Matthew 24:31 is about the rapture

[Spiritual Jew]

Are you saying that even those end time prophecies relating to Revelations, in the old testament, in Daniel, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zachariah, that we cannot consider those to be exact, and we need to interpret them based on the New Testament?

Whenever possible, yes. Why not?

For example, there is this prophecy in Daniel:

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Without the aid of the New Testament we might conclude that this is talking about many of the dead being resurrected, but not all of them. But, Jesus made it clear that a time is coming when all of the dead will be resurrected.

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

So, using John 5:28-29 to illuminate Daniel 12:2 for us, we can see that the "many" that will be resurrected is not saying "many, but not all" of the dead will be resurrected at a future time. Instead, it's saying that all will be resurrected and the number of them will be "many" or "a multitude" (the Hebrew word can mean "many" or "a multitude").

Do you see my point?

 

[keras]

However, I don't think the sheep will be the ones building the temple. His sheep, who are scattered throughout the world, who God will gather, is Israel who will be in Jerusalem at the end times, and will be sacrificing in the temple administered by the Levi Priest. As Isaiah 65:9 says.

We are told who His 'sheep' are. John 10:1-27, Matthew 15:24
They are the Christian peoples; Jews and gentiles, people from every tribe, race, nation and language. Revelation 5:9-10

At this time, the church is the temple of God.

Yes, we Christians are His Temple; made without hands; the Spiritual Temple of God. This truth does not preclude a new physical Temple being built in Jerusalem. As Ezekiel 40 to 46 describes.
Jesus will Return to it, but before then, the Anti- Christ will desecrate it. 2 Thess 2:4

 

[keras]

So, you think He's going to go back to the inferior thing again for some reason? And you think that makes sense?

Sense? Gods ways are not our ways.
We don't know the Mind of God. The Prophets clearly say there will again be offerings in a literal Temple. Isaiah 56:1-8, Ezekiel 20:40-41

 

[biblelesson]

Whenever possible, yes. Why not?

For example, there is this prophecy in Daniel:

Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.

Without the aid of the New Testament we might conclude that this is talking about many of the dead being resurrected, but not all of them. But, Jesus made it clear that a time is coming when all of the dead will be resurrected.

John 5:28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

So, using John 5:28-29 to illuminate Daniel 12:2 for us, we can see that the "many" that will be resurrected is not saying "many, but not all" of the dead will be resurrected at a future time. Instead, it's saying that all will be resurrected and the number of them will be "many" or "a multitude" (the Hebrew word can mean "many" or "a multitude").

Do you see my point?

I see what you are saying, but this seems to be related to language, and the meaning of a phrase, or the interpretation of a phrase or how someone stated something, oppose to how another person stated it. But we are dealing with the same evet in each of the scriptures; nothing has changed. The even will take place.

This is not the same thing, as you are saying the temple can't be built because of Hebrews 8:10, and Hebrews 10 . There is 8 chapters in Ezekiel identifying the temple, and there are other Prophets identifying the temple in the end time. So, before we determine that because of Hebrews, we must completely disbelieve Ezekiel, and the other prophets, we must try and understand God's ways and how He works, and ask ourselves, why he made the change.

There are a lot of things that we might say we don't understand in the bible. But God provides an answer in His word, and if we continue to say that something doesn't make sense based on our rationalization, we become unable to discern scripture.

The bible says "in the mouth of two or three witness shall every word be established," 2 Corinthians 13:1). And Deuteronomy 19:15 says, ..."at the mount of two witnesses, or at the mouth of three witness, shall the matter be established. The witnesses that have established that there will be a temple at the end times during the thousand years are: Zacharia, Ezekiel, Daniel, Isaiah, Jeremiah, John who wrote Revelations, and several more.

 

[DavidPT]

I see what you are saying about Hebrews 10, however, I can't see that this temple is only to make Israel ashamed. I see this as a literal temple in the last days, especially based on other scriptures that talks about the last days. Now the question is why would the sacrifices be brought back? Although you don't agree, I do see that them as a re-establishment of the the laws that Israel broke, and God making Israel holy before Him. So they must go through all the laws they broke. I know you don't agree!

Here's something you're probably not considering. Granted, this is my own thinking and that I might be the only person on the planet that has thought some of this through in this manner, thus, maybe no one but me has considered it. Regardless what the case may be, here's what I'm assuming you are not taking into consideration before deciding how to interpret these last 8 chapters in Ezekiel.

Ezekiel 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.
8 In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, and the wall between me and them, they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger.
9 Now let them put away their whoredom, and the carcases of their kings, far from me, and I will dwell in the midst of them for ever.
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.
12 This is the law of the house; Upon the top of the mountain the whole limit thereof round about shall be most holy. Behold, this is the law of the house.

In this passage the son of man is meaning Ezekiel, and is obviously meaning while he was still alive. What was he to do while he was still alive? He was to shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern. That means the house of Israel meant is also alive at the time Ezekiel was. To project all of this into the future would have to mean that Ezekiel first needs to be resurrected, then the house of Israel living when he did, they also need to be resurrected, and once all of those things happen, the resurrected Ezekiel is to then shew the house to the resurrected house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern.

And if they be ashamed after all of them being resurrected first, the resurrected Ezekiel is to then 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.

How can any of these things not involve Ezekiel himself? And if we project this into the future, nothing recorded in the last 8 chapters involve Ezekiel during the time he was physically alive on the earth, but involve a time after everyone is resurrected first. IOW, to project these events into the future would mean Ezekiel was to never actually show the house of Israel alive in his day and age any of these things, but he was to wait until he is resurrected first, then he is to show them these things.

 

[keras]

How can any of these things not involve Ezekiel himself? And if we project this into the future, nothing recorded in the last 8 chapters involve Ezekiel during the time he was physically alive on the earth, but involve a time after everyone is resurrected first. IOW, to project these events into the future would mean Ezekiel was to never actually show the house of Israel alive in his day and age any of these things, but he was to wait until he is resurrected first, then he is to show them these things.

Ezekiel was an ancient Prophet, like all the rest of them, They have died and they rest, like David; Acts 13:36, until the GWT Judgment, after the Millennium.
Ezekiel 40 to 48 is about what will happen before Jesus Returns. Proved by how the people, all the righteous, faithful Christians, will elect their own leader, Hosea 1:11, Jeremiah 30:21 and he will have children. Ezekiel 46:16

 

[biblelesson]

Here's something you're probably not considering. Granted, this is my own thinking and that I might be the only person on the planet that has thought some of this through in this manner, thus, maybe no one but me has considered it. Regardless what the case may be, here's what I'm assuming you are not taking into consideration before deciding how to interpret these last 8 chapters in Ezekiel.

Ezekiel 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcasses of their kings in their high places.
8 In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, and the wall between me and them, they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger.
9 Now let them put away their whoredom, and the carcasses of their kings, far from me, and I will dwell in the midst of them for ever.
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.
12 This is the law of the house; Upon the top of the mountain the whole limit thereof round about shall be most holy. Behold, this is the law of the house.

In this passage the son of man is meaning Ezekiel, and is obviously meaning while he was still alive. What was he to do while he was still alive? He was to shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern. That means the house of Israel meant is also alive at the time Ezekiel was. To project all of this into the future would have to mean that Ezekiel first needs to be resurrected, then the house of Israel living when he did, they also need to be resurrected, and once all of those things happen, the resurrected Ezekiel is to then shew the house to the resurrected house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern.

No, Ezekiel would not have to be resurrected the way you explained, nor Israel. Ezekiel was shown a vision, where God brought him into the land of Israel where he was sat upon a high mountain. Ezekiel 40:1. Ezekiel's vision was in the future. In Ezekiel 43:9, God told Ezekiel that if Israel put away their whoredom, and carcasses of the king, He would dwell with them for ever.

Now think about the above paragraph. God was not talking about dwelling with Israel forever at that time because Israel was in exile. And if what Ezekiel's vision was in the future, God was speaking about that future event that he was showing Ezekiel.

This is a verse that tells you this is a real future Temple: Ezekiel 43:18, "...Son of man, thus saith the Lord God; These are the ordinances of the alter in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.

And if they be ashamed after all of them being resurrected first, the resurrected Ezekiel is to then 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.

Ezekiel had a major task. He was to show the pattern to Israel who was in captivity. Ezekiel 401:1. He had to show the form and the laws, and write it out in front of them, so that they could keep them. So why would they keep them? They were in captivity. God wanted Israel to still follow the pattern of the future temple, even while they were captives. God wanted Israel to know that he consumed them because of their iniquities, although they were in exile. But that He was still their God, and would dwell with them forever. This is the purpose of showing Israel the form of the future Temple, to make them ashamed, and to give them hope that Israel would be saved in the future, and that there would be a glorious future Temple for the nation of Israel.

How can any of these things not involve Ezekiel himself? And if we project this into the future, nothing recorded in the last 8 chapters involve Ezekiel during the time he was physically alive on the earth, but involve a time after everyone is resurrected first. IOW, to project these events into the future would mean Ezekiel was to never actually show the house of Israel alive in his day and age any of these things, but he was to wait until he is resurrected first, then he is to show them these things.

Again, Ezekiel was show a vision of the future, and God wanted him to show the Children of Israel the future temple and its form, where he had to write it physically write it out and show the people what the temple would look like.

This vision that Ezekiel saw is like other visions that the prophets saw of future event that was to come to pass, whole scenes, which God required the prophet to act out sometimes for months and for years.

So, your analysis doesn't have to happen. Ezekiel saw a vision of a future Temple, and God wanted him to show the people of his Israel "of that day" what that Temple would look like, and all of the forms of it, and laws. And to do them while they were in exile, and to have hope that He was still their God, and would dwell with them forever in their land.

 

[DavidPT]

No, Ezekiel would not have to be resurrected the way you explained, nor Israel. Ezekiel was shown a vision, where God brought him into the land of Israel where he was sat upon a high mountain. Ezekiel 40:1. Ezekiel's vision was in the future. In Ezekiel 43:9, God told Ezekiel that if Israel put away their whoredom, and carcasses of the king, He would dwell with them for ever.

Now think about the above paragraph. God was not talking about dwelling with Israel forever at that time because Israel was in exile. And if what Ezekiel's vision was in the future, God was speaking about that future event that he was showing Ezekiel.

So let's think about this some more.

Ezekiel 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.


Would not the place of His throne, and the place of the soles of His feet, where He will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, be meaning this same temple in question? If so, this requires that this temple has to remain for ever in order for God to take up residence there for ever. Yet, most Premils who conclude that this is a temple that gets built in the future, thus is used during the thousand years, also conclude it is done away with after the time of the great white throne judgment, thus is no longer present once the new Jerusalem comes down from God out of heaven.

The only place I see in the NT where God takes up residence for ever is in the new Jerusalem. That has to be what Ezekiel 43:7 is ultimately referring to. The question is, is this temple and the new Jerusalem one and the same? If we look at the following in Ezekiel then compare that to the following in Revelation 22, maybe they are one and the same, yet I still can't fathom why animal sacrificing would be resuming after Christ has returned to the earth.

Ezekiel 47:12 And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.

Compared with----

Revelation 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.



I admit, it does seem odd that Ezekiel 47:12 appears to match what is described in Revelation 22:1-2, thus proving that what is recorded in these chapters in Ezekiel will come to pass in the future, while anything involving animal sacrificing though, it won't come to pass in the future. One then has to wonder why some of it will come to pass but not all of it will, unless one wants to propose that Ezekiel 47:12 has zero to do with Revelation 22:1-2?

But look what Ezekiel 47:12 indicates---whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed. In order for it's fruit to not get consumed it requires an age that is never ending. Revelation 22:1-2 is such an age as that.

This is a verse that tells you this is a real future Temple: Ezekiel 43:18, "...Son of man, thus saith the Lord God; These are the ordinances of the alter in the day when they shall make it, to offer burnt offerings thereon, and to sprinkle blood thereon.

I understand your point, it's a fair point. That still doesn't have to mean that when they make it, it is meaning post the 2nd coming, though.

 

[biblelesson]

So let's think about this some more.

Ezekiel 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.


Would not the place of His throne, and the place of the soles of His feet, where He will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, be meaning this same temple in question? If so, this requires that this temple has to remain for ever in order for God to take up residence there for ever. Yet, most Premils who conclude that this is a temple that gets built in the future, thus is used during the thousand years, also conclude it is done away with after the time of the great white throne judgment, thus is no longer present once the new Jerusalem comes down from God out of heaven.

The only place I see in the NT where God takes up residence for ever is in the new Jerusalem. That has to be what Ezekiel 43:7 is ultimately referring to. The question is, is this temple and the new Jerusalem one and the same? If we look at the following in Ezekiel then compare that to the following in Revelation 22, maybe they are one and the same, yet I still can't fathom why animal sacrificing would be resuming after Christ has returned to the earth.

Ezekiel 47:12 And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.

Compared with----

Revelation 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.



I admit, it does seem odd that Ezekiel 47:12 appears to match what is described in Revelation 22:1-2, thus proving that what is recorded in these chapters in Ezekiel will come to pass in the future, while anything involving animal sacrificing though, it won't come to pass in the future. One then has to wonder why some of it will come to pass but not all of it will, unless one wants to propose that Ezekiel 47:12 has zero to do with Revelation 22:1-2?

But look what Ezekiel 47:12 indicates---whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed. In order for it's fruit to not get consumed it requires an age that is never ending. Revelation 22:1-2 is such an age as that.



I understand your point, it's a fair point. That still doesn't have to mean that when they make it, it is meaning post the 2nd coming, though.

You have some valid questions, that I will need to research to answer your questions to show you the clear picture. Yes there is 1) the Temple at the end times, and 2) there is New Jerusalem. But remember we cannot say that animal sacrifice can't happen in the future temple just because we don't understand. The bible answers our questions, we must "study to show ourselves approved." We must find God's answer in God's word.

So, I will examine your questions, because I want to know myself, because they are valid. I will then post an answer after I do some studying! But you should study for the answer to your questions also in God's word.

 

[Timtofly]

So, you think He's going to go back to the inferior thing again for some reason? And you think that makes sense?

Is it going back? Who claims going back? This is an argument why there cannot be a millennium kingdom. God is moving forward without sin. This temple is not about sin, or need to make sacrifices for sin.

The Law did not cover sin either. It was not a means of salvation. Why make the Law a dispensational point, yourself? The Law just pointed out what sin was. The Law was an economy built around the type of people these were.

The argument is an excuse for why God cannot do what God plans to do. If God were going back as you alledge, would God be wrong? Any one who claims sinners still live and are born in Adam's flesh after the start of the Millennium are wrong. All will physically die and leave Adam's flesh in the dust from where it came.

 

[biblelesson]

Any one who claims sinners still live and are born in Adam's flesh after the start of the Millennium are wrong. All will physically die and leave Adam's flesh in the dust from where it came.

Are you saying no flesh alive after the Millennium or during the Millennium? If during the Millennium, why are there no sinners who are alive? What about Gog and Meg-og during who will attack those in the land during the Millennium? Ezekiel 38:1-23, and Ezekiel 39:1-20.

 

[biblelesson]

Any one who claims sinners still live and are born in Adam's flesh after the start of the Millennium are wrong. All will physically die and leave Adam's flesh in the dust from where it came.

CORRECTION: Gog and Ma-Gog will attack after the Millennium, after Satan is loosed out of his prison, so there will still be those alive even at that time.

These two events in Revelations and Ezekiel are the same events. Revelations 20:7-10, Ezekiel 38:1-23, and Ezekiel 39:1-20.

 

[Timtofly]

So let's think about this some more.

Ezekiel 43:7 And he said unto me, Son of man, the place of my throne, and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, and my holy name, shall the house of Israel no more defile, neither they, nor their kings, by their whoredom, nor by the carcases of their kings in their high places.


Would not the place of His throne, and the place of the soles of His feet, where He will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel for ever, be meaning this same temple in question? If so, this requires that this temple has to remain for ever in order for God to take up residence there for ever. Yet, most Premils who conclude that this is a temple that gets built in the future, thus is used during the thousand years, also conclude it is done away with after the time of the great white throne judgment, thus is no longer present once the new Jerusalem comes down from God out of heaven.

The only place I see in the NT where God takes up residence for ever is in the new Jerusalem. That has to be what Ezekiel 43:7 is ultimately referring to. The question is, is this temple and the new Jerusalem one and the same? If we look at the following in Ezekiel then compare that to the following in Revelation 22, maybe they are one and the same, yet I still can't fathom why animal sacrificing would be resuming after Christ has returned to the earth.

Ezekiel 47:12 And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.

Compared with----

Revelation 22:1 And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb.
2 In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.



I admit, it does seem odd that Ezekiel 47:12 appears to match what is described in Revelation 22:1-2, thus proving that what is recorded in these chapters in Ezekiel will come to pass in the future, while anything involving animal sacrificing though, it won't come to pass in the future. One then has to wonder why some of it will come to pass but not all of it will, unless one wants to propose that Ezekiel 47:12 has zero to do with Revelation 22:1-2?

But look what Ezekiel 47:12 indicates---whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed. In order for it's fruit to not get consumed it requires an age that is never ending. Revelation 22:1-2 is such an age as that.



I understand your point, it's a fair point. That still doesn't have to mean that when they make it, it is meaning post the 2nd coming, though.

The NHNE is not an age. It is a totally different reality.

There is a precedent about creating an eternal image and then destroying that image in the Flood. The Garden of Eden was a forever place. It was not forever on earth after the Flood. The Garden will come down as the New Jerusalem. It went from a Garden to a City. The Garden was the place Jesus left earth to prepare after the Cross. Jesus told them they already knew that place and how it was prepared. It is recorded in Genesis, as told to Moses. Ezekiel would have been describing the Garden of Eden as much as the New Jerusalem. They both are the same place.


Yet at the Second Coming Christ sets up a throne and there is a temple, that Satan sits in for 42 months, if that is necessary. Daniel 9:27 and Revelation 13 show that may happen. Not that they have happened. How can this be referring to "in heaven" or after all are in the Lake of Fire? How can Satan and those living on earth have access to the heavenly city?

 

[biblelesson]

That means the house of Israel meant is also alive at the time Ezekiel was. To project all of this into the future would have to mean that Ezekiel first needs to be resurrected...

I wanted to give you an example of something that deals with what you said about projecting all of this into the future, and Ezekiel needing to be resurrected.

It's as simple as this:

Ezekiel say a vision of a completed Temple, that he only was suppose to show to those alive during his days, that would be built later in the future.

You have seen architects plans for building condos, or shopping malls, and they first designed a replica. In that miniature replica you have the exact number of buildings, height, windows, stores, the connecting streets, the dimensions that corresponds to what the original buildings will look like when they are built. So everything in the replica is identical the original complex that will be built in the future, maybe ten years down the road. Now will these architects have to be transported in the future, 10 years later before they can show the replica?

Ezekiel's vision is basically the same, however, he saw a vision of the actual Temple in the actual land that will be built at the end times. And he was to report what he saw the those alive during his time.

 

[biblelesson]

The NHNE is not an age. It is a totally different reality.

There is a precedent about creating an eternal image and then destroying that image in the Flood. The Garden of Eden was a forever place. It was not forever on earth after the Flood. The Garden will come down as the New Jerusalem. It went from a Garden to a City. The Garden was the place Jesus left earth to prepare after the Cross. Jesus told them they already knew that place and how it was prepared. It is recorded in Genesis, as told to Moses. Ezekiel would have been describing the Garden of Eden as much as the New Jerusalem. They both are the same place.


Yet at the Second Coming Christ sets up a throne and there is a temple, that Satan sits in for 42 months, if that is necessary. Daniel 9:27 and Revelation 13 show that may happen. Not that they have happened. How can this be referring to "in heaven" or after all are in the Lake of Fire? How can Satan and those living on earth have access to the heavenly city?

I think you might need to back up what you are saying with scriptures, because I don't understand what you are saying about the Temple and New Jerusalem being the same, and the same as the Garden of Eden. It's possible God revealed this to you, but it's not revealed to me. So back up what you are saying with scriptures so that we can see this clearly.

 

[Timtofly]

Are you saying no flesh alive after the Millennium or during the Millennium? If during the Millennium, why are there no sinners who are alive? What about Gog and Meg-og during who will attack those in the land during the Millennium? Ezekiel 38:1-23, and Ezekiel 39:1-20.

Ezekiel is not describing the march against the camp of the saints in Revelation 20. That protest at the end of the Millennium ends in the protesters being consumed by fire.

These humans were not conceived in sin and Adam's flesh. They were decieved by Satan in the same way Eve listened to Satan before sin entered the world. That world passes away and sin does not enter. That is the end of current reality.

 

[Timtofly]

CORRECTION: Gog and Ma-Gog will attack after the Millennium, after Satan is loosed out of his prison, so there will still be those alive even at that time.

These two events in Revelations and Ezekiel are the same events. Revelations 20:7-10, Ezekiel 38:1-23, and Ezekiel 39:1-20.

Different Gog and Magog event. There have been several Gog and Magog events in history. The one in Ezekiel is going on right now. This is definitely not 1000 years after the Second Coming.

 

[biblelesson]

Ezekiel is not describing the march against the camp of the saints in Revelation 20. That protest at the end of the Millennium ends in the protesters being consumed by fire.

These humans were not conceived in sin and Adam's flesh. They were decieved by Satan in the same way Eve listened to Satan before sin entered the world. That world passes away and sin does not enter. That is the end of current reality.

Look Timtofly, what the heck are you saying? Explain yourself with scripture? You said it, you want us to understand, so help us understand.

 

[biblelesson]

Different Gog and Magog event. There have been several Gog and Magog events in history. The one in Ezekiel is going on right now. This is definitely not 1000 years after the Second Coming.

The endtime Gog and Me-gog events are the same in The chapters I gave you in Revelations and Ezekiel are end time events dealing with God and Me-gog.

Explain with scripture how there is a Gog and Me-gog event going on now! Otherwise why should we just believe you! You should not talk without backing up what you are saying with scriptures. Otherwise you know what that makes you!

 

[Timtofly]

I think you might need to back up what you are saying with scriptures, because I don't understand what you are saying about the Temple and New Jerusalem being the same, and the same as the Garden of Eden. It's possible God revealed this to you, but it's not revealed to me. So back up what you are saying with scriptures so that we can see this clearly.

Which temple was Abel killed in with an alter? Matthew 23:35. Luke 11:51. Jesus made a claim concerning those who stood as priest. That claim starts with Abel and ends with Zechariah.

This verse is about New Jerusalem:

22 And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

There is no temple in the NHNE. The last temple will be the Millennium temple. So how does one justify an eternal temple that is physical and the lack of any physical temple in the New Reality?

Throughout Revelation up until chapter 20, John mentions an alter in heaven. This alter is where the saints dwell. Even in chapter 7 it says:

15 Therefore are they before the throne of God, and serve him day and night in his temple: and he that sitteth on the throne shall dwell among them.

This was not a phenomenon prior to the Cross. It cannot be referring to after the NHNE. The only thing that it can be is an ongoing phenomenon since the Cross. It will continue until the NHNE. No where does it claim this temple comes to earth at the Second Coming. We have been taught it does for the Millennium. Where are the Scriptures proving that? Amil claims it is future after God destroys current reality at the Second Coming. Where are the Scriptures for that?