring the Jewish Scriptures or making the NT above them in importance, when they need to be taken as a complete work and on the same level.

But as to the Levitical inheritance, no I do not think that can be replaced, the scriptures are clear that it is an eternal covenant as long as the Earth is here they are to be the priests in the Temple.

 

[ralliann]

Possibly, but it would depend. In general I do not agree with any replacement theology as most take scripture out of context by either ignoring the Jewish Scriptures or making the NT above them in importance, when they need to be taken as a complete work and on the same level.

But as to the Levitical inheritance, no I do not think that can be replaced, the scriptures are clear that it is an eternal covenant as long as the Earth is here they are to be the priests in the Temple.

So, you appear to be in agreement with me concerning the law of Moses concerning the priestly inheritance. So this is why I do not take Ezekiel to be in anyway contradicting Moses.
Now, a new covenant, and an heavenly kingdom and spiritual tabernacle yes! But not another priesthood officiating in the earthly worldly tabernacle as prescribed in law from Moses....

 

[tampasteve]

So, you appear to be in agreement with me concerning the law of Moses concerning the priestly inheritance. So this is why I do not take Ezekiel to be in anyway contradicting Moses.

Yes, I believe so

Now, a new covenant, and an heavenly kingdom and spiritual tabernacle yes! But not another priesthood officiating in the earthly worldly tabernacle as prescribed in law from Moses....

Exactly, I agree.

 

[mmksparbud]

You should study about the temple and the sacrifices.
They weren't all about sin. Yeshua himself will be the
high priest and king at the millennial temple, and there
will be sacrifices made.

I have----extremely interesting. One of the best studies on it was made by a Scottish professor. Went into every aspect of it, including the threads used and the colors. Never heard a more thorough discussion and he could have gone on much longer. The earthly temple has always been only a shadow of the heavenly. And the heavenly is where Christ now is.
Heb_8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
Heb_9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Thing is---we no longer need an earthly temple.

1Co_3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
1Co_3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
1Co_6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

1Pe_2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.


and in the remade earth, there will be no temple:
Rev_21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.


No---sacrifices were not all about sin--and I already mentioned that. Those required no blood, and therefore, no animals killed.
For Christ's is the only blood needed for sins
Mat_26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

 

[tampasteve]

I have----extremely interesting. One of the best studies on it was made by a Scottish professor. Went into every aspect of it, including the threads used and the colors. Never heard a more thorough discussion and he could have gone on much longer. The earthly temple has always been only a shadow of the heavenly. And the heavenly is where Christ now is.

Heb_8:5 Who serve unto the example and shadow of heavenly things, as Moses was admonished of God when he was about to make the tabernacle: for, See, saith he, that thou make all things according to the pattern shewed to thee in the mount.
Heb_9:23 It was therefore necessary that the patterns of things in the heavens should be purified with these; but the heavenly things themselves with better sacrifices than these.

Yep! Since Yeshua is officiating in the Heavenly Temple, we will need the Levites to officiate in the Earthly Temple, when it is rebuilt.

Thing is---we no longer need an earthly temple.

1Co_3:16 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
1Co_3:17 If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.
1Co_6:19 What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

1Pe_2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Except the verses you list and having a physical temple are not mutually exclusive, one can have a physical Temple, and a body (soul) temple. G-d always desired for our bodies to be the Temple, to be worshiping Him with our mind, souls, and bodies, but he also desired a place that He could literally be among us, His Temple.

and in the remade earth, there will be no temple:
Rev_21:22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

No---sacrifices were not all about sin--and I already mentioned that. Those required no blood, and therefore, no animals killed.
For Christ's is the only blood needed for sins

Back to the beginning of the chapter:
Rev. 21:1

Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away, and the sea was no more.​

This chapter of Rev. is talking about after the new Heaven and New Earth are made, so the Mosaic covenant would not be relevant any longer, the scriptures say that the Mosaic Covenant is eternal and forever as long as this Earth is here. So it would be presumably after the third Temple.

Mat_26:28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Right, the blood shed mystically for our remission of sins to allow us eternal life and access to the Heavenly Temple.

 

[mmksparbud]

• The thing is this: Now---if Jesus is the blood shed once and for all for sin---then what need is there of any more shed blood? I am not saying that the temple will not be built, that is between the Jews and God. I am saying, scripture says it is no longer needed. Jesus is in the Heavenly Temple now, it is His blood presented for each sinner, and we are, ourselves now the temple of God wherein He resides. And there will be no temple in the remade earth.
• And I am aware that fire from heaven did not come down at every sacrifice--but always at the dedication of the temple. This temple would have to have God's approval also by fire from heaven when dedicated. But if one of the signs of the end is Satan bringing fire down from heaven, whose fire would it be that the 3rd temple is dedicated by??
• If Jesus is the only blood needed, then what about Ezekiel's vision? It is right that I really can not say that Ezekiel is perhaps imposing his own view of the temple unto his vision for that would indeed taint scripture. I believe the person who said this is more of a spiritual meaning than a literal one. it is hard to reconcile these 2 points of view, but they must be for all the scriptures to make sense. And a literal Jesus reigning on this earth offering blood sacrifices, makes absolutely no sense.
• Can someone help me please---I am having a hard time finding that vision of Jesus supposedly reigning on earth and offering sacrifices---where is it??? I wanted to review it and can't find it! I thought it was Ezekiel, but maybe I'm wrong.

 

[tampasteve]

• The thing is this: Now---if Jesus is the blood shed once and for all for sin---then what need is there of any more shed blood? I am not saying that the temple will not be built, that is between the Jews and God. I am saying, scripture says it is no longer needed. Jesus is in the Heavenly Temple now, it is His blood presented for each sinner, and we are, ourselves now the temple of God wherein He resides. And there will be no temple in the remade earth.

In my view, the blood shed was for our entry into Heaven, eternal life. Earthly blood is for Earthly atonement and entry to the earthly temple. Scripture says it is not needed for eternal life, but it does not say it is not needed for fulfillment of the commandments of the Mosaic Law for Jewish believers on this earth. As there is no Temple now the commandment is lifted, for the time being.

As for the building of the Temple being "between the Jews and G-d", I believe that is not quite right. If we truly believe are are grafted to the nation of Israel as scriptures tells us, it concerns us all. We are not under the Law for the sacrifices, but having the Temple and being able to see it would be incredible for us, as Messianic Believers and as grafted Christians.

• And I am aware that fire from heaven did not come down at every sacrifice--but always at the dedication of the temple. This temple would have to have God's approval also by fire from heaven when dedicated. But if one of the signs of the end is Satan bringing fire down from heaven, whose fire would it be that the 3rd temple is dedicated by??

Could you point out where it happened in the dedication of the second Temple or where scriptures tells us it must happen at the dedication? I cannot find that in Ezra. Ezra 6:13-18 describes the dedication and sacrifices made, but it does not mention Heavenly Fire. Indeed the first Temple, Solomon's Temple, had fire from Heaven ignite the sacrifice at the dedication.

• If Jesus is the only blood needed, then what about Ezekiel's vision? It is right that I really can not say that Ezekiel is perhaps imposing his own view of the temple unto his vision for that would indeed taint scripture. I believe the person who said this is more of a spiritual meaning than a literal one. it is hard to reconcile these 2 points of view, but they must be for all the scriptures to make sense. And a literal Jesus reigning on this earth offering blood sacrifices, makes absolutely no sense.

I believe that the way I have presented my case reconciles the scriptures without making the vision out to be spiritual only. Also, why would it not make sense for literal sacrifice with Yeshua here? He is not the Earthly priest, but the Heavenly one. If we view the Earthly sacrificial system as a way to get closer to G-d Himself then it would make sense still as Yeshua is part of the Trinity but not the same as G-d. Just as having the Ruach Hakodesh present now is not the same as having Yeshua here even though He is part of the Trinity as well (assuming we are Trinitarian in this discussion). But the scriptures about sacrifices in the Millennial Kingdom are not just in Ezekiel, they are also found: (ESV)
Jeremiah 33:18
18 and the Levitical priests shall never lack a man in my presence to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings, and to make sacrifices forever."
Isaiah 56:7
7 these I will bring to my holy mountain, and make them joyful in my house of prayer; their burnt offerings and their sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house shall be called a "house of prayer for all peoples."
Malachi 3:3-4
3 He will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the sons of Levi and refine them like gold and silver, and they will bring offerings in righteousness to the LORD.

I personally find it difficult to read the exactness and vividness of the description of a physical temple and say it is mean to be spiritual. Though, I can certainly be wrong. In the end this is not a point that our salvation hangs on, so I believe we can differ in our points of view.

• Can someone help me please---I am having a hard time finding that vision of Jesus supposedly reigning on earth and offering sacrifices---where is it??? I wanted to review it and can't find it! I thought it was Ezekiel, but maybe I'm wrong.

Perhaps Ezekiel 43:18-27? This chapter is giving vivid detail of the sacrificial system and is believed by most Christians to be during the millennial reign.

 

[Ygrene Imref]

I have a great love for history and find the churches as seven...

Ephesus - Messianic - Beginning with the Apostle to the Circumcision, Peter
Smyrna - Martyr - Beginning with the Apostle to the Un-Circumcision, Paul
Pergamos - Orthodoxy formed in this time... Pergos is a tower... Needed in the dark ages
Thyatira - Catholicism formed in this time - The spirit of Jezebel is to control and to dominate.
Sardis - Protestantism formed in this time- A sardius is a gem - elegant yet hard and rigid
Philadelphia - Wesleyism formed in this time - To be sanctioned is to acquire it with love.
Laodicea - Charismatic movement formed in this time - Beginning with DL Moody, the first to make money off of ministry

I also believe that the fulfilling of Ezekiel 38 is imminent. In which case, if Israel regains her borders in the aftermath of Ezekiel 38, from the river Euphrates to Egypt, I would look for a surge in Judaism and in the Messianic faith.

Have you read into Ezekiel 38?

8 After many days thou shalt be visited: in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.
9 Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.
10 Thus saith the Lord God; It shall also come to pass, that at the same time shall things come into thy mind, and thou shalt think an evil thought:
11 And thou shalt say, I will go up to the land of unwalled villages; I will go to them that are at rest, that dwell safely, all of them dwelling without walls, and having neither bars nor gates,
12 To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations, which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land.

18 And it shall come to pass at the same time when Gog shall come against the land of Israel, saith the Lord God, that my fury shall come up in my face. - Ezekiel 38

When these armies come against Israel the bible says that the anger and fury of God will come up in his face! I would say that those armies are all as good as dead in the aftermath!

This will create a power vacuum for Israel and she will once again become great. I would imagine almost like an empire. In which, the funds will be readily available for construction of a third temple.

What happens if and when physical/land Israel is razed?

 

[mmksparbud]

In my view, the blood shed was for our entry into Heaven, eternal life. Earthly blood is for Earthly atonement and entry to the earthly temple. Scripture says it is not needed for eternal life, but it does not say it is not needed for fulfillment of the commandments of the Mosaic Law for Jewish believers on this earth. As there is no Temple now the commandment is lifted, for the time being.

As for the building of the Temple being "between the Jews and G-d", I believe that is not quite right. If we truly believe are are grafted to the nation of Israel as scriptures tells us, it concerns us all. We are not under the Law for the sacrifices, but having the Temple and being able to see it would be incredible for us, as Messianic Believers and as grafted Christians.

\
Well---that is in your view. However that is not supported by scripture. Nothing states that the blood of Jesus is only for entry into heaven. It is not. It is shed for forgiveness of sins--period. That does not entitle anyone to enter into heaven. We have to believe it, it has to change our hearts into reflecting the character of God. If we live a life contrary to His word, it will grant us nothing. Earthly blood was good only until Jesus shed His own blood. Earthly blood is useless---it is only the blood of Jesus that can forgive sins. The earthly was a symbol, a substitute for the real Lamb. The shedding of blood is no longer needed for removal of sin or anything else. The temple itself is not needed and has no value to God now. He has a heavenly temple, the original where Jesus is the High Priest and now presents His own blood for the forgiveness of sins when a believer is brought to His altar. The Father accepts that shed blood. And, as in the earthly temple---those forgiven sins, are then placed on the head of the scape goat, they go squarely on the head of Satan.
The temple should not be built by Christian help. It is solely for non Christians, unbelievers who have no claim to the shed blood of Jesus. It is salvation through works. It is, in fact, a rejection of Jesus atonement. Will it save them??
Act_4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Would it be an awesome thing to see? Absolutely, but it is not for Christians.

Could you point out where it happened in the dedication of the second Temple or where scriptures tells us it must happen at the dedication? I cannot find that in Ezra. Ezra 6:13-18 describes the dedication and sacrifices made, but it does not mention Heavenly Fire. Indeed the first Temple, Solomon's Temple, had fire from Heaven ignite the sacrifice at the dedication.

You are right. The 2nd temple does not describe a fire from heaven. It had been destroyed by Nebby--was that considered a rebuilding? Herod's temple was a rebuilding of a standing structure---a remodel more?? Sort of makes it a 3rd temple already.

Perhaps Ezekiel 43:18-27? This chapter is giving vivid detail of the sacrificial system and is believed by most Christians to be during the millennial reign.

No---that's not the one I was thinking of that has been presented as during the millennium. Which, BTW, I do not believe happens on this earth anyway. He has a perfectly wonderful, magnificent heavenly temple, why come to this filthy earth to use this measly one? He alre4ady came---0the next time He comes will be as ruler of heaven and earth, nit as an earthly priest--His days of humble service are over--He is now King of Kings, Lord of Lords, High Priest forever---
The millennium is a shadow of the 7th year rest rule for the land:
Lev 25:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the LORD.
Lev 25:3 Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof;
Lev 25:4 But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard.
Lev 25:5 That which groweth of its own accord of thy harvest thou shalt not reap, neither gather the grapes of thy vine undressed: for it is a year of rest unto the land.

Such as --- 6000 years--then 1000 years of the land in rest.

 

[tampasteve]

I am not sure we are going to convince each other or see eye to eye on this. I am going to take a part of the last post that touch on the Temple that we have not gone over. I do not think that at this point there is a reason to re-hash the need, or lack of a need of sacrifices in the third Temple. Suffice to say that both points of view are supportable in scripture, but we disagree on how it is interpreted. I look from a Jewish perspective and you from a more or less mainline Christian perspective. Neither view is necessary for salvation, so in the end, it does not matter which of us is "right"

\
You are right. The 2nd temple does not describe a fire from heaven. It had been destroyed by Nebby--was that considered a rebuilding? Herod's temple was a rebuilding of a standing structure---a remodel more?? Sort of makes it a 3rd temple already.

The first Temple (Solomon's Temple) was destroyed in approximately 586BC. The second was built starting in 521BC and dedicated in 516BC, and has always been considered the "Second Temple". It was re-dedicated under the Maccabees in (probably) 165BC, as we just celebrated in Hanukkah. The reason for the re-dedication was that the Temple had been desecrated and pigs had been sacrificed to Zeus on the altar, but the Temple stood and was not rebuilt. The remodel under Herod was just a remodel and expansion, as far as we can tell religious ceremony and offerings continued during the construction, it was destroyed by the Romans in 70AD. But as for fire in the dedication, so far as I can see it only happened in the first Temple dedication and not at the second or second's re-dedication, so would not be required in the Third.