Christs second coming

mkgal1 said:

I probably shouldn't be doing your work for you - but here's a start:

Hebrews 8:1-2 ~The point of what we are saying is this: We do have such a high priest, who sat down at the right hand of the throne of the Majesty in heaven, and who serves
in the sanctuary, the true tagernacle set up by the LORD, not by man.​

4

The Old Covenant Priesthood Foreshadows the Priesthood of the New Covenant



If an Israelite high priest were to come into the fellowship of a Christian
group today, dressed in his linen tunic, ephod, breastplate, turban, and Urim
and Thummim, he would certainly create quite a stir. When one reads Exodus and Leviticus,
it can be a daunting task to try to relate to all the ceremony, regulations,
special clothing, different orders associated with the Jewish priesthood. If one will
bear in mind that in all this, God had a plan to reveal his plan for the ministry
of Jesus Christ and his church, this confusing array of information which we
cannot really relate to will begin to make sense. In trying to understand the Old
Covenant priesthood and the foreshadows in all these regulations, we will find
further evidence to support the claim that the theme of the Old Testament is
The Messiah is coming, bringing salvation.

Under the Old Covenant, the tabernacle and the temple would not have counted
for much without priests to serve there. Who were the priests? What did they do, and what,
specifically does all this foreshadow in the New Testament? That is the subject of this
chapter.



THE PRIESTHOOD



First, we will need a primer on the Jewish priesthood. Sometimes the priesthood in the
Mosaic Law is called the levitical priesthood. This is somewhat of a misnomer. All priests were
Levites, but not all Levites were priests. The Levites were the sons of Levi, one of
the twelve sons of Israel. God designated the Levites to serve at the tabernacle
and the temple. The Levites were, in a sense, the tithe of God's people devoted
to the ministry of God. However, only a small portion of the Levites were actually designated priests. The LORD said to Moses, "Speak to the priests, the sons of Aaron" (Leviticus 21:1). Only the sons of Aaron were accepted as priests to actually serve in the sanctuary, making sacrifices, keeping the lamp lit, replacing the bread and so forth.

The rest of the Levites were designated for such tasks as moving the tabernacle,
singing at the temple and so forth. Their fellow Levites were assigned to all the
other duties of the tabernacle, the house of God. But Aaron and his descendants
were the ones who presented offerings on the altar of burnt offering and on
the altar of incense in connection with all that was done in the Most Holy Place,
making atonement for Israel, in accordance with all that Moses the servant of God had commanded. (1 Chronicles 6:48,49).

There were many special regulations in the Law of Moses requiring the sons of
Aaron, the priests, to keep ceremonially clean. They could not touch a dead body, shave their head or marry women who had formerly been prostitutes and so forth. They must be holy to their God and must not profane the name of their God. Because they present the offerings made to the LORD by fire, the food of theirGod, they are to be holy. (Leviticus 21:6). No son of Aaron with any physical deformity was allowed to serve in the sanctuary. To us, this might seem a bit prejudiced against the physically disabled, but all these restrictions have meaning in the antitype to the priesthood in the New Testament. The point of all these restrictions was so that priests would be more "holy" than the other Israelites. The word holy in the Hebrew means one specially designated, set apart, or pure. This will have great significance in the antitype to the priesthood in the New Testament.

Amongst the priests, there was one specially designated as high priest. The office of high priest was of great significance to the entire system of Law instituted by God through Moses. The High Priest, obviously, had to be a descendant of Aaron. In fact, Aaron was the first high priest. The high priest was designated so by anointing with oil. There were even more stringent rules for holiness for the high priest than for the other sons of Aaron. ~ The Old Covenant Priesthood Prefigures the Priethood in the New Covenant | Evidence for Christianity

Click to expand...

mkgal1 said:

What are you talking about?

Click to expand...

BABerean2 said:

Antiochus Epiphanes was the "little horn" of Daniel.

See John 10:22 for a reference to Hanukkah, which is a celebration of the re-dedication of the temple.

.

Click to expand...

BABerean2 said:

Normally on this forum a statement such as the above is backed up by scripture.

Do you expect us to take your word for it?

.

Click to expand...

mkgal1 said:

No.....that's not my point. I wasn't speaking to a determination of holy or unholy.

My point was that the Mosaic covenant had its time and place (as God ordained).....and like BABerean pointed out - some priests were, indeed, righteous and blameless before God.

Click to expand...

mkgal1 said:

The temple was taken from ancient Jews (including the holy of holies) - and the whole religious system that their lives revolved around was gone. The ancient temple wasn't comparable to our modern-day churches. It wasn't just a meeting hall.

Until you grasp the meaning of "kingdom" and even what the Mosaic covenant system was (and the people and time period it pertained to) - you won't be understanding what's revealed in the Old testament about the coming of salvation that's in the New Testament.

It's not about modern judaism - it's about the Mosaic covenant/temple system compared to the New Covenant.

I'd suggest doing some reading (maybe from early church fathers). I'm unsure of where you're getting your "information" - but it's not in line with orthodox Christianity.

Click to expand...

iamlamad said:

Truth? The little horn of chapter 7 is still future to us. the little horn of chapter 8 is history, being about Antiochus.

Click to expand...

mkgal1 said:

I do.

If a person is reading this with a different context rather than in Jesus' time (as Jesus kept teaching His disciples the time would be) - they will arrive at a whole other interpretation (which is what I suspect is happening).

I believe Jesus when He said, "the kingdom of heaven is NEAR". I don't believe 2,000 or so years qualifies as "near".

Matthew 4 ~

Jesus Begins His Ministry in Galilee
12 Now when Jesus heard that John had been arrested, he withdrew to Galilee. 13 He left Nazareth and made his home in Capernaum by the sea, in the territory of Zebulun and Naphtali, 14 so that what had been spoken through the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled:

15 “Land of Zebulun, land of Naphtali,
on the road by the sea, across the Jordan, Galilee of the Gentiles—
16 the people who sat in darkness
have seen a great light,
and for those who sat in the region and shadow of death
light has dawned.”

17 From that time Jesus began to proclaim, “Repent, for the kingdom of heaven has come near.”​

Click to expand...