The Third Temple

[BroRog]

Dear BroRog,

But you are making my point true again . . .

Not Really, I don't think.

In 2Corinthians, Paul is working hard to get the Corinthians to accept his apostleship, and to work cooperatively with him to spread the gospel. In chapter 6, he attempts to commend himself again, reminding them of his contribution to worldwide evangelism. He suffered with much endurance, he says, afflictions, hardships, beatings, imprisonments, and etc. in order that he might speak freely to the Corinthians with his heart open wide.

In this, he wants the Corinthians to join up with him, rather than being bound to unbelievers "for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?" He argues that since we are the temple of God, we ought not practice idolatry. To illustrate his point, he cites the Ezekiel passage, not to suggest that Ezekiel 37 is realized in the church, but as an example for us to follow. As he says in his first letter that these passages are examples for us, written for our instruction. And so, just as God will demand loyalty and fidelity from the Israelites when he dwells amongst the people of Israel, he demands loyalty and fidelity of us too.

Therefore, "all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" are a part of "God's Israel"--as indicated here:

Gal. 6
14 But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
15 For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.
16 And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

I read this controversial passage differently. I believe Paul is blessing two groups: 1) those who walk by "this rule" and 2) the Israel of God.

And so, when Peter writes to the following people in his first epistle:

I Pet. 1
1a Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

he is writing to those who are born again--to those who are Christians--to those who are chosen--to those who are sanctified by the Spirit of God--to those who are sprinkled by the blood of Jesus . . .

Peter is writing to a subset of those who are sanctified by the Spirit of God etc., which are from the Jewish Diaspora. What he says concerning a chosen race would only apply to the Sons of Jacob as God says in Deuteronomy.

[billy-brown 2]

Not Really, I don't think.

In 2Corinthians, Paul is working hard to get the Corinthians to accept his apostleship, and to work cooperatively with him to spread the gospel. In chapter 6, he attempts to commend himself again, reminding them of his contribution to worldwide evangelism. He suffered with much endurance, he says, afflictions, hardships, beatings, imprisonments, and etc. in order that he might speak freely to the Corinthians with his heart open wide.

I agree with what you are saying here . . . this is good. (See . . . we agree!)

In this, he wants the Corinthians to join up with him, rather than being bound to unbelievers "for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness, or what fellowship has light with darkness?" He argues that since we are the temple of God, we ought not practice idolatry.

I agree with what you are saying here also . . . this is good. (See . . . we agree!)

To illustrate his point, he cites the Ezekiel passage, not to suggest that Ezekiel 37 is realized in the church, but as an example for us to follow. As he says in his first letter that these passages are examples for us, written for our instruction. And so, just as God will demand loyalty and fidelity from the Israelites when he dwells amongst the people of Israel, he demands loyalty and fidelity of us too.

Well, I cannot agree with all of this . . . let's see . . .

You and I agree already that we are the temple of God, and I assume we agree on this because we both are in Christ. Thus, we are "one" with the Corinthian saints of that time (because we are in Christ, and they are in Christ also).

Thus, you and I are part of the "one new man" in Christ of Eph. 2--as the saints of Corinth are as well.

So, here's my question: How does any person become part of the temple of God--as given in II Cor. 6:16?

Here is the verse again:

II Cor. 6 (NLT)
16And what union can there be between God’s temple and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God said:

“I will live in them
and walk among them.
I will be their God,
and they will be my people. e

Footnote:
e 6:16 Lev 26:12; Ezek 37:27.

(go to the next post . . .)

[billy-brown 2]

(this is the continuation from the last post . . .)

Therefore, "all who in every place call on the name of our Lord Jesus Christ" are a part of "God's Israel"--as indicated here:

Gal. 6
14 But may it never be that I would boast, except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world.
15 For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation.
16 And those who will walk by this rule, peace and mercy be upon them, and upon the Israel of God.

I read this controversial passage differently. I believe Paul is blessing two groups: 1) those who walk by "this rule" and 2) the Israel of God.

Dear BroRog,

I feel that there is no need to read the controversial passage of Gal. 6:12-14 in the manner that you are reading it.

Indeed, Paul wrote the epistle to the Galatians in order to encourage believers in Christ to understand that faith in Christ alone justifies them before a Holy God. Paul indicates that circumcision is nothing and uncircumcised is nothing--and this is indeed the "rule" that Paul encourages the saints to walk by.

And so, Paul writes the following in Gal. 6:16: as many as walk by that rule (circumcision is nothing and uncircumcised is nothing), peace and mercy be upon those who walk by the rule he had just laid out--as he has written earlier in the epistle (especially the bold verse below):

Galatians 5:
1So Christ has truly set us free. Now make sure that you stay free, and don’t get tied up again in slavery to the law.
2Listen! I, Paul, tell you this: If you are counting on circumcision to make you right with God, then Christ will be of no benefit to you.
3I’ll say it again. If you are trying to find favor with God by being circumcised, you must obey every regulation in the whole law of Moses.
4For if you are trying to make yourselves right with God by keeping the law, you have been cut off from Christ! You have fallen away from God’s grace.
5But we who live by the Spirit eagerly wait to receive by faith the righteousness God has promised to us.
6For when we place our faith in Christ Jesus, there is no benefit in being circumcised or being uncircumcised. What is important is faith expressing itself in love.

And without faith in Christ, relationship with YHWH is not possible, as John 8 and 14 teaches:

John 8
21 Then He said again to them, “I go away, and you will seek Me, and will die in your sin; where I am going, you cannot come.”
22 So the Jews were saying, “Surely He will not kill Himself, will He, since He says, ‘Where I am going, you cannot come’?”
23 And He was saying to them, “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world.
24 “Therefore I said to you that you will die in your sins; for unless you believe that I am He, you will die in your sins.”

John 14
1 “Do not let your heart be troubled; believe in God, believe also in Me.
2 “In My Father’s house are many dwelling places; if it were not so, I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you.
3 “If I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself, that where I am, there you may be also.
4 “And you know the way where I am going.”
5 Thomas said to Him, “Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?”
6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.


(go to the next post . . . )

[billy-brown 2]

(this is the continuation from the last post . . .)

And so, when Peter writes to the following people in his first epistle:

I Pet. 1
1a Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia,

he is writing to those who are born again--to those who are Christians--to those who are chosen--to those who are sanctified by the Spirit of God--to those who are sprinkled by the blood of Jesus . . .

Peter is writing to a subset of those who are sanctified by the Spirit of God etc., which are from the Jewish Diaspora. What he says concerning a chosen race would only apply to the Sons of Jacob as God says in Deuteronomy.

Dear BroRog,

The people that Peter is writing to in I Pet. 1:1:

I Pet. 1
1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ,
To those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, who are chosen

are born again indeed--as indicated here also:

I Pet. 1
2 according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, by the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to obey Jesus Christ and be sprinkled with His blood: May grace and peace be yours in the fullest measure.
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His great mercy has caused us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
4 to obtain an inheritance which is imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven for you,
5 who are protected by the power of God through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.

And you and I have been born again also to the same living hope. What is that hope? (See the bold passage below for the answer.)

Romans 8
23 And not only this, but also we ourselves, having the first fruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting eagerly for our adoption as sons, the redemption of our body.
24 For in hope we have been saved, but hope that is seen is not hope; for who hopes for what he already sees?
25 But if we hope for what we do not see, with perseverance we wait eagerly for it.

Indeed, every born again person is waiting on the "redemption of our body" as our reward for faith in Christ--it is in this hope that we were saved. Therefore, Peter is writing the epistle of I Peter to all of the "born again" people--whether Hebrew or Non-Hebrew.

In conclusion, I feel that you should review posts #136 and #137 above, because many of the conclusions that you have reached in your recent post to me show that you don't see that Jesus is sitting at the right hand of the Father literally right now--and that He is therefore King and High Priest over every born again believer--indeed, over the "one new man"--over the "the Israel of God" consisting of believing Hebrew and Non-Hebrew people in Christ. This is the "Holy Nation" of I Pet. 2:9-10 indeed.

[Matthehitmanhart]

To answer this we need to understand what role the Levitical sacrifices played in God's relationship with the nation of Israel.
What is your take on this issue? What role did they play?

It's commonly recognized amonst scholarship that we lack the basic historical information to make any solid conclusions about the inner rationale behind animal sacrifices, and thus we cannot form a concrete explaination as to why they were seen as carrying atoning value. One thing we are sure of from the Torah itself, however, is that they were seen as carrying this atoning value. I have written on this here.

The point was, we understand from Revelation 21-22 that certain things in this age will be found in the coming age and other things will not be found in the coming age. For instance, Jesus and God will be found in the coming age, but crying and death will not. We measure the transitory aspect of things in terms of whether something will survive into the next age. You reminded me that the temple will not be found in the coming age, and I simply remarked that if we don't find a temple in the coming age doesn't mean we won't see one in this age.

Okay, but the point I was making was that what we see in Revelation 21-22, that there will be no localized Temple in the age to come, directly contradicts what we see in Ezekiel, that there will be a localized Temple in which God will dwell for all eternity. It seems to me that this reveals a fundamental discontinuity between the two visions, based upon the two different covenantal contexts in which they were recieved. And for all you've said, you haven't actually addressed that point.

I think a review of the relevant passages would reveal that the essential connotation of "forever" has more to do with the durability of a thing than the duration of it's existence.

Okay, but then durability implies duration, doesn't it? If something is said to be indestructible, would it not by implication also be eternal? I must say it seems silly to me that you're arguing for עולם to denote durability more than duration, especially in light of the way it's actually used in Ezekiel 43:7: "This is the place of my throne and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel forever."

I don't see a problem with Ezekiel's "forever" as you call it, but if you have a problem with that, why don't you have a problem with this?

"Thus says the LORD, 'If you can break My covenant for the day and My covenant for the night, so that day and night will not be at their appointed time, then My covenant may also be broken with David My servant so that he will not have a son to reign on his throne, and with the Levitical priests, My ministers. Jeremiah 33:20-21

In this passage from Jeremiah, God associates three covenants together: his covenant with day and night, his covenant with David, and his covenant with Levi. The clear implication is that since no being in existence can break God's covenant with the day and night, then no being in existence can cause God to break his covenant with David or Levi. The NT teaches that Jesus is the ultimate fulfillment of God's covenant with David, but Jesus can not be the fulfillment of God's covenant with Levi, since it is unlawful for Jesus to serve as priest on earth. The author of Hebrews argues that Jesus is allowed to be our high priest in heaven because Jesus is a priest according to the order of Melchizedek.

I wouldn't even agree with your premise (the part in bold strikes me as far too platonic), so I'm not presented with any problem here. But if I may ask, if Jesus cannot serve as a priest on earth, then how in your view is he supposed to oversee all the activities of an earthly millennial Temple?

I agree that this passage puts Gentiles outside of God's covenant with Israel, yes. But this does not put the Gentiles outside of the body of Christ, in whom all will find salvation.

It is God's covenant with Israel into which the Gentiles have been grafted through the Messiah, and that is why circumcision is no longer necessary: because the people of God no longer consist of only one ethnicity. That is Paul's explicit point in Galatians 3-4 and elsewhere. Under the old covenant, however, all who were not circumcised were cut off from God's people. Thus, as with animal sacrifices, we simply cannot escape the basic discontinuity between the old and new covenants on the point of circumcision.

Sure, why not?

Um, maybe because Jesus provided the ultimate sacrifice for sin once and for all, thus making the continued sacrifices in the Temple entirely redundant. Would you disagree with this?

What you say is a clear implication of what Ezekiel has said. What I want to know is why we would object to something that God instituted since the Exodus? What else does it mean to be a chosen people? Deuteronomy 7:6

There are many ways I could respond to this, but since you reference Deut 7:6, perhaps you could answer a question for me: why does the NT repeatedly apply Duet 7:6 and passages like it to the renewed Jew-plus-Gentile people of God in Christ? I'm thinking particularly of passages like 1 Cor 8:6, 1 Tim 2:14, and Rev 1:6.

[T W Taylor]

Hello Beckrl, Your thread is about another Temple being built, Maybe this applies.

The Third Temple
Where in scripture would you find the prophecy of the restoration of the Jewish Temple? Reference to the building of the third temple.

Jesus prophesied this of the second Herod temple that shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Am 9:11 "On that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of old;

Am 9:12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, And all the Gentiles who are called by My name," Says the Lord who does this thing.

Am 9:13 "Behold, the days are coming," says the Lord, "When the plowman shall overtake the reaper, And the treader of grapes him who sows seed; The mountains shall drip with sweet wine, And all the hills shall flow with it.

Ac 15:16'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up;
Ac 15:17So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the Lord who does all these things.'

Another thing, Would the Temple that was destroyed in 70AD be legitimate? Herod, a Roman, a Gentile, built it . Gentiles were not allowed to help with Ezra’s Temple. ???

Ezr 4:2 they came to Zerubbabel and the heads of the fathers' houses, and said to them, "Let us build with you, for we seek your God as you do; and we have sacrificed to Him since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assyria, who brought us here."

Ezr 4:3 But Zerubbabel and Jeshua and the rest of the heads of the fathers' houses of Israel said to them, "You may do nothing with us to build a house for our God; but we alone will build to the Lord God of Israel, as King Cyrus the king of Persia has commanded us."

TWTaylor

[Beckrl]

Hello Beckrl, Your thread is about another Temple being built, Maybe this applies.

TWT
That is what I was looking for in scripture, but let us see if it applies.

Am 9:11 "On that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of old;

Yes indeed that applies to the rebuilding of the temple or tent of David. We must also take into account the time frame of the prophecy. Amos given this warning of repentance or judgment would come in 760 in the days of Uzziah two years before the great earthquake. Some three decades before the downfall of Israel.

Israel was taken into captivity in or around 722 and Judah was taken into captivity around 586. Then we have the return under Zerubbabel, Ezra and Nehemiah let say 500 were the temple is rebuilt. That is how I view those passages by Amos.

Am 9:12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, And all the Gentiles who are called by My name," Says the Lord who does this thing.

Am 9:13 "Behold, the days are coming," says the Lord, "When the plowman shall overtake the reaper, And the treader of grapes him who sows seed; The mountains shall drip with sweet wine, And all the hills shall flow with it.

Ac 15:16'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up;
Ac 15:17So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the Lord who does all these things.'

Amos 11:9-15 I view as the restoration of Israel that they return from that captivity [14]. These are the promises after the judgment.

Another thing, Would the Temple that was destroyed in 70AD be legitimate? Herod, a Roman, a Gentile, built it . Gentiles were not allowed to help with Ezra’s Temple. ???

Ezr 4:2 they came to Zerubbabel and the heads of the fathers' houses, and said to them, "Let us build with you, for we seek your God as you do; and we have sacrificed to Him since the days of Esarhaddon king of Assyria, who brought us here."

Ezr 4:3 But Zerubbabel and Jeshua and the rest of the heads of the fathers' houses of Israel said to them, "You may do nothing with us to build a house for our God; but we alone will build to the Lord God of Israel, as King Cyrus the king of Persia has commanded us."

TWTaylor

i'm not sure if he was a jew or not but he did claim to be one. I believe his family converted to Judaism.

[BroRog]

It's commonly recognized amonst scholarship that we lack the basic historical information to make any solid conclusions about the inner rationale behind animal sacrifices, and thus we cannot form a concrete explaination as to why they were seen as carrying atoning value. One thing we are sure of from the Torah itself, however, is that they were seen as carrying this atoning value. I have written on this here.

I'm not certain why you raise the issue of scholarship, since modern scholars have proven themselves to be the least qualified to speak on Biblical issues. The fact that modern scholars have no idea why God would accept animal sacrifices for atonement is no surprise to me. One can only surmise that any student who thought he knew anything before he sat under the teaching of modern scholars, will definitely lose even what he thought he knew after he graduates. (Matthew 13:12)

The atoning value of the animal sacrifices is incontrovertible. What remains unclear, in Christian circles anyway, is the relevant distinctions between atonement and forgiveness; justice and mercy. Being hamstrung by the view of Anselm, who during his attempt to defend God's honor, robbed Christians of the true meaning and significance of the atoning work of Christ on the cross, Christians find themselves ill equipped to make sense of both the animal sacrifices and the cross. And without the correct understanding of the cross, one can not understand the book of Hebrews. So while I agree with your assertions that the animal sacrifices had atoning value, I disagree with your assertion that the atonement value was "limited", or that an individual could not find salvation through them.

Anselm proposed an economic model for the atonement, which I discussed here, here , and, here.

Okay, but the point I was making was that what we see in Revelation 21-22, that there will be no localized Temple in the age to come, directly contradicts what we see in Ezekiel, that there will be a localized Temple in which God will dwell for all eternity. It seems to me that this reveals a fundamental discontinuity between the two visions, based upon the two different covenantal contexts in which they were recieved. And for all you've said, you haven't actually addressed that point.

In order to adequately address the point you raise, I would need to adequately address your foundational assumptions concerning the essential differences between the Old and the New Covenant. I think this is beyond the scope of this thread. But I don't think the basis of your point is theological, or philosophical, but exegetical.

If I understand your point correctly, the absence of a temple in the next age precludes a new temple in this age, is due, not to the essential difference between the Old and New Covenant, but a comparison between two seemingly disparate passages of scripture. And so, this is an exegetical question. In Ezekiel's vision, we read that the new temple of this age will be the place where he will "dwell among the sons of Israel forever." In John's vision, we read that there will be no temple in the coming age. Since we believe that one portion of scripture will not contradict another portion of scripture, we are invited to learn how these two passages are, indeed, not contradictory.

My resolution of the exegetical challenge involves an understanding of the usage of the term "forever". What does God mean when he says "this is the place of my throne . . . forever"? I think what God meant is that Mt. Zion and the physical temple that will exist there, will be the place of God's throne "without interruption", but not necessarily "for a limitless time." The promise assumes that the temple on Zion will be God's throne as for as long as that place exists." The emphasis in this context is not a "limitless time" in which the earthly throne will exist, but the permanence of Israel's new found faithfulness to God. The alternative to this statement would be if Israel were slip back into idolatry to seek out other gods again, resulting in God removing himself from Zion and the temple again.

Okay, but then durability implies duration, doesn't it? If something is said to be indestructible, would it not by implication also be eternal? I must say it seems silly to me that you're arguing for עולם to denote durability more than duration, especially in light of the way it's actually used in Ezekiel 43:7: "This is the place of my throne and the place of the soles of my feet, where I will dwell in the midst of the children of Israel forever."

Yes, I would agree that ultimate durability implies ultimate longevity. But the term "forever" doesn't necessarily imply durable or indestructible. If I were to drop my watch into molten lava, I would lose the use of my watch forever. What I mean is, "the situation as it pertains to my use of that watch is fixed permanently in time such that I will never be able to tell time with that particular watch again." If, in the next world, I find myself in a timeless domain, the whole question of my watch will become moot.

I wouldn't even agree with your premise (the part in bold strikes me as far too platonic), so I'm not presented with any problem here. But if I may ask, if Jesus cannot serve as a priest on earth, then how in your view is he supposed to oversee all the activities of an earthly millennial Temple?

He doesn't. According to Leviticus and Ezekiel the Levites will serve in that role.

It is God's covenant with Israel into which the Gentiles have been grafted through the Messiah, and that is why circumcision is no longer necessary: because the people of God no longer consist of only one ethnicity. That is Paul's explicit point in Galatians 3-4 and elsewhere. Under the old covenant, however, all who were not circumcised were cut off from God's people. Thus, as with animal sacrifices, we simply cannot escape the basic discontinuity between the old and new covenants on the point of circumcision.

I don't see a discontinuity between the two covenants as you do.

Um, maybe because Jesus provided the ultimate sacrifice for sin once and for all, thus making the continued sacrifices in the Temple entirely redundant. Would you disagree with this?

Yes, I disagree. I don't accept the premise of an "ultimate sacrifice". I believe in a "singular sacrifice", i.e. once for all, which brings the worshiper assurance of forgiveness. I also believe that the sin offerings were not intended as substitutional penance for sin, but as a means to return to a state of "cleanness", i.e. holiness. The sin offerings in Ezekiel's temple will not serve as compensation or reparation for sins in order to make an appeal for mercy or salvation. The sin offerings will serve to exemplify the behavior of a holy people who wish to approach a holy God. In this context, mercy and forgiveness will have already been granted, not as recompense for animal offerings, but in view of faith and a circumcised heart.

There are many ways I could respond to this, but since you reference Deut 7:6, perhaps you could answer a question for me: why does the NT repeatedly apply Duet 7:6 and passages like it to the renewed Jew-plus-Gentile people of God in Christ? I'm thinking particularly of passages like 1 Cor 8:6, 1 Tim 2:14, and Rev 1:6.

Are you sure you have the right references? Revelation 1:6 talks about a kingdom of priests, but nothing about a holy people. The other two references don't say anything that seems relevent to the issue.

[Johnny]

Where in scripture would you find the prophecy of the restoration of the Jewish Temple? Reference to the building of the third temple.

Jesus prophesied this of the second Herod temple that shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

I have been to Israel 4 times. I have visited the Temple Institute on various occasions. The 3rd Temple will be rebuilt. It is needed for the reign of the Antichrist which will rule the world from there. Jesus will come and build the 4th Temple.

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Visit the Temple Institute website and see that everything is almost in place to rebuilt the temple.

[kay-gee]

I have been to Israel 4 times. I have visited the Temple Institute on various occasions. The 3rd Temple will be rebuilt. It is needed for the reign of the Antichrist which will rule the world from there. Jesus will come and build the 4th Temple.

Rev 11:1 And there was given me a reed like unto a rod: and the angel stood, saying, Rise, and measure the temple of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein.
Rev 11:2 But the court which is without the temple leave out, and measure it not; for it is given unto the Gentiles: and the holy city shall they tread under foot forty and two months.

Visit the Temple Institute website and see that everything is almost in place to rebuilt the temple.

Wont happen! Not today, Not tomorrow. Not ever!!! The temple has been built. His name is Jesus Christ. The chief corner stone. We as his followers are the stones that make up te rest.
all the best...

[divaD]

Wont happen! Not today, Not tomorrow. Not ever!!! The temple has been built. His name is Jesus Christ. The chief corner stone. We as his followers are the stones that make up te rest.
all the best...

Even if a temple does happen to get rebuilt, and if the Jews start once again doing animal sacrifices, I can't imagine who they would be sacrificing to. I can't imagine God desiring them to sacrifice animals to Him.I also can't see God putting it into their hearts to once again start up the animal sacrificial system.

[David Taylor]

Maybe this applies.


Am 9:11 "On that day I will raise up The tabernacle of David, which has fallen down, And repair its damages; I will raise up its ruins, And rebuild it as in the days of old;

Am 9:12 That they may possess the remnant of Edom, And all the Gentiles who are called by My name," Says the Lord who does this thing.

Am 9:13 "Behold, the days are coming," says the Lord, "When the plowman shall overtake the reaper, And the treader of grapes him who sows seed; The mountains shall drip with sweet wine, And all the hills shall flow with it.

Ac 15:16'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up;
Ac 15:17So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord, Even all the Gentiles who are called by My name, Says the Lord who does all these things.'

Acts isn't referring to the fulfillment of Amos in an inferior stone building made with hands, which was a pattern of the perfect and final temple to come.....rather Acts is referring to long expected true temple that Amos and the prophets looked forward to, made without hands.

This temple, is the fulfillment of the Amos-Acts reference.

Mark 14:58 "I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands."

John 2:19 "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body."



Ac 15:16 'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord"



Hebrews 9:11 "Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building"

[John146]

Wont happen! Not today, Not tomorrow. Not ever!!! The temple has been built. His name is Jesus Christ. The chief corner stone. We as his followers are the stones that make up te rest.
all the best...

Amen to that. Those who are making a big deal out of a meaningless physical temple that may or may not be built have completely missed the fact that Jesus is the chief corner stone of the third temple, which we are part of.

19Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

[John146]

Even if a temple does happen to get rebuilt, and if the Jews start once again doing animal sacrifices, I can't imagine who they would be sacrificing to. I can't imagine God desiring them to sacrifice animals to Him.I also can't see God putting it into their hearts to once again start up the animal sacrificial system.

Especially in light of scripture like this:

Heb 10
1For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.
2For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.
3But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.
5Wherefore when he cometh into the world, he saith, Sacrifice and offering thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me:
6In burnt offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure.
7Then said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me,) to do thy will, O God.
8Above when he said,Sacrifice and offering and burnt offerings and offering for sin thou wouldest not, neither hadst pleasure therein; which are offered by the law;
9Then said he, Lo, I come to do thy will, O God. He taketh away the first, that he may establish the second.
10By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

[John146]

Acts isn't referring to the fulfillment of Amos in an inferior stone building made with hands, which was a pattern of the perfect and final temple to come.....rather Acts is referring to long expected true temple that Amos and the prophets looked forward to, made without hands.

This temple, is the fulfillment of the Amos-Acts reference.

Mark 14:58 "I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands."

John 2:19 "Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body."



Ac 15:16 'After this I will return And will rebuild the tabernacle of David, which has fallen down; I will rebuild its ruins, And I will set it up; So that the rest of mankind may seek the Lord"



Hebrews 9:11 "Christ being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building"

I couldn't agree more. Well said.