Ezekiel?

Hi Hitch,
Many people on this site interpret the Bible as a surface text that only occasionally needs to be interpreted more like a parable (when it seems really obvious to them that it is a parable). A parable would have a hidden or deeper meaning. Perhaps you are the same as this, seeing the Bible as mostly a surface text, or perhaps you are not, seeing the Bible as needing interpretation in much the same way as a parable. It seems like you might be tending to the non-surface, more hidden, meaning style in the case of Ezekiel. If you approach the Bible as a parable, you will be doing things correctly. We read in Psalm 78, verses one and two that we are to listen to God's law (scripture), and that scripture is given in parable form. We read the same in Mark 4:11.

Since your question regards the book of Ezekiel, a book written to a rebellious people to show them the true pattern if only they might turn and see (Chapter 2 Ezekiel), let's look at it. The temple in Ezekiel is a picture of the way true believers are in correct relation to God. Believers are the temple. We can read that in 1 Cor 3:16. The blood sacrifice we find in Ezekiel 40 and onward is a picture of Christ having paid the price for those who are his, his body, the temple. There is not going to be some future enactment of another covenant for the true believers in which a physical animal is slaughtered. Not for some future Jew group or for anyone.

Since you are interested in the subject of a so-called 'rapture, try approaching 1 Thes 4:16 as a parable. 'Notice the similarity in parable language between it and some lines of Romans 11:

Romans 11 mentions:
"And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins. " Notice how it speaks in the future tense when referring to the gospel that we know and love and know to be in effect today. This does not mean it is a future gospel but simply that the Bible had been pointing to this. It is saying.. And in this manner all true believers will be saved, as it is written the deliverer (that's Jesus) will come out of Sion (heaven, the kingdom) and will turn ungodliness from the true believers. Notice how it mentions Jesus' covenant with saved persons. For this is my covenant with them. Notice it is the taking away of sins that accompanies the covenant. It's the gospel that we all know and love. Read it again: "And so all Israel shall be saved: as it is written, There shall come out of Sion the Deliverer, and shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: For this is my covenant unto them, when I shall take away their sins." This is simply the gospel that we all familiar with. Jesus comes from heaven to earth to die on a cross to turn us to him and to take away our sin.

Now look at 1 Thes 4:16: "For the Lord himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise first: " This again, seems to be a picture of the gospel we all know and love and are familiar with. Notice that it also is in the future tense, apparently to show that this had been prophesied in scripture. God comes from heaven. He has the voice to share the gospel. Because of this, those who are spiritually dead rise to new life in Christ and so the true believers will always be with the Lord.

mmmmm

Exactly!

Since your question regards the book of Ezekiel, a book written to a rebellious people to show them the true pattern if only they might turn and see (Chapter 2 Ezekiel), let's look at it. The temple in Ezekiel is a picture of the way true believers are in correct relation to God. Believers are the temple. We can read that in 1 Cor 3:16. The blood sacrifice we find in Ezekiel 40 and onward is a picture of Christ having paid the price for those who are his, his body, the temple. There is not going to be some future enactment of another covenant for the true believers in which a physical animal is slaughtered. Not for some future Jew group or for anyone.

Yup.

Oh yeah!

We’ll I double dog dare you to knock this chip off my shoulder.

Ha I TRIPLE dog dare ya!

Hmmmm... I'd like a chapter by chapter study of Ezekiel.
But I doubt we could all agree upon what Bible to read... lol

Might make a good thread, this one has a far more narrow focus.

Go ahead and start it! Just don't use the KJV please, it's not necessary and it gives me a headache!

LOl Typically I quote KJV but for reading I use NASB . But its Ezekiel that gives me a headache.

"Drink your Ovaltine!"

Is there a Bible code for that ??

I'm not a dispensationalism expert at all, but I really don't see a problem with Jesus running an old school Israel/Jerusalem/temple. I don't really think it would be "offensive" as long as everyone knows the sacrifices are strictly ceremonial. Actually, I think it would be great to have Jesus show everyone how an earthly kingdom is run correctly. Jesus proved his sinlessness/holiness etc. and showed us how a heavenly kingdom works- but would he really be a good King in the temporal world? Obviously, that's a rhetorical question, and I'm not saying he has to prove it... but I for the sake of his own glory, he might do it.

First I suggest a review of Hebrews. Second the prophet calls the sacrifices 'sin offerings' . I can provide chapter and verse if needed chow time now

Actually, I think it would be great to have Jesus show everyone how an earthly kingdom is run correctly

He's doing that ,we call it the church.

Really? Didn't Jesus say "my kingdom is not of this world" and if it was, that his servants would fight?

You are referring to the Jesus who said 'All the power and authority there is is mine' and is through the Spirt currently gathering His chosen out of the kingdom of darkness and placing them in His kingdom of light... That Jesus?
Dave and Sol had the Lord's throne , in the natural, now the time has come for the real throne the real rule and it is spiritual and its power has no earthly source, rather the source is heavenly.

.......

Okay. But I find Jesus phrasing of the nature of his kingdom to be interesting.

Jesus answered, 'My kingdom is not of this world; if my kingdom were of this world, my officers had struggled that I might not be delivered up to Jews; but now my kingdom is not from hence.' (YLT)
Jesus answered, "My kingdom does not belong to this world. If my kingdom belonged to this world, my servants would fight to keep me from being handed over to the Jewish leaders. But for now my kingdom is not from here." (ISV)

I understand all about Jesus being the only valid sacrifice to pay for sin, I wouldn't argue against that. But I think -in dispensationalism- For the "millennial kingdom" Jesus literally comes to rule what is left of the world after the tribulation (which you may or may not believe already happened, I know,) and while the church is there with him, not all of his tribulation survivor subjects are necessarily believers or even wanting to be ruled by him; which is supposed to explain why Satan is able to come out an deceive one last time, before he and his are wiped out. So, anyone not being ruled by the spirit, logically would have to be ruled by law- not as a "separate covenant" but rather as policy. There would still be no salvation by the law, and if there were sin offerings, the most they would do is postpone judgement on people under the law. It would only be there to keep people civilized until they either accept Jesus as Lord, or get wiped out with Satan.

That's just my understanding of it. I'm not saying that's what I 100% believe, but it makes some sense. More sense than a lot of other eschatological understandings I have heard of, anyway. You could say it's "manufactured" but, I've really yet to see an eschatological view presented in a manner that it can't be poked at in some way.

Are you a subject of He who is both Lord and Christ, today?

Sure. If you're some kind of animal rights activist, you might not view me as such, but, yes, I am.