|
|
Post by willard on Jan 3, 2019 12:00:42 GMT -6
|
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Jan 3, 2019 14:03:23 GMT -6
Hi willard. I looked at the article and applaud the author for the amount of work that went into its writing. One thought; to the Jews the temple represents the return of Judah to animal sacrifice as the payment for sin. However, to the Christian the temple represents what? That is, since the temple is built at Ezekiel 40 etc., then what is its purpose for a Christian since there is no further animal sacrifice for sin. Since it is God who is re-building the temple, and there is no further need of animal sacrifice (speaking as a Christian), then what is the temple for? The question is loaded because I have an answer. Perhaps this should be a separate thread. The purpose of the temple goes far beyond animal sacrifice and to execute that practice in light of the atonement is a defilement of the temple. Because, Revelation 7:15 tells us that "they" shall "serve him day and night in his temple." That is, since the service in Rev. 7:15 is not sacrificing animals day and night for sin (sin that has already been paid), then what is the service they are serving? Thus, the purpose of the temple as the Jews suppose is incorrect. It is not for sacrificing animals for sin, and it is for this reason that the Jews rebel against God in Dan. 9:26-27; wanting to perform animal sacrifice but being rejected like Cain. Hard words I know, but as Cain offered less than, so do the Jews when they refuse their hearts to God, and they will once again receive a spanking for their rebellion. |
|
|
|
Post by willard on Jan 3, 2019 14:44:13 GMT -6
Hi willard. I looked at the article and applaud the author for the amount of work that went into its writing. One thought; to the Jews the temple represents the return of Judah to animal sacrifice as the payment for sin. However, to the Christian the temple represents what? That is, since the temple is built at Ezekiel 40 etc., then what is its purpose for a Christian since there is no further animal sacrifice for sin. Since it is God who is re-building the temple, and there is no further need of animal sacrifice (speaking as a Christian), then what is the temple for? The question is loaded because I have an answer. Perhaps this should be a separate thread. The purpose of the temple goes far beyond animal sacrifice and to execute that practice in light of the atonement is a defilement of the temple. Because, Revelation 7:15 tells us that "they" shall "serve him day and night in his temple." That is, since the service in Rev. 7:15 is not sacrificing animals day and night for sin (sin that has already been paid), then what is the service they are serving? Thus, the purpose of the temple as the Jews suppose is incorrect. It is not for sacrificing animals for sin, and it is for this reason that the Jews rebel against God in Dan. 9:26-27; wanting to perform animal sacrifice but being rejected like Cain. Hard words I know, but as Cain offered less than, so do the Jews when they refuse their hearts to God, and they will once again receive a spanking for their rebellion. There is a school of thought,(most notably by Dr. Jack Kelley), that us Christians will be spending our time in New Jerusalem during the millennial reign of our Savior. I personally hope we get to travel to and fro. But it does clearly state in Ezekiel 40 that sacrifices will be happening. The actual temple might just be where Jesus sits to rule. I'm fairly new to this stuff so I'm not trying to talk out of school. |
|
|
|
Post by socalexile on Jan 3, 2019 17:38:43 GMT -6
What would happen if a new believer in Christ started walking up to the guillotine and became too afraid (just from a natural response of facing death) to accept beheading and instead took the mark of the beast? Revelation 14:9-13 paints the picture for us well. You're trying to proof-text again. That's coming to the passage with an a priori assumption which you are trying to stuff scripture into when it does not say what you are trying to make it say. |
|
|
|
Post by uscgvet on Jan 3, 2019 19:13:02 GMT -6
What would happen if a new believer in Christ started walking up to the guillotine and became too afraid (just from a natural response of facing death) to accept beheading and instead took the mark of the beast? Revelation 14:9-13 paints the picture for us well. You're trying to proof-text again. That's coming to the passage with an a priori assumption which you are trying to stuff scripture into when it does not say what you are trying to make it say. Well, Mike said this kind of speculation isn't fair. To his credit, we really don't have enough information to make a fair judgement on the Holy Spirit one way or another during the Great Trib so it becomes unprofitable to us to speculate. So I abandoned it. To me, it's a curious thought. But lets not discuss it here. |
|
|
|
Post by uscgvet on Jan 3, 2019 19:50:25 GMT -6
Here is a thought on James 2.
This letter was likely taken by hand from synagogue to synagogue and very carefully read out loud to a crowd of Jewish believers.
What would the crowd conclude from James 2 after hearing it word for word read aloud?
|
|
|
|
Post by socalexile on Jan 3, 2019 20:15:38 GMT -6
Here is a thought on James 2. This letter was likely taken by hand from synagogue to synagogue and very carefully read out loud to a crowd of Jewish believers. What would the crowd conclude from James 2 after hearing it word for word read aloud? Here's a fact: it was the earliest epistle written, around 40 AD. If you read Acts 15, Peter clearly states that the Law was never required of the church (as if you could cherry-pick some Laws and ignore others). The crowd would conclude what believers of the Gospel conclude today: that he's not encouraging Law, he's encouraging sound conduct for a more effective witness of the Gospel to a lost world. What did the demons believe? That there is one God, not that Christ is their savior. James is saying that merely claiming to be a monotheist in a polytheistic world isn't a substantive witness. For those interested in a further study of James, this is a good class that covers James: |
|
|
|
Post by boraddict on Jan 3, 2019 21:56:31 GMT -6
Hi willard. I looked at the article and applaud the author for the amount of work that went into its writing. One thought; to the Jews the temple represents the return of Judah to animal sacrifice as the payment for sin. However, to the Christian the temple represents what? That is, since the temple is built at Ezekiel 40 etc., then what is its purpose for a Christian since there is no further animal sacrifice for sin. Since it is God who is re-building the temple, and there is no further need of animal sacrifice (speaking as a Christian), then what is the temple for? The question is loaded because I have an answer. Perhaps this should be a separate thread. The purpose of the temple goes far beyond animal sacrifice and to execute that practice in light of the atonement is a defilement of the temple. Because, Revelation 7:15 tells us that "they" shall "serve him day and night in his temple." That is, since the service in Rev. 7:15 is not sacrificing animals day and night for sin (sin that has already been paid), then what is the service they are serving? Thus, the purpose of the temple as the Jews suppose is incorrect. It is not for sacrificing animals for sin, and it is for this reason that the Jews rebel against God in Dan. 9:26-27; wanting to perform animal sacrifice but being rejected like Cain. Hard words I know, but as Cain offered less than, so do the Jews when they refuse their hearts to God, and they will once again receive a spanking for their rebellion. There is a school of thought,(most notably by Dr. Jack Kelley), that us Christians will be spending our time in New Jerusalem during the millennial reign of our Savior. I personally hope we get to travel to and fro. But it does clearly state in Ezekiel 40 that sacrifices will be happening. The actual temple might just be where Jesus sits to rule. I'm fairly new to this stuff so I'm not trying to talk out of school. One thing worth mention is that the prophets in some instances used archaic terminology to seal prophecy. For example, look at Isaiah 1:10-12 wherein it states "Sodom" and "Gomorrah" in reference to his people, followed by works as sacrifices of "burnt offerings" and treading his courts. Similarly, Ezekiel also used linguistic devices to seal his work. We should work with what we know to be true and that is: Lord Jesus paid the price for sin. Therefore, any reference in Ezekiel to animal sacrifice as a payment for sin is a linguistic devise used in sealing scripture. So when we see animal sacrifice as a payment for sin we should then ask, Has Lord Jesus paid for sin? If the answer if yes, then there is no need for animal sacrifice and what is really being said is that these prophecies are sealed with archaic sacrificial terminology. Those who do not know Lord Jesus paid the price for sin will believe in animal sacrifice as a payment. In other words, it is false doctrine that some choose to believe and the prophets used that false belief to seal prophecy. It is for this reason that I tend to stay out of Ezekiel because he used all the linguistic devices in excess. He changed Egypt that all the other prophets used, to Babylon, and wrote everything like Picasso paints. It is a lot of work to read Ezekiel, in my opinion. Post Script: I would love to watch Picasso paint. If I could travel back in time it would be one of my wishes; to see one of the greatest painters of all time painting a work of art. That is how I see Ezekiel. A master writer with his "Son of man" reference that links to the one and only "Son of Man" wherein Man metaphorically means God the Father. Yes, Ezekiel in my opinion is the Shakespeare of the Bible, and I do not read Shakespeare. |
|
