You haven't proved that it was, either.Originally Posted by rejoice44
Deadpan Snarker
You haven't proved that it was, either.
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, and declare it on the islands from afar, and say, "He Who scattered Israel will gather them together and watch them as a shepherd his flock."
Jeremiah 31:9
Banned
For what reason(s) do you interpert that city to be literal? Yes, it has boundries, priests and kings, streets of gold, twelve gates, etc....But didn't Jesus relate to his kingdom as much and likewise did Peter speaking to the saints that they were livings stone of that city? (1 Peter 2:5) Should reveal all that you need to understand the city that Ezekiel saw even the acceptabe spiritual sacrifices.
4To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,
5Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.
6Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
7Unto you therefore which believe he is precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
8And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
9But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; 10Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.
Coffee Break
You are the one saying it wasn't. The burden of proof is on you.
I am the one saying show us by giving us the dimensions of the second temple and showing why it couldn't be Ezekiel's.
Deadpan Snarker
What reason do we have to assume it's not literal? "It fits better with my personal theology" is not an acceptable answer.
Ezekiel goes on for 8 chapters, in great specificity, for something that hardly seems to be a spiritual construct.
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, and declare it on the islands from afar, and say, "He Who scattered Israel will gather them together and watch them as a shepherd his flock."
Jeremiah 31:9
Deadpan Snarker
You're the one who's saying it is. The burden of proof is on you.
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, and declare it on the islands from afar, and say, "He Who scattered Israel will gather them together and watch them as a shepherd his flock."
Jeremiah 31:9
Coffee Break
I didn't start out saying it was, but upon investigation I observed that the altar and porch were built to Ezekiel's proportions, and that Ezra was a son of Zadok. At the same time I could find no dimensions that any one had that showed that the second temple was out of proportion. Since the sons of Zadok did minister in the second temple as foretold by Ezekiel, and since the altar and porch were built to Ezekiel's dimensions, shouldn't someone offer some proof that the second temple wasn't Ezekiel's temple before everyone just assumes it wasn't.
I live here!
Would you then conclude there is more than one new heavens and a new earth?
2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
The key phrase here would be...wherein dwelleth righteousness.
When Christ returns, wouldn't that then be the case? If it it, then that means the new heavens and a new earth have to take place first, because that is where there will be righteousness dwelling within. It doesn't say wherein dwelleth righteousness upon the old earth.
Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
This first earth that passes away, that couldn't be wherein dwelleth righteousness. If it was, then no reason to pass away I wouldn't think. I would then think Revelation 21:1 is contradicting 2 Peter 3:13 if righteousness dwells upon the earth that will later pass away. And like I pointed out. How could righteousness not dwell therein when Christ returns? And if it does, how could it not be in the new heavens and a new earth?
2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.
Revelation 21:1 And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea.
What I have in bold is a contradiction if the first earth does not pass away when Christ returns. Why? Because it is only in the new heaven and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness. Add to that, once Christ returns, how can righteousness not be dwelling therein?
Deadpan Snarker
Ah. So if two objects were built to certain specifications, they all were? That does not logically follow.
Great, that means his descendants who might serve in a third temple also are., and that Ezra was a son of Zadok.
The second temple, both of them actually, were rectangles. Ezekiel describes a square. A very, very large square.At the same time I could find no dimensions that any one had that showed that the second temple was out of proportion.
Um, I believe I mentioned the shape and size. Once or twice...Since the sons of Zadok did minister in the second temple as foretold by Ezekiel, and since the altar and porch were built to Ezekiel's dimensions, shouldn't someone offer some proof that the second temple wasn't Ezekiel's temple before every just assumes it isn't.
I'm also amused to note that the source of your information didn't believe that the second temple was Ezekiel's temple. But I guess it's only a "good source" when it corroborates what you already believe.
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, and declare it on the islands from afar, and say, "He Who scattered Israel will gather them together and watch them as a shepherd his flock."
Jeremiah 31:9
Here is some comparisons
First and second temple
Here is some comparison of all three Yashenet
Temples
There is plenty of passages and dimensions .... for figuring it out, and proving that Ezekiels temple was or wasn't built according to the specifications. However, remember, Herod enlarged on that temple, so technically, the "second" temple as originally built was smaller than what Herod later added on...so how does that figure into it all?
I didn't spend a lot of time on these sites but if you don't find them satisfactory, google will provide ample supply...lol, I got tired of googling it...
Banned
I understand your peference to view it as being literal, but in context it would have to been to those exiles as the temple build under Herod. If that's NOT the case then it would be in their future generations. As to the great details of that city it would be the same for the city seen by John as described as the city that comes down from heaven it also was descibed with great details. i perfer not to read them as being literal in a book full of symbolism. Which I can see John draws from many in the OT ones like Isaiah, Daniel and Ezekiel.
The children of exiles is to have been like unto a second exodus (Isaiah 11) and we can clearly see that fullfillment in Acts 2----Ezekiel also proclaimed the gathering of these from the nations (Ezekiel 37) so we have Isaiah and Ezekiel proclaiming the gathering together of the out cast of Israel (Judah and Ephraim) the picture of the valley of dry bones coming together as one stick.
Coffee Break
It is an indication that they were following Ezekiel's blue print. No it is not proof that they followed it completely, but it points in that direction.
So you know where we could find some sons of Zadok at the present time?Great, that means his descendants who might serve in a third temple also are.
Dimensions please? Josephus described a square for Herod's temple.The second temple, both of them actually, were rectangles. Ezekiel describes a square. A very, very large square.
You never gave a dimension and place from which you obtained it. I could say the second temple was a square, and what would that prove.Um, I believe I mentioned the shape and size. Once or twice...
There is a difference between what someone believes, and what they describe as being a fact.I'm also amused to note that the source of your information didn't believe that the second temple was Ezekiel's temple. But I guess it's only a "good source" when it corroborates what you already believe.
Captain Obvious
Perhaps you could, beyond the dimensions of the second temple, help us connect to your point by comparing other aspects of the Temple in Ezekiel 40-48 with the Second Temple? The river and the glory, the prince, the sons of Zadok, the lack of sweat on the garments, etc. would be a great place to start.
The Rookie
Twelve is the number of government. Thus, it is quite apropos that I am on my way towards wielding the power of twelve bars - each bar like, say, a tribe.....or a star.....or, maybe an apostle. A blue apostle. Like apostle smurfs. Does anyone remember smurfs? And all the controversy about them being from the devil? It's probably bad that I juxtaposed "apostle" and "smurf" in the same sentence. But then, I probably lost you at "blue apostle". Yes, my friends, this is what "rare jewel of a person" is actually implying. "Rare Jewel of a Person" really means, "Potentially Insane".
Deadpan Snarker
Im not sure what you mean here...
AT the risk of starting yet another fight on the topic, I don't think that Ezekiel 37 has been "fulfilled".The children of exiles is to have been like unto a second exodus (Isaiah 11) and we can clearly see that fullfillment in Acts 2----Ezekiel also proclaimed the gathering of these from the nations (Ezekiel 37) so we have Isaiah and Ezekiel proclaiming the gathering together of the out cast of Israel (Judah and Ephraim) the picture of the valley of dry bones coming together as one stick.
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, and declare it on the islands from afar, and say, "He Who scattered Israel will gather them together and watch them as a shepherd his flock."
Jeremiah 31:9
I live here!
I would see all this pertaining to the now. The new heavens and a new earth are future. The above would be understood spiritually. The new Jerusalem in Rev 21-22 would be understood literally and be seen physically. IOW, actual dimensions, having an actual location on the earth. After all, it's seen as having gates, which then infers there's an inside, and there's an outside. You can get a closer look of it in the OT, like here for instance...Isaiah 60:11 and the surrounding context.
Deadpan Snarker
They followed it where possible. Since they could not expand the temple mount to the size described by Ezekiel, they didn't.
Sure. many of them have the same last name, "Cohen".So you know where we could find some sons of Zadok at the present time?
Dimensions please? Josephus described a square for Herod's temple.
Not a square
We have archeological digs at the site.You never gave a dimension and place from which you obtained it. I could say the second temple was a square, and what would that prove.
We don't know "for a fact" what the size of the objects in the temple were. You just cite the Talmud- in this instance- because it agrees with you.
There is a difference between what someone believes, and what they describe as being a fact.
Hear the word of the Lord, O nations, and declare it on the islands from afar, and say, "He Who scattered Israel will gather them together and watch them as a shepherd his flock."
Jeremiah 31:9
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks