Millennial Sacrifices???

[BroRog]

The New Testament disallows the re-introduction of the abolished sacrifices and offerings. Christ is that final offering for sin.

Hebrews 10:18 says, “there is no more offering for sin.”

In the same verse it also says, "“This is the covenant that I will establish with them after those days . . ." Those days haven't come yet.

Hebrews 10:26 says, “there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins.”

Ah, but if the sacrifices are "memorial" sacrifices, then those who make them have no expectation of their efficacy, and since they don't expect the sacrifices to expiate sin, they do not violate the warning of Hebrews 10:26. Or else those who take communion are also in violation of that verse, since they too, memorialize the death of Jesus on the cross.

The new earth will be incorrupt, it will be glorified. That is why mortals cannot inhabit it.

But then, where does Ezekiel say that the earthly temple will be on the New Earth? If this Temple is on the old earth during this age, then why would the Amil doctrine have a problem with it?

This couldn't be clearer. The kingdom that is going to be inherited at Christ's return is an incorrupt one.

Perhaps, but remember all this takes place after God has put all of Jesus' enemies under his feet as a footstool. Even those who affirm the premil doctrine, place that time after the defeat of Satan, death and Hades.

The error of the premil doctrine may not be in the fact that Jesus rules for a thousand years on earth, but that the righteous dead are resurrected during that time. After all, if all the righteous dead are resurrected at the inauguration of the Millennial period, it could be argued that death was defeated then, rather than later. Why assume that the "first resurrection" is the resurrection of all the righteous dead, especially when the text specifies a narrow subset of the righteous dead -- the martyrs of the Great Tribulation?

Why can't the rapture not only be post-trib but post-mill?

[wpm]

Ah, but if the sacrifices are "memorial" sacrifices, then those who make them have no expectation of their efficacy, and since they don't expect the sacrifices to expiate sin, they do not violate the warning of Hebrews 10:26. Or else those who take communion are also in violation of that verse, since they too, memorialize the death of Jesus on the cross.

But what I am trying to establish: where is the basis for anticipating "memorial sacrifices"? Where does it teach this in Ezek 40-47 or anywhere else? No holder of this has ever furnished this to me.

Why can't the rapture not only be post-trib but post-mill?

Hmmm.

Paul

[third hero]

ok, that does it!
Paul, not all premils believe that Christ will institute animal sacrifices when He rules the world at His return. But yet, you continue to spout out that little bit of untruth in every thread you either start or involve yourself with. If you are going to make generalities, could you make ones that are actually true?

I have, and there are others like me that believe that Ezekiel 40-44 was conditional prophecies that involved Zerrubabel, the prince that led the people from Babylon to Jerusalem. And guess what? We are still premils. So can you erase that little bit of misinformation from your diatribes? Thank you.

Second of all, why would any premil believe that animal sacrifices, which did nothing for the Israelites who were under the Law, be reinstitutionalised by the man who negated them in the first place? Jesus bacame sin so that we sould be relieved of ours. Everyone knows that! And on top of that, nothing can take away a person's sin except for the blood og Lord Jesus. You know that, and even us premils know that. (ok, I have not read any further than the OP, so please premils, do not make a fool out of me... please?!) Anyway, we know that only Jesus can forgive men of their sins, and no animal can do that. So why would Lord Jesus reinstitutionalize a dead ritual?

Just because we believe that Christ is going to come to this earth and have His very own Kingdom established by His Father does not mean that we are Judaizers or adhere to any other false doctrines. We take our beliefs from the Bible, and we actually say that places in the Bible like Revelation 19-20 can be taken at face value, instead of figurating it away like you and many other Amils tend to do. So, before you make untrue comments like "Premils believe that Christ is going to reinstitute animal sacrifices", check your sources.

Thanks.
Doug
the Third Hero

[third hero]

I used to be one, so I know that this is what was taught. I have also been around here a while, and know that this would be the standard Premil view.

Paul

From the many posts of your that I have read, it would seem to me that you were a Dispensationalist, and not a Historical or Classical premil. I could be wrong, but I doubt it, since many of the Historical Premil beliefs that we believe, you have not referenced a single one when talking about the end times.

[third hero]

Dispensational Premillenial Christianity, does it get any better? No it does not, it makes more sense than the unorganized alternative. And since i believe this, and haven't ever heard of what you're talking about, it must be some radical, old, bald, and dying out breed of premils you're talking about...or ones that i don't completley agree with, anyway...

I see your point, that by saying Christ would come back for his church at the rapture and leave those at the tribulation would be limiting His power as well. And obviously i don't agree with Tim LaHaye and whats his name Jenkins and their allegorical attrocity...(he should have stuck to writing marriage counseling books, sigh).

You have done something that no one else has ever been able to do for me, you have challenged a foundational belief that has been taught to me for years and I have no answer for myself even to this question. And so, rather than admit that im wrong, I admit that I don't know, and that now, I have a beckoning and nagging urge to research all this and find out for myself, what exactly have i been believing about the end times. Thanks for getting things going inside of my rather "narrow" visioned mind. I'll catch up with you later, oh, and sorry for any previous comments that may have seemed...rude.

Until later

Matthew 24:15-21
Zechariah 14:1-5
2 Thes 2:3-4
Matthew 24:22-34
Revelation 12
Revelation 13-15
Revelation 20:1-4
Revelation 14:11-14
Revelation 16:14-17 And especially verse 15
Daniel 7, all of it
Matthew 20, all of it
Just to start you off. I am sure you will find amny other scriptures that lead you to the truth. Enjoy, and happy reading!

[third hero]

I personally believe that the purpose of it was to show what God would have done for Israel had they only repented of their ways. I believe it was a conditional prophecy and Israel did not meet the conditions that God laid out for them in order for the prophecy to be fulfilled as it is described.

Ezekiel 43
10Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern.
11And 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: and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.

Here is something that Eric and I actually agree on!

[third hero]

Ok. I guess scripture has to be infused into this debate as well.

Ezekiel 40:1
In the five and twentieth year of our captivity, in the beginning of the year, in the tenth [day] of the month, in the fourteenth year after that the city was smitten, in the selfsame day the hand of the LORD was upon me, and brought me thither.

Guess what? Ezekiel has switched gears, and apparently, so had God. God wanted to show him something else, not concerning the end times, but concerning the very near future of Israel. How do I know? Well, let's take a look.

Verse 4
And the man said unto me, Son of man, behold with thine eyes, and hear with thine ears, and set thine heart upon all that I shall shew thee; for to the intent that I might shew [them] unto thee [art] thou brought hither: declare all that thou seest to the house of Israel.

Whom is this prophecy concern? Israel. Not Spiritual Israel, but Ethnic Israel. Remember, when Ezekiel had received these prophecies, Israel was still in Babylon, captives of the Babylonian/Mede/Persian empire. So, it is possible that this prophecy is about the second temple and how God wanted it rebuilt.

Now, is this a conditional prophecy, like Jonas' prophecy concerning Ninevah, or is it unconditional? Ezekiel 43 answers that.

We begin with verse 8.
In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, and the wall between me and them, they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger. (vs 9)Now let them put away their whoredom, and the carcases of their kings, far from me, and I will dwell in the midst of them for ever.

Now, we see God doing two things. 1. He is explaining to Ezekiel what He had just done to Israel. 2. He is making a condition for Israel. He is telling them to forsake the wickedness of the past, and come and dwell with Him. This is definitely conditional. But there is more.

Verse 10
Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern. (vs 11)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: and write [it] in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.

Now, is it any more obvious that chapters 40-44 have nothing to do with the end times? Even the priests of Zadok are mentioned here, and they were referenced in not only Isaiah, but Jeremiah as well, right along with Zerubabbel. This whole portion of scripture is concerning Israel and their soon-to-be exodus back to their homeland, after the first dispersion. Moreover, since the word "if" is used, this would become a conditional scripture, dealing with their near future whic hwould be our very ancient past. There is no Millennial reference here.

[wpm]

From the many posts of your that I have read, it would seem to me that you were a Dispensationalist, and not a Historical or Classical premil. I could be wrong, but I doubt it, since many of the Historical Premil beliefs that we believe, you have not referenced a single one when talking about the end times.

Historic Premil.

Paul

[David Taylor]

ok, that does it!
Paul, not all premils believe that Christ will institute animal sacrifices when He rules the world at His return. But yet, you continue to spout out that little bit of untruth in every thread you either start or involve yourself with. If you are going to make generalities, could you make ones that are actually true?

OK Doug,
When someone makes a generalization that Premillennialism teaches that Ezekiel 40-48 is a future literal expectation; and the animal sacrifices describe within those chapters are literally expect; this isn't inaccurate or untruth.

Most believers of the Premillennialism view believe and expect this to occur.
(There are always minority exceptions to any view).

Besides, the topic of this OPs thread is 'millennial sacrifices' and only the Premill viewpoint expects this. Amill and Postmill don't; so wpm was within the subject of the OP to begin with.

Similarly, if you made a blanket generalization that Amillennialism believes that Satan was bound in the 1st century; that would be true of most Amillennialists views as well (although there are assuredly some who disagree).

So don't try to run wpm through the ringer for making a general statement that is in accordance with the majority understanding of that view.

It's fine for you to step up and say you don't believe that in within your Premill understanding; but to say he is making untrue generalities is simply not correct or warranted.

Amillennialism by the vast majority of its adherents, believes Satan was bound in the 1st century.

Premillennialism by the vast majority of its adherents, believe in a future literal fulfillment of Ezekiel 40-48, including its animal sacrifices.

There are always minority exceptions to every general viewpoint.

[BroRog]

Ok. I guess scripture has to be infused into this debate as well.

Ezekiel 40:1
In the five and twentieth year of our captivity, in the beginning of the year, in the tenth [day] of the month, in the fourteenth year after that the city was smitten, in the selfsame day the hand of the LORD was upon me, and brought me thither.

Guess what? Ezekiel has switched gears, and apparently, so had God. God wanted to show him something else, not concerning the end times, but concerning the very near future of Israel. How do I know? Well, let's take a look.

Verse 4
And the man said unto me, Son of man, behold with thine eyes, and hear with thine ears, and set thine heart upon all that I shall shew thee; for to the intent that I might shew [them] unto thee [art] thou brought hither: declare all that thou seest to the house of Israel.

Whom is this prophecy concern? Israel. Not Spiritual Israel, but Ethnic Israel. Remember, when Ezekiel had received these prophecies, Israel was still in Babylon, captives of the Babylonian/Mede/Persian empire. So, it is possible that this prophecy is about the second temple and how God wanted it rebuilt.

Now, is this a conditional prophecy, like Jonas' prophecy concerning Ninevah, or is it unconditional? Ezekiel 43 answers that.

We begin with verse 8.
In their setting of their threshold by my thresholds, and their post by my posts, and the wall between me and them, they have even defiled my holy name by their abominations that they have committed: wherefore I have consumed them in mine anger. (vs 9)Now let them put away their whoredom, and the carcases of their kings, far from me, and I will dwell in the midst of them for ever.

Now, we see God doing two things. 1. He is explaining to Ezekiel what He had just done to Israel. 2. He is making a condition for Israel. He is telling them to forsake the wickedness of the past, and come and dwell with Him. This is definitely conditional. But there is more.

Verse 10
Thou son of man, shew the house to the house of Israel, that they may be ashamed of their iniquities: and let them measure the pattern. (vs 11)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: and write [it] in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.

Now, is it any more obvious that chapters 40-44 have nothing to do with the end times? Even the priests of Zadok are mentioned here, and they were referenced in not only Isaiah, but Jeremiah as well, right along with Zerubabbel. This whole portion of scripture is concerning Israel and their soon-to-be exodus back to their homeland, after the first dispersion. Moreover, since the word "if" is used, this would become a conditional scripture, dealing with their near future whic hwould be our very ancient past. There is no Millennial reference here.

What I have learned in my studies of the Old Testament is this. While it is true that God's offers to Israel are conditional, they are not contingent. The fact that Israel has yet to feel the shame specified in verse 10, doesn't mean they won't. If we read the rest of Ezekiel, we find passages in which God tells Israel that he will bring them back to the land, and they will know that he is the Lord. These prophesies have yet to be fulfilled, "For his lovingkindness is everlasting."

Moreover, God declares that the House of Zadok will be priests forever.

14 `Behold, days are coming,' declares the Lord, `when I will fulfill the good word which I have spoken concerning the house of Israel and the house of Judah. 15 `In those days and at that time I will cause a righteous Branch of David to spring forth; and He shall execute justice and righteousness on the earth. 16 `In those days Judah will be saved and Jerusalem will dwell in safety; and this is [the name] by which she will be called: the Lord is our righteousness.' 17 "For thus says the Lord, `David shall never lack a man to sit on the throne of the house of Israel; 18 and the Levitical priests shall never lack a man before Me to offer burnt offerings, to burn grain offerings and to prepare sacrifices continually.' " Jeremiah 33:13

[David Taylor]

If we read the rest of Ezekiel, we find passages in which God tells Israel that he will bring them back to the land, and they will know that he is the Lord.

God did bring them back to the Land and they did know that He was the Lord....soon after Ezekiel wrote his book.

Ezra and Nehemiah describe the return of the 12 tribes of Israel from captivity back into their lands AND their soon rebuilding of the stone temple and reistatement of sacrificial system by the priests.

[John146]

Amen. Christ shedding of his blood did not anull pervious promises to Israel. There will be a temple and continued sacrifices after Christ returns however not during a millenial kingdom but thoughout all eternity.

These will be done for a memorial unto all of Israel and will point that they were and always be insufficient. Note that God says he will MULTIPLY Israel in his midst for generation unto generation and these continued sacrifices will potentially lead their offspring to salvation.

Mark

In Ezekiel 40-48, there is no mention at all that the sin offerings would be performed as a memorial. You are reading that idea into the text, but it's nowhere to be found. Instead, it says this:

Eze 45:17 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.

Eze 46:20 Then said he unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass offering and the sin offering, where they shall bake the meat offering; that they bear them not out into the utter court, to sanctify the people.

Again, the text says the purpose of the sin offerings would be "to make reconciliation for the house of Israel" and "to sanctify the people". But Jesus has already accomplished this with His shed blood on the cross.

[John146]

Here is something that Eric and I actually agree on!

Stop the presses!

[BroRog]

God did bring them back to the Land and they did know that He was the Lord....soon after Ezekiel wrote his book.

Ezra and Nehemiah describe the return of the 12 tribes of Israel from captivity back into their lands AND their soon rebuilding of the stone temple and reistatement of sacrificial system by the priests.

sigh . . . Of course. But David, surely you know I was being brief. The scriptures predict a return to the land, yes. But along with that, God pours out his spirit on them all and they all come to belief. That has not happened yet.

[BroRog]

In Ezekiel 40-48, there is no mention at all that the sin offerings would be performed as a memorial. You are reading that idea into the text, but it's nowhere to be found. Instead, it says this:

Eze 45:17 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.

Eze 46:20 Then said he unto me, This is the place where the priests shall boil the trespass offering and the sin offering, where they shall bake the meat offering; that they bear them not out into the utter court, to sanctify the people.

Again, the text says the purpose of the sin offerings would be "to make reconciliation for the house of Israel" and "to sanctify the people". But Jesus has already accomplished this with His shed blood on the cross.

John, does the term "sanctify" and "reconciliation" always refer to salvation?