Will there be third temple sacrifices?

Stephen1 said:

2.Millennium: Temple, symbolic sacrificing

Click to expand...

This is impossible. The sacrifices prophecized by Ezekiel are not symbollic and not memorial. A 'literal' interpretation of the text will not allow it. They are specifically sin offerings (Ezekiel 40:39; 43:19-25; 44:27-29; 45:17-25; 46:20).

And you can't even say they're in the form of sin offerings memorializing Christ's atonement, since the text actually says the sacrifices make atonement:

Ezekiel 45:15-17 (ESV):

And one sheep from every flock of two hundred, from the watering places of Israel for grain offering, burnt offering, and peace offerings, to make atonement for them, declares the Lord GOD. All the people of the land shall be obliged to give this offering to the prince in Israel. It shall be the prince's duty to furnish the burnt offerings, grain offerings, and drink offerings, at the feasts, the new moons, and the Sabbaths, all the appointed feasts of the house of Israel: he shall provide the sin offerings, grain offerings, burnt offerings, and peace offerings, to make atonement on behalf of the house of Israel.

Click to expand...

Either the text is symbolic, or Hebrews is lying.

GratiaCorpusChristi said:

This is impossible. The sacrifices prophecized by Ezekiel are not symbollic and not memorial. A 'literal' interpretation of the text will not allow it. They are specifically sin offerings (Ezekiel 40:39; 43:19-25; 44:27-29; 45:17-25; 46:20).

And you can't even say they're in the form of sin offerings memorializing Christ's atonement, since the text actually says the sacrifices make atonement:

Ezekiel 45:15-17 (ESV):



Either the text is symbolic, or Hebrews is lying.

Click to expand...

Exactly friend.

THE SACRIFICES


They were to be burnt offerings, sin offerings, meat offerings, trespass offerings and peace offerings. Read the full list and mark the details of the ordinances in chapters 40: 39; 42: I3; 43: 18 to end; 44: 27-29; 45:17 to end; 46. In the two latter chapters the sacrificial observances of Sabbaths and new moons, as well as the daily sacrifices, were to be resumed. If the Millennial Age is to be a period during which the worship of God is to be compulsorily accompanied by the unceasing flow of animal blood it will be very unlike the blessed time foretold in that lovely conception of it visioned by Isaiah (ch. 11: 6-9):Further, chapter 45:21 ordains the restoration of the Passover, to be observed with seven days' eating of unleavened bread, and sin offerings of bullocks, rams and kids.

Now, if this refers to Millennial times, was not St. Paul sadly mistaken when he declared in 1 Corinthians 5:7, that `Christ our passover is sacrificed for us'?

If St. Paul was right they are wrong who regard Ezekiel's restored Passover as Millennial; if Christ be indeed the very `Lamb of God Who taketh away the sin of the world', if St. John truly visioned Him ascending the throne in heaven `a Lamb as it had been slain', then surely Ezekiel's vision related only to the possibilities of pre-Christian times.

On this question of the resumption of blood sacrifices in the future, study Hebrews 10, especially verses 1-14. In verses 5-9 our Lord's First Coming is expressly stated to have been in order that by the taking away of the legal sacrifices through the offering of His own Body He might establish the will of God, and so we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all' (v. 10).

Why should it be supposed to be necessary, by the restoration of sacrifices, to establish the will of God in the Millennial era if that has already been done by our Lord `once for all'?

Moreover, from Hebrews 10:16-18 we learn that the New Covenant being now in operation there is no further need of sacrifices.

Verse 18, `there is no more offering for sin.'

Verse 14, `By one offering He hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.'

So then the all-sufficient Sacrifice, and the last ever to be offered, was that of Calvary! Is it conceivable that in the better days to come we shall renounce that Blessed Substance of final redemptive achievement for the renewal of vain type and shadow?

God Bless

Till all are one.

Stephen1 said:

If what you say regarding the millennuim is true, then how do you explain Ezekiel's vision ?

Click to expand...

As we have tried to show, Ezekiel's vision was a "conditional promise" from God for the Israelites provided they:

1. "...that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern." (v. 10)
2. "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:" (v. 11)
3. "...and write it in their sight," (v. 11)
4. "...that they may keep the whole form thereof," (v. 11)
5. "...and all the ordinances thereof," (v. 11)
6. And most important of all: "...and do them." (v. 11)

Why?

"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." (v. 12)

And as history bears true, Israel did none of what the Lord commanded in verses 10-11. Because if they would have, there would not have been a conquoring of Israel by Greece, or Rome. What happened to the priesthood? Your guess is as good as mine, but I do know that instead of the priests being the head of the temple, after Israel came back out of the Babylonian and Assyrian captivity, the scribes, Sadduces, and the Pharasees ruled in the temple.

Whereas Ezekiel went into captivity with Israel, Jeremiah was allowed to stay behind in Judah, and prophesize to the remnant that was behind. And Israel had gotten so bad, God said to Jeremiah, and told him to tell the people they were so bad, God had:

"And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also." -Jer. 3:8

God had given Israel, as a whole, "I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce;" (Jer. 3:8)

The visions Ezekiel was given, were conditional in nature. Conditional based on their doing what was told them to do in Eze. 43:10-11. As as history has shown, they did not do it. So God is in no way liable to fulfill His promise since Israel did not fulfill her promise.

God Bless

Till all are one.

"As we have tried to show, Ezekiel's vision was a "conditional promise" from God"

No way. You cannot do it. There are volumes of Scripture that refute your view here. Israel is still in the game big time. I would suggest that you take the opposite position and then re-study all Scriptures that prove otherwise. You cannot just carve out direct proof-text passages of Scripture on the Lord's continued relationship with the Jews because you think the Lord is finished with the nation as part of His future planning. You have missed much in your study of the Lord's Word. His promise to the nation still stands and there are Scriptures that state this exactly .... exactly the opposite of what you are trying to prove. Their intransigensce is one thing, but the Lord's purposes are another and you should find out just what they are. Setting one's self against the Lord's purposes is a dangerous game to play. Your choice.

Stephen1 said:

"As we have tried to show, Ezekiel's vision was a "conditional promise" from God"

No way. You cannot do it. There are volumes of Scripture that refute your view here. Israel is still in the game big time. I would suggest that you take the opposite position and then re-study all Scriptures that prove otherwise. You cannot just carve out direct proof-text passages of Scripture on the Lord's continued relationship with the Jews because you think the Lord is finished with the nation as part of His future planning. You have missed much in your study of the Lord's Word. His promise to the nation still stands and there are Scriptures that state this exactly .... exactly the opposite of what you are trying to prove. Their intransigensce is one thing, but the Lord's purposes are another and you should find out just what they are. Setting one's self against the Lord's purposes is a dangerous game to play. Your choice.

Click to expand...

Well what can I say? You think that when Jesus comes back to rule during the Millennial kingdom that He is gonna require us to be placed back uder a law? For what does Eze. 44:6-9 say?

"And thou shalt say to the rebellious, even to the house of Israel, Thus saith the Lord GOD; O ye house of Israel, let it suffice you of all your abominations, In that ye have brought into my sanctuary strangers, uncircumcised in heart, and uncircumcised in flesh, to be in my sanctuary, to pollute it, even my house, when ye offer my bread, the fat and the blood, and they have broken my covenant because of all your abominations. And ye have not kept the charge of mine holy things: but ye have set keepers of my charge in my sanctuary for yourselves. Thus saith the Lord GOD; No stranger, uncircumcised in heart, nor uncircumcised in flesh, shall enter into my sanctuary, of any stranger that is among the children of Israel." -Eze. 44:6-9 (KJV)

No stranger, that is the Gentile, shall enter the temple, unless they are circumcized. (v. 9) And yet you ignore this. And didn't the Apostle Paul tell the Galatians that if they submitted to "ritual" circumcision that:

"For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law." -Gal. 5:3 (KJV)

And by doing so:

"Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace." -Gal. 5:4 (KJV)

The law that Jesus fulfilled perfectly, we are going to be placed back under it?????? I cannot accept, no, I will not accept that! Sorry.

And to show that it is further wrong to believe in Millennial sacrificing, let me show you this:

These last nine chapters of Ezekiel refer to an order of rulers of the restored Israel nation called `princes', a term often used in the Bible, signifying rulers from among the people, not at all necessarily royal or kingly. Frequent mention of `the prince', `my princes', etc., is made in chapters 44, 45, 46 and 47. The prince has sons, and must make provision for them out of his own resources (`possessions'). There is not a single reference in these chapters to their being of David's line; the title `king' is never once used and nothing can be more certain than that the term `prince' or the office it covers has here no Messianic significance, for not only has he sons and the obligation of providing for them, but as prince he has the further obligation of making such numerous offerings of animal sacrifices for Israel and for himself that a special tax of ½ per cent is to be levied on the people to provide these offerings (ch. 45:15-22). The not uncommon supposition that this prince is the Messiah in His Millennial reign seems to be too grotesque for consideration.

And if you care to read the verses in question, the Prince himself will be the one who has to do the offering:

"And it shall be the prince's part to give burnt offerings, and meat offerings, and drink offerings, in the feasts, and in the new moons, and in the sabbaths, in all solemnities of the house of Israel: he shall prepare the sin offering, and the meat offering, and the burnt offering, and the peace offerings, to make reconciliation for the house of Israel... And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin offering, and put it upon the posts of the house, and upon the four corners of the settle of the altar, and upon the posts of the gate of the inner court...And upon that day shall the prince prepare for himself and for all the people of the land a bullock for a sin offering." -Eze. 45:17,19,22 (KJV)

Jesus is gonna require a tax to sacrifice?

"All the people of the land shall give this oblation for the prince in Israel." -Eze. 45:16 (KJV)

I have shown you what God said in Ezekiel and you reject that. What else can I say other than God bless you in your convictions.

I refuse to believe that Jesus is going to offer sacrifices, or prepare sacrifices to Himself during this time. I refuse to believe that people are going to be placed back under the "ritual" law of circumcision. I refuse to believe that people are going to be taxed for the right to sacrifice.

I'm sorry but I refuse to accept, rather, I reject the conclusions to which you refer to. I can say God Bless you in your convictions.

I thank God that they are not mine.

God Bless

Till all are one.

Stephen1 said:

You will have to ask the Lord about His rule on the earth during the millennium and what He will do. Or, you can read the Scriptures about it .... but I would suggest that you do not sweep them under the rug. The Scriptures are there and they state His intentions. Those who live during His millennium will be mortals ..... no member of the Church will be a mortal living on the earth at the time, but will be eternal beings inhabiting the Lord's entire creation.

Click to expand...

Pardon me brother, but I have spent a long time researching end times prophecy, and in this instance, I really suggest you go back and re-read the last nine chapters of Ezekiel. So the Jews who do not, or did not accept Jesus as Savior prior to His return, will be "grand-fathered" in as part of the Redemmed??????? If everybody is going to be:

Stephen1 said:

eternal beings inhabiting the Lord's entire creation

Click to expand...

As you say, then why would there be any "strangers?" (Eze. 44:9)

If we are called, "the redeemed," children of the king" and are known to Him, how can there be strangers?

I believe you are wrong. Plain and simple. Jesus said:

"I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine." -Jn. 10:14

If Jesus knows who is and who isn't His, and as you said everybody:

Stephen1 said:

will be eternal beings inhabiting the Lord's entire creation.

Click to expand...

How can there be strangers as it says in Ezekiel? You are wrong friend, plain and simple. Scriptures tell a different story.

As a matter of fact, re-read my last post, I think you missed a few things.

Matter of fact, from the facts I've shown, that alone would be enough to show that the last nine chapters of Ezekiel are "conditional promises." But being as since you think I'm so wrong, I'm going to say God bless you in your convictions, and I'll take my views and leave.



God Bless

Till all are one.

I don't know if I'm adding any insight here but here goes:
I am of the understanding that there will only be "mortals" on earth during the millenial reign. Many will be Jews but there will be other tribulation survivors who are not Jews.
So the "strangers" are those non-Jewish people who will be given land as well mentioned in Ezekiel.

If the point is being made that Israel as a nation has nothing to do with anything anymore, then jeepers, read through the minor prophets, Romans, and a host of other scripture. Israel's rebirth is fulfillment of prophecy in EZ 37. It is nothing but the hand of God!

I hope my post has added to the debate, if not, sorry.

You WILL remember the rules you agreed to when you joined CF...

No Flaming!!

That means posting with courtesy and respect!

No Harrassing!!!

That means addressing the subject matter, not the poster!

My personal opinion is of this nature, When the third temple is built and the antichrist delcare he is god in this temple. I believe he will re make the animal scarfices in his name. Making people believe some how that there is no god and he is the true and just god. And people should worship and make sacrifices for him.

I mean the antichrist declaring that he is god in this temple should give you chills up your spine right away. I believe the rebuilding of the temple is just a slap in God's face because when he died for us he took care of all our sin's. I know this temple must be built to fufill yet another prophecy but no good will come of it in my opinion.

The temple of god is in all of us so i am totally against any temple being made.

Sorry for the rant

In any case if a temple is built for the antichrist to reign in in the weeks of daniel. This will be big enough news that everyone will hear about correct?

GratiaCorpusChristi said:

Carey,

A European/Muslim/Catholic alliance? You must be joking. Seriously, I understand how people can read into the Scriptures present day events because every age thinks their age is the end times....

But Muslims and Catholics together? You must be joking.

Moreover, rabbis? Rabbis don't offer sacrifices. Priests do. Rabbis are teachers of any tribe. Priests are Aaronid Levites. I'm surprised I have to explain that....

------------------------------------

Look, if the Jews ever do succeed in getting rid of the Domb of the Rock and the Al-Aqsa mosque and rebuild the temple, it will have no bearing on the return of Christ and the ushering in of the final consumation. It will be politically momentous and probably cause world war, but there's no biblical reason to think that the rebuilding of the temple has any significance.

All the Hebrew prophecies concerning the temple were fulfilled in the Israelite return from Babylonian exile and the rebuilding of the temple under Zerrubabel, the coming of Jesus Christ and his atoning/saving work in his crucifixion and resurrection, and the destruction of Zerrubabel's second temple in A.D. 70.

Click to expand...

Europe and even Brittian are already cow toeing to Islam.

Pope John Paul kissed the Koran and called it a Holy book.
Pope bendict has been to Turkey and prayed ina Mosque like the Muslims.
I see an alliance between the Vatican and Islam . The Vatican already has instilled many beliefs from other religions into Catholcism.
The future will only tell exactly how it will play out.
And the time that was prohecied so bad for the jews and world as to never be worse as prphecied did not happen in A.D. 70 because W.W 2 was even worse than A.D 70

The son of perdition has already taken several forms over the millenia, alexander, nero, hitler, stalin, mussollini, saddam etc etc