Ezekiel's temple

[Madhu]

Robert has wanted to post on this for a while: Recently I sat through a
presentation by the local pastro on Ezekiel, which included the chapters
on the temple. He didn't comment on future prophecy at all, but let it
be understood that Zerubabbel would have built Ezekiel's temple.

Ezekiel's temple is essentially an orthodox Jewish hope. Three times a
day Jews everywhere pray, standing up, that Ezekiel's temple will be
built and the animal sacrifices restored. I'm don't God will not be
ignoring their standing prayers for the past 2000 years but I cannot say
I'd be happy with the restitution of animal sacrifices.

Hindu temples are flourishing. The temple at Tirumala Tirupati - notably
"Lord of Seven Hills", Telangana (former AP) today comes close to the
legendary glory and income of the Jerusalem temple . Except for a few
places there are no animal sacrifices in Hindu temples, only grain
offerings are made. This change is understood to be the divine will.
Malachi 3:4 talks about for grain offerings, and I think God's position
on sacrifice would have changed 2000 years ago. I cannot believe animal
sacrifices will continue to be an expression of God's justice or of
God's love, and cannot say I'd be thrilled with the restoration of
animal sacrifice.

In my reckoning Ezekiel's temple can only be the Fourth, Final,
Millennial Temple. It will not be desecrated, and God's presence will
last through the millennium. Therefore it cannot be the temple that the
abomination of the desolation (Jesus quoting Daniel) can defile. There
are two parts to Daniel's prophecy, first the cessation of the oblation,
and second the defilement by the abomination of the desolation. Only
the second part is in a future marker for the endtime tribulaition of
Jerusalem. There is no "another" interruption of the daily sacrifice,
and it is not required for sacrifices to be instituted before the
antichrist defiles the Third Temple.

Personally I'd call Herod's temple the Third Temple, the antichrist's
temple the Fourth Temple and Ezekiel's temple the Fifth Temple.
Actually I'm not even sure there is a need be the antichrist's Temple,
and that part of the prophecy may well be fulfilled in the abstract.

[Kendall K. Down]

On 21/10/2021 16:18, Madhu wrote:

> Robert has wanted to post on this for a while:

Is there any particular reason why Robert has not been able to post himself?

> Recently I sat through a
> presentation by the local pastro on Ezekiel, which included the chapters
> on the temple. He didn't comment on future prophecy at all, but let it
> be understood that Zerubabbel would have built Ezekiel's temple.

No, Zerubbabel did not build Ezekiel's temple. It is recorded that
Zerubbabel's temple was considerably smaller than Solomon's, but
Ezekiel's temple was identical in all its measurements to Solomon's.

> Ezekiel's temple is essentially an orthodox Jewish hope. Three times a
> day Jews everywhere pray, standing up, that Ezekiel's temple will be
> built and the animal sacrifices restored. I'm don't God will not be
> ignoring their standing prayers for the past 2000 years but I cannot say
> I'd be happy with the restitution of animal sacrifices.

No, God will not bring about a restoration of animal sacrifices. There
has been one final sacrifice - Jesus on Calvary. That is not to say that
some people may not restart animal sacrifices, but if they do so, they
will be acting contrary to God's will.

> Hindu temples are flourishing. The temple at Tirumala Tirupati - notably
> "Lord of Seven Hills", Telangana (former AP) today comes close to the
> legendary glory and income of the Jerusalem temple . Except for a few
> places there are no animal sacrifices in Hindu temples, only grain
> offerings are made.

Is that something new? I can remember watching as goats were sacrificed
to Kali in the Kali Temple in Calcutta in the 1950s. A bloody business.

> In my reckoning Ezekiel's temple can only be the Fourth, Final,
> Millennial Temple.

I don't believe that Ezekiel's temple will ever be built. Note the
following. Ezekiel's final chapters start with the resurrection (the
valley of dry bones) and Revelation's final chapters also start with the
resurrection (well, the return of Christ, but that involves the
resurrection).

Ezekiel Revelation
======= ==========
Resurrection Resurrection
Israel restored Saints to heaven
Gog and Magog Birds to the feast
Destroyed by fire Gog and Magog
Birds to the feast Destroyed by fire
High Mountain High Mountain
Surveyor Surveyor
Measure temple No temple
River of Life River of Life
Tree of Life Tree of Life

Both Ezekiel and Revelation end with identical trees and rivers of life.
There is a slight difference in the order in which God and Magog are
introduced and in the location of the Promised Land (earth v. heaven),
but otherwise the two visions are identical apart from the fact that in
Revelation there is no temple. As Revelation is Ezekiel adapted for the
Christian era, it follows that Ezekiel's temple will not now be built.

God bless,
Kendall K. Down

[Madhu]

* "Kendall K. Down" <sksh99$fkb$1...@dont-email.me> :
Wrote on Thu, 21 Oct 2021 21:07:06 +0100:

> On 21/10/2021 16:18, Madhu wrote:
>> Robert has wanted to post on this for a while:
>
> Is there any particular reason why Robert has not been able to post himself?

Sorry this message was posted to the wrong newsgroup. I was hoping to
"troll" a different Robert , a dispensationalist who posts in
alt.christnet.christianlife who is interested in the topic.

With the charter on crossposting, I've decided not to repost my message
there.

>> Recently I sat through a
>> presentation by the local pastro on Ezekiel, which included the chapters
>> on the temple. He didn't comment on future prophecy at all, but let it
>> be understood that Zerubabbel would have built Ezekiel's temple.
>
> No, Zerubbabel did not build Ezekiel's temple. It is recorded that
> Zerubbabel's temple was considerably smaller than Solomon's, but
> Ezekiel's temple was identical in all its measurements to Solomon's.

[Well the idea is Zerubabbel should have built it]

>> Hindu temples are flourishing. The temple at Tirumala Tirupati - notably
>> "Lord of Seven Hills", Telangana (former AP) today comes close to the
>> legendary glory and income of the Jerusalem temple . Except for a few
>> places there are no animal sacrifices in Hindu temples, only grain
>> offerings are made.
>
> Is that something new? I can remember watching as goats were
> sacrificed to Kali in the Kali Temple in Calcutta in the 1950s. A
> bloody business.

Yes but other than the few hotspots I believe the vast majority of
temples though are vegetarian-kosher, there has been the change. Vedic
sacrifice which was essentially animal sacrifice has been reinterpreted,
perhaps as a part of the new brahminism, it is a public consciousness
thing.

Yes I think there is something to this view, and Ezekiel may have been
zealous about his own [unfulfilled] priesthood which may colour some of
the more earthly passages.

However this view stands on a millennium in which the saints are not on
earth and I am not convinced of that.

[Kendall K. Down]

On 22/10/2021 01:14, Madhu wrote:

> [Well the idea is Zerubabbel should have built it]

It is a peculiarity of English that "should" is not the same as "did".

> Yes but other than the few hotspots I believe the vast majority of
> temples though are vegetarian-kosher, there has been the change. Vedic
> sacrifice which was essentially animal sacrifice has been reinterpreted,
> perhaps as a part of the new brahminism, it is a public consciousness
> thing.

It always did strike me as odd that Hindus, who believe in
reincarnation, should sacrifice animals - you might be sacrificing your
own grandmother! - while at the same time refusing to eat animals.

> Yes I think there is something to this view, and Ezekiel may have been
> zealous about his own [unfulfilled] priesthood which may colour some of
> the more earthly passages.

It depends on what you mean by "unfulfilled". Clearly Ezekiel was not a
priest in the temple, but there is no reason why he could not have
carried out at least some priestly functions during his exile, just as
any other priest who happened to live outside Jerusalem.

> However this view stands on a millennium in which the saints are not on
> earth and I am not convinced of that.

In which case you are obliged to explain the parallelism that is so
obvious between the two accounts of the end times.

[Madhu]

* "Kendall K. Down" <sktdcg$69m$1...@dont-email.me> :
Wrote on Fri, 22 Oct 2021 05:06:41 +0100:

> On 22/10/2021 01:14, Madhu wrote:
>
>> [Well the idea is Zerubabbel should have built it]
>
> It is a peculiarity of English that "should" is not the same as "did".

I thought I was safely ambiguous when I wrote "would".

for those who hold that particular view: the temple was prophecied for
Zerubabbel to build, but he didn't quite do it, but (the outcome was
unsatisfactory but the prophecy is closed. Also in that view the glory
and the elevation of the Saduccees in the 2nd temple period would have
corresponded with the glory prophecied for the Zadok priesthood. This is
of course not the orthodox Jewish view where the Zadok priesthood will
be discerned anew by Elijah after it has been lost in the gene pools)

>> Yes I think there is something to this view, and Ezekiel may have been
>> zealous about his own [unfulfilled] priesthood which may colour some of
>> the more earthly passages.
>
> It depends on what you mean by "unfulfilled". Clearly Ezekiel was not
> a priest in the temple, but there is no reason why he could not have
> carried out at least some priestly functions during his exile, just as
> any other priest who happened to live outside Jerusalem.

The picture is that even as a kid he was looking forward to the entering
the temple service at age 30 with all the trappings and rituals, the
full works, and expected to serve till he was 50. Taken captive and
transported he was forcefully deprived of what he considered he was born
for, and that longing expresses itself in some visions.

>> However this view stands on a millennium in which the saints are not
>> on earth and I am not convinced of that.
>
> In which case you are obliged to explain the parallelism that is so
> obvious between the two accounts of the end times.

The modern critic would probably just say John plagarised Ezekiel.
However I don't think I'm upto the task you set. Ezekiel's account has
difficult parts which only make sense in either a New-Jerusalem context
(where there is no temple) or in the 2nd temple past. But I'm sure if
you can convice yourself of a millennium on earth with the whole world
worshipping at Jerusalem (visions of 3rd Isaiah, Jeremiah etc.) the case
for the temple emerges.

[Kendall K. Down]

On 24/10/2021 15:51, Madhu wrote:

>>> [Well the idea is Zerubabbel should have built it]

>> It is a peculiarity of English that "should" is not the same as "did".

> I thought I was safely ambiguous when I wrote "would".

And you probably would have been - if only you *had* written "would"!

> for those who hold that particular view: the temple was prophecied for
> Zerubabbel to build, but he didn't quite do it, but (the outcome was
> unsatisfactory but the prophecy is closed. Also in that view the glory
> and the elevation of the Saduccees in the 2nd temple period would have
> corresponded with the glory prophecied for the Zadok priesthood.

Good grief! The Sadducces?

> The picture is that even as a kid he was looking forward to the entering
> the temple service at age 30 with all the trappings and rituals, the
> full works, and expected to serve till he was 50. Taken captive and
> transported he was forcefully deprived of what he considered he was born
> for, and that longing expresses itself in some visions.

No doubt Ezekiel felt as you describe, but unless God shared his
feelings, I doubt that they had any effect on his visions.

> The modern critic would probably just say John plagarised Ezekiel.
> However I don't think I'm upto the task you set. Ezekiel's account has
> difficult parts which only make sense in either a New-Jerusalem context
> (where there is no temple) or in the 2nd temple past. But I'm sure if
> you can convice yourself of a millennium on earth with the whole world
> worshipping at Jerusalem (visions of 3rd Isaiah, Jeremiah etc.) the case
> for the temple emerges.

But that case only emerges if you ignore Revelation.

As to John plagiarising Ezekiel, I think he would have done a better job
if he had set out to copy the Old Testament prophet - everything in the
same order, people burying the dead for seven years, etc. No, I believe
that he was given his visions by God and that it is God Who has tweaked
the end-times to take account of the fact that God's people will no
longer be confined to Palestine.