Re: The 5 Points of FINALISM
Not so fast young lady. Ez. 40-48 follows Ez. 38-39, which describes the final battle between the forces of good and evil. The majority of chiliast commentators agree that this war is the type for the battle of Armageddon, which takes place at the end of the 7 year 'great tribulation'. The building of this temple must therefore take place after the battle, not prior to or during it, which would be an absurdity. In other words, during the 'millennium' that follows. In fact, I know of no millennialist commentator who has ever put the construction of this temple during the tribulation, so this idea smacks very strongly of a deeply flawed attempt to avoid the obvious problems associated with a millennial temple.
Meanwhile, back in the millennium where it properly belongs, we have the repugnant spectacle of the glorified Son of God presiding over a kingdom in which the main 'attraction' is a revived Jewish cultus replete with temple, Levitical priesthood, and animal sacrifices that are expressly described as sin offerings, trespass offerings, burnt offerings, and peace offerings. If this is what passes for millennial bliss, count me out. No seriously, I want no part in this nightmare.
As for the temple plans already being in hand, please. This story has been doing the rounds since the Six Day War. One could be forgiven for thinking that 50-odd years was more than enough time to get past the planning stage. No, this story is complete fiction, not unlike the earthly millennium that continues to inspire and fan it.
The real mystery here is how Bible-believing Christians with the NT in their hands can continue to hold to such undiluted twaddle. Unfortunately, sensationalism is often a more attractive proposition over a sober interpretation of the disputed passages, and I suspect that goes a long way to explain the mystery.