He did for sure write this post though, and I thought it was good too: ... ... This question of t...
He did for sure write this post though, and I thought it was good too:
This question of the millennial temple is what pushed me over the line of premil to amil. I was in a colloquium with two Jewish pastor friends (I also am a Jew) discussing what impact our being Jewish had on our faith in Christ. Well, my two friends were talking about the glories of the new temple-to-be-built in Jerusalem when Messiah returned to reign there, and it of a sudden struck me how strange that was, and I said to them, “Haven’t you guys ever read the Book of Hebrews?” As there it talks about the doing away with the old temple worship and Levitical priesthood and offerings. I know premil folks will talk about the millennial temple sacrifices as being simply a memorial of Messiah’s sacrifice, but how lame is that!?
It is written, “In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old [obsolete NASB ESV]. Now that which decayeth and waxeth old is ready to vanish away” (Heb 8:13). Thus, they are no longer priests who are of the Levitical/Aaronic order, and have no right to make sacrifices, seeing as the temple veil was rent and the holy place removed from earth, as God now dwells in the heavens, Jesus is the sole and high priest, and we have boldness “to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus” (Heb 10:19).
The Lord of glory having anything to do with a temple made of crumbling stones, unauthorized priests, and bleeding livestock after He has offered the sacrifice of Himself once for all on the cursed tree, is shameful!
Is He not building a temple of living stones (1 Peter 2:5), in which He dwells, and which is the glory of New Jerusalem on New Earth, the Lamb and God the light and glory of it? Into this temple I call my countrymen after the flesh, to seek the favor of the High Priest, and to rejoice in the ongoing celebration and praises offered the living God. This is the eternal temple, never to crumble, the house of light in which God and His people abide forever in His care and glory.
To add onto Pastor Bruce’s remarks above, it is the very details that refute the literal hermeneutic. For instance, in the first chapters of Ezekiel 40 the information given is not sufficient for an architect to build the temple; to quote Pastor Iain Duguid’s Ezekiel commentary, for “many details....are lacking, most notably the height dimensions and construction materials” (p 479). Daniel Bock in his commentary on Ezekiel concurs: with reference to the outer East gate he says, “Like most of the account to follow, the materials used to construct the item are not specified” (Vol 2, p 517), and, “The information offered by the narrative is insufficient to construct the gates. We do not know how high they were or the material used to build them” (Ibid, p 523). Compare this with the minute detail given Moses in constructing the sanctuary, which was meant to be built.
This temple shown Ezekiel was not so meant! If one considers its structure it is more like – for those times – a massive fortress, especially the gates. It is symbolic, like the heavenly Jerusalem of Revelation 21 is symbolic. They both are meant to convey the impenetrable holy of holies by anything that would defile it. They both depict – but especially the Revelation vision – the holiness and exquisite perfection of beauty of God’s temple, which is Himself, and the Lamb (Rev 21:22), and His bride, and the renewed earth which is home to the Godhead and His children, for God will walk among us in the glory of His Person.
The very last words of Ezekiel and his prophecy are “The LORD is there” (Ezek 48:35), Jehovah Shammah, even as our Jesus is named Immanuel, God with us, world without end.