Jump to content
Kingdom of Adventistan
Gregory Matthews

Under Law

Recommended Posts

Ron Amnsn
On 10/6/2019 at 9:00 PM, Gustave said:

The early Church understood Jesus' "sermon on the mount" to replace the ministry of death Moses brought down from the mountain. 

God's Law given through Moses had two purposes or "ministries".  The "ministry" of death was one of those.  The "ministry" of life was the other one.  Notice what Moses said in Deuteronomy 30:19-20, " I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, blessing and curse. Therefore choose life, that you and your offspring may live, loving the LORD your God, obeying his voice and holding fast to him, for he is your life and length of days,"

Both "ministries" of the law are valid and beneficial.   As Moses said, one purpose of the Law was to show people how to choose life.  Jesus chose to lived according to the Law and proclaimed "I am the life."   (not "I will be the Life", as if the "life" was something different than what Jesus was living at the time he spoke)  The other purpose of the Law will still be necessary whenever the wicked are judged, in order to show that they chose death and that God is just in allowing them to experience what they have chosen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.

Ron Amnsn
On 10/1/2019 at 9:19 AM, 8thdaypriest said:

Hebrews 8:13 When He said, "A new covenant," He has made the first obsolete. 

The writer of Hebrews also said that system was "ready to pass away".  It did pass away.  The Romans obliterated it.

It is apparent from Hebrews 8:13 that the translators have misled people with the word "obsolete" because at the time that verse was written the "first" had not yet passed away, even though the promise of the "new covenant" had been made several centuries earlier in the time of Jeremiah, and the book of Hebrews was written several decades after the resurrection of Jesus.

If you look up the meaning of the Greek word used in Hebrews it is apparent that "obsolete" is not a good translation of it, because that same Greek word is used in Hebrews 1:11 to describe the foundation of the earth, which is still vital today.

The author of Hebrews was expecting the imminent return of Jesus and the re-creation of heaven and earth, as were the other New Testament authors.  In that sense, the "first" was ready to pass away, but there is nothing in the Bible that says that the "first" has passed away between the time Hebrews was written and now.

The Romans did destroy the Temple and put the Levitical priesthood out of service.  However, that had also happened before, at the time of Jeremiah, and there is nothing in Scripture to indicate that such an occurrence indicated a permanent revoking of God's promises to Israel, Aaron, Phinehas, David, or Jesus.   Through Jeremiah YHWH re-affirmed that His promises to David and to the Levitical priests would remain valid as long as the covenant regarding day and night remained, which is still the case today. 

Many people declare that those promises were "conditional", which they were, but God explicitly explained those conditions when the promises were given. God did not authorize humans who lived millenia later to add additional "conditions" to those promises.  Through Jeremiah, God also foretold that people would say just what many Christians are saying now regarding Judah and Israel, and God explicitly declared those rumors to be false.

The throne of David has been desolate for far longer than the Temple in Jerusalem has been desolate and we know from what the angel told Mary in Luke 1:32 that Jesus will still inherit the throne of David.  So the length of time that the Temple has been desolate is apparently no indication of permanent obsolescence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
56 minutes ago, BlessedMan said:

It sounds more like you are posting some sort of mixed up behavioral analyses, rather than scriptural exegesis here. Scripture IS plain and clear that none of those sacrifices would be "valid" after Christ was crucified:

"Once" means the opposite of all the oft-repeated "sacrifices" in the Temple that you speak of here, and its essential to put it into context:

I would rather go with scripture, rather than anecdotal "rebuttals."

I'm glad you don't just take my word for anything.  However, your assertion that "Scripture IS plain and clear that none of those sacrifices would be 'valid' after Christ was crucified' is actually unsupported in Scripture. 

YHWH told the Israelites that at least some of the sacrifices should happen throughout the generations of the Israelites (Exodus 29:42, etc) , and that portions of those sacrifices would belong to the Levitical priests throughout the generations of the Israelites (Lev. 7:36, etc.)  That's what God's Word established -- that's what the original readers of Romans and Hebrews would have been using to evaluate whether the messages of Romans and Hebrews were valid.  In order to get the faithful believers to disbelieve God's Word would have taken much more than the what is contained in the whole of Romans and Hebrews. 

What Romans and Hebrews says about the sacrifice of Jesus being better than the sacrifices of the Levitical priests is absolutely true.  Indeed Jesus only sacrificed once.  However neither Romans nor Hebrews says anything about the Levitical sacrifices being no longer "valid" after that one sacrifice of Jesus.  Go ahead and search for yourself.  Your assertion is apparently based on assumptions rather than on what is written in the Scriptures.

The teaching that God did away with the inheritance (of a portion of the sacrifices) that God gave to the Levitical priests is an assertion that God's promises can't be trusted because someone who will be born thousands of years later will add conditions to God's promise by which to nullify God's promise.  Jesus didn't nullify the instructions or promises given to Israel or to the Levites.  It was Christians who tried to do that after the great apostasy that was foretold by Paul and Jesus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlessedMan
12 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

The teaching that God did away with the inheritance (of a portion of the sacrifices) that God gave to the Levitical priests is an assertion that God's promises can't be trusted because someone who will be born thousands of years later will add conditions to God's promise by which to nullify God's promise. 

The thing about the various rites in OT Temple services of the Levites, is that your point has often been argued about over the years. People can do any of those Temple rituals anytime they want; but I already gave scripture that says they wont be needed after Christs death; for His Sacrifice trumps all others. Not sure how anyone can deny this. Saying that we MUST still do those ritual sacraments of the Levites, is like denying the original promise of Gen 3:15, and saying that the Bible contradicts itself; and that adds up to a denial of the need for Christs Sacrifice. If people feel a need to do some of those, its their right, I suppose, but it will never again mean what it used to. Bible says "Christ died ONCE for all"; therefore, why would  ANY other sacrifice be needed? Just to make ourselves look pious and "prove" we are "religious?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
13 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

If you look up the meaning of the Greek word used in Hebrews it is apparent that "obsolete" is not a good translation of it, because that same Greek word is used in Hebrews 1:11 to describe the foundation of the earth, which is still vital today.

Hebrews 1:10 And, "Thou, Lord, in the beginning didst lay the foundation of the earth, And the heavens are the works of Thy hands; 11 They will perish, but Thou remainest; And they all will become old as a garment, 12 And as a mantle Thou wilt roll them up; As a garment they will also be changed. But Thou art the same, And Thy years will not come to an end." (NAS)

The foundation of the earth will "pass away".  It is wearing out.   Which is the reason why Christ must create a "new earth".  A "new" earth, just like a "new" covenant - because the "first" was rendered "old" when the real sacrifice was offered. 

Exactly when this present earth will "pass away" is something open for discussion. 

Jesus said,   "Behold, your house is being left to you desolate! (Mat 23:38)   Desolate - devoid of God's presence.  

The Temple with its priesthood has not existed for almost 2000 years.  God is not there.  Christ now ministers in Heaven - the "true Tabernacle".  Millions have come to Christ and have been justified through Him, without the Temple.  

I do believe a Temple will be restored at Jerusalem for a short period just prior to the return of Christ in glory.   Satan/AntiChrist will use that Temple for his masterpiece of deception.

The priests on earth "served the copy".  They served only for "purifying the flesh" - (bodily defilement).  The Temple/sacrifices/Levirate priesthood were a prophecy - of Christ. 

1 Corinthians 13:8 "Love never ends. But if there are prophecies, they will be set aside;"

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
13 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

there is nothing in the Bible that says that the "first" has passed away between the time Hebrews was written and now.

Matthew 23:38 "See! Your house is left to you desolate; (Mat 23:38 NKJ)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
13 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

The throne of David has been desolate for far longer than the Temple in Jerusalem has been desolate and we know from what the angel told Mary in Luke 1:32 that Jesus will still inherit the throne of David.  So the length of time that the Temple has been desolate is apparently no indication of permanent obsolescence.

The "throne of David" is in Heaven.  Every being there bows before Christ and His Father.   We on earth who believe, serve Him and bow before Him.  He IS our King.  Because He has not yet moved His throne, or His city to this earth, does not mean that throne, or that city is now in a state of obsolesence.  It is occupied. 

Hebrews 12:22 But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, 23 to the general assembly and church of the first-born who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge of all, and to the spirits of righteous men made perfect, (NAS)

But there are no dead goats or lambs or bulls at our Mount Zion - nor will there be in the Kingdom of Messiah.  

Isaiah 11:9  "They shall not hurt nor destroy in all my holy mountain: for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the LORD, as the waters cover the sea." (KJV)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest

You mentioned the Temple shown to Ezekiel in a vision.  There are a whole lot of puzzling things about that Temple.  

Just a couple things: 

The LORD said to Ezekiel, "Son of man, 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.  No more shall the house of Israel defile My holy name, . . . "  (Ezek 43:7). 

According to John, there is no Temple in the New Jerusalem, which will cover all of the land area promised to Abraham.   This makes me think that Ezekiel's Temple was a prophecy of a Temple, not a literal description of a Temple which will exist on earth.

I personally believe this Temple will exist on earth during the 8th millennium (not the 7th), and I believe the redeemed from the first resurrection will be priests for those raised at that time - those who died in ignorance, who did not knowingly reject Christ.  

In the description of this Temple, there are many, many descriptions of animal sacrifices and the tables and tools to clean them. 

Apparently "the last enemy" - death, has not yet been destroyed forever.

One thing I find very interesting is that "the alter was of wood, three cubits high, and its length two cubits.  Its corners, its length, and its sides were of wood; and he said to me, 'This is the table that is before the LORD.'" 

Doesn't say the wood was overlaid with any metal.  Just wood.  4.5 feet high and 3 feet long.   How will they burn all those sacrifices on a wooden alter? 

Could this alter symbolize the Cross of Christ?

There is no description of any other furniture inside the Temple.  No Ark.  No table for shewbread.  No lampstand.   No alter of incense.  Just the walls covered with cherubim and palm trees (symbols of victory). 

I find it very interesting that there could still be "wild beasts" tearing other animals apart.

Ezekiel 44:31 "The priests will not eat any bird or animal that has died a natural death or was torn to pieces by a wild animal."

I thought the wolf would lie with the lamb in Messiah's restored kingdom. 

Circumcision of both heart and flesh, is required for entry into this Temple  (Ezek 44:9).

The priests - only those of the line of Zadok, offer the sacrifices - on the alter made of wood.   (44:15)

It appears the priests will boil their portions (46:20, 24). 

Can't say I would look forward to eating boiled meat forever. 

These priests change their clothing when they exit the Temple, "to approach that which is for the people" (44:19, 42:13-14). 

I wonder if this is a symbolic way of saying they go back and forth between the spirit/heavenly dimension and the physical dimension.

Then there is the stream that flows from under the threshold of the Temple, that becomes a river to deep and wide to cross, and the men casting fishing nets into that river. 

We all accept that Revelation has represented many things in symbols, and has used Temple imagery.   Why not also Ezekiel's Temple vision? 

I don't think we can use Ezekiel's Temple vision to prove the continuation of the system of animal sacrifices.  Just my opinion. 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
2 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

The thing about the various rites in OT Temple services of the Levites, is that your point has often been argued about over the years.

Does the length of time or frequency that a point has been argued or presented prove anything the validity of the point?  It seems that truth could be argued just as long as error could be argued.

If God were not the author of the various rites in the Temple services, we might dismiss them at a whim or for any reason whatsoever.  But when we think about setting aside or declaring invalid the instructions for the only system of worship ever given to humans by God himself, shouldn't we at least ponder what criteria might be adequate for invalidating the Word of God?  Doesn't the Bible teach anything about what prerequisites should be necessary before we accept a teaching that supposedly invalidates the Word of God that was given earlier?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlessedMan
16 minutes ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Does the length of time or frequency that a point has been argued or presented prove anything the validity of the point?  It seems that truth could be argued just as long as error could be argued.

If God were not the author of the various rites in the Temple services, we might dismiss them at a whim or for any reason whatsoever.  But when we think about setting aside or declaring invalid the instructions for the only system of worship ever given to humans by God himself, shouldn't we at least ponder what criteria might be adequate for invalidating the Word of God?  Doesn't the Bible teach anything about what prerequisites should be necessary before we accept a teaching that supposedly invalidates the Word of God that was given earlier?

This is a true, adhominem argument. No one  has suggested that God's word is "invalidated."  What I, personally have suggested is quite different than that. Your answer side-steps my point, made from scripture, that those old pre-crucifixion Levitical laws, were not a necessary function to accomplish, for salvation. There is always just ONE SACRIFICE for all, and the older Levitical sacraments, are types/examples of the one Sacrifice that does count. Where do you find in scripture that the Sacrifice of Christ needs some kind of assistance from the Levitical Priesthood services?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
3 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I do believe a Temple will be restored at Jerusalem for a short period just prior to the return of Christ in glory.   Satan/AntiChrist will use that Temple for his masterpiece of deception.

I agree. Furthermore, when this third Temple is completed, I believe the old sacrificial system could be reinstituted by the Jews for - oh - I'd guess 3-1/2 years before the antichrist takes over the Temple. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
45 minutes ago, BlessedMan said:

This is a true, adhominem argument. No one  has suggested that God's word is "invalidated." 

I did not mean to offend.  Maybe I misunderstood what you said, quoted below.  I understood "those sacrifices" to mean the sacrifices that God himself instructed the Levites to offer. Some of those sacrifices God specified to be offered throughout their generations.  The Israelites and Levites continue to produce generations to this day.   I consider the first five books of the Bible to be Gods' Word, especially when it says, "The Lord said to Moses" and then quotes the instructions that God gave to Moses.  If any of those sacrifices are now invalid, then someone must have invalidated the instructions God gave in his Word.  This is what you said:

17 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

Scripture IS plain and clear that none of those sacrifices would be "valid" after Christ was crucified:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
16 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

Many people declare that those promises were "conditional"

Maybe the promises to the Israelites were conditional when the Law was proclaimed at Sinai; but the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not conditional.  Israel remains the possession of the Israelites through at least the Millennium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
2 hours ago, 8thdaypriest said:

I personally believe this Temple will exist on earth during the 8th millennium (not the 7th)

I know you believe this because you believe the 7th millennium will be spent in heaven.  I believe that the millennium will be spent on earth; and that the 3rd Temple will be built during the 7th millennium. One reason for this is seen in Zechariah 14:8-19:

"8 On that day living water will flow out from Jerusalem, half of it east to the Dead Sea and half of it west to the Mediterranean Sea, in summer and in winter.

9 The Lord will be king over the whole earth. On that day there will be one Lord, and his name the only name.

10 The whole land, from Geba to Rimmon, south of Jerusalem, will become like the Arabah. But Jerusalem will be raised up high from the Benjamin Gate to the site of the First Gate, to the Corner Gate, and from the Tower of Hananel to the royal winepresses, and will remain in its place. 11 It will be inhabited; never again will it be destroyed. Jerusalem will be secure.

12 This is the plague with which the Lord will strike all the nations that fought against Jerusalem: Their flesh will rot while they are still standing on their feet, their eyes will rot in their sockets, and their tongues will rot in their mouths. 13 On that day people will be stricken by the Lord with great panic. They will seize each other by the hand and attack one another. 14 Judah too will fight at Jerusalem. The wealth of all the surrounding nations will be collected—great quantities of gold and silver and clothing. 15 A similar plague will strike the horses and mules, the camels and donkeys, and all the animals in those camps.

16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, they will have no rain. 18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The Lord will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles."

Could the water flowing out of Jerusalem mentioned in verse 8 - be flowing out of the Temple?  If this is the 8th Millennium. All the wicked will be dead early in the millennium, so there would be no need for the Lord to send a plagues to the survivors of all the nations that don't come to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of tabernacles.

The "survivors" are those few people who survive the bowls of God's wrath just prior to Jesus' coming.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
5 hours ago, BlessedMan said:

People can do any of those Temple rituals anytime they want; but I already gave scripture that says they wont be needed after Christs death; for His Sacrifice trumps all others.

I'm willing to look more closely at the Scriptures you provided.

In Acts 6:7 it tells us, "a great many of the priests became obedient to the faith."  It does not tell us that those priests quit serving at the Temple as priests.  At some point those priests who were following Jesus would need to decide whether to continue their God-assigned work of going to the Temple to help offer the sacrifices of the people, which continued to be sacrificed for almost four decades after the resurrection of Jesus.  The books of Romans and Hebrews were not written until two or more decades after the resurrection of Jesus.  If those priests came to you on the day after the Holy Spirit was poured out in Jerusalem at the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) to ask your advice, which Scripture passages would you share with them to convince them that their work at the Temple was no longer necessary? (The New Testament wasn't available yet.)  Which teachings of Jesus would you point them to that would convince them to not show up for work at the Temple? 

If those priests came to you right after the book of Romans became available in Jerusalem, which parts of Romans 6:10 would you use to convince them that their God-assigned work at the Temple was no longer needed?  Would you be able to convince them from Scripture that they could be absolutely certain that all of the purposes for which God gave the instructions regarding sacrifices were no longer valid reasons?  Where in Scripture does it list all of the purposes for which God gave the sacrifices?  Do we presume to know the mind of God?  People often say the sacrifices were an object lesson pointing forward to Jesus.  That makes sense.  Does the Bible tell us that the sacrifices could never be used as an object lesson pointing back to what Jesus already did?  The authors of the New Testament seem to use the sacrifices for that purpose, without being guilty of denying the sacrifice of Jesus.  Does the Bible tell us that it's okay to talk about the animal sacrifices in order to illustrate the sacrifice of Jesus but that it is now wrong to actually do the sacrifices in order to illustrate the sacrifice of Jesus?  

Does Romans 6:10 tell us that the sacrifices were no longer to be a part of the inheritance that God had promised to the Levitical priests so that it would be wrong for the priests to accept the portions of the sacrifices that God gave to them as a perpetual inheritance in Israel? 

The immediate context of Romans 6:10 teaches that the followers of Jesus should not sin.  How would you convince the believing priests that, although it had once been sinful for a priest to disobey the instructions given to the priests in the books of Moses, that it would no longer be sinful to disobey those instructions?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlessedMan
1 hour ago, Ron Amnsn said:

I did not mean to offend.  Maybe I misunderstood what you said, quoted below.  I understood "those sacrifices" to mean the sacrifices that God himself instructed the Levites to offer. Some of those sacrifices God specified to be offered throughout their generations.  The Israelites and Levites continue to produce generations to this day.   I consider the first five books of the Bible to be Gods' Word, especially when it says, "The Lord said to Moses" and then quotes the instructions that God gave to Moses.  If any of those sacrifices are now invalid, then someone must have invalidated the instructions God gave in his Word.  This is what you said:

 

No "offense" taken. Trying to subvert every other verse in scripture to one verse as you are doing is not a good way to look at this. It gives false meanings to true facts. Your posts are ignoring other texts supplied, and seem more like just playing the fiddle to distract everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BlessedMan
1 hour ago, JoeMo said:

I agree. Furthermore, when this third Temple is completed, I believe the old sacrificial system could be reinstituted by the Jews for - oh - I'd guess 3-1/2 years before the antichrist takes over the Temple. 

"the" Antichrist certainly doesnt need such a "Temple" as this to do what THEY are going to do.

Quote

1Jn_2:18  Little children, it is the last time: and as ye have heard that antichrist shall come, even now are there many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the last time.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Amnsn
1 hour ago, BlessedMan said:

No "offense" taken. Trying to subvert every other verse in scripture to one verse as you are doing is not a good way to look at this. It gives false meanings to true facts. Your posts are ignoring other texts supplied, and seem more like just playing the fiddle to distract everyone.

Although I do believe that new messages from God need to be tested to ensure that they agree with all the older messages from God, what I am saying isn't dependent on any one verse.  God's Word agrees with itself when it is understood in context.  And I don't "ignore" the other texts supplied.  As I have time I'll talk about the other passage you provided as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
3 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Maybe the promises to the Israelites were conditional when the Law was proclaimed at Sinai; but the promises made to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were not conditional.  Israel remains the possession of the Israelites through at least the Millennium.

The land area promised to Abraham's Seed, is much larger than the area currently in the "possession" of the geopolitical nation calling itself Israel.  "Abraham's Seed" - the "Seed of promise" - is Jesus Christ, and "if you are Christ's then you are Abraham's Seed".  Which means that nearly all of the descendants of Jacob, currently living within the borders of the geopolitical nation named "Israel" are NOT "Abraham's Seed" - at least according to Paul in Galatians.  They have defined themselves as "a Jewish nation" - which means they have officially rejected the man Jesus of Nazareth as "the Christ". 

You cannot possess what belongs to someone else.  The land belongs to Jesus, THE "Seed".  He will share it with those who believe in and serve Him.  All else will be disinherited and "broken off".

At the Jubilee, Jesus will return to HIS possession. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
JoeMo
3 hours ago, JoeMo said:

Israel remains the possession of the Israelites through at least the Millennium.

By this comment I meant spiritual Israel - including faithful Gentiles who have been grafted in and those Israelites who turn their eyes upon Jesus for their salvation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
3 hours ago, JoeMo said:

16 Then the survivors from all the nations that have attacked Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, and to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 17 If any of the peoples of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship the King, the Lord Almighty, they will have no rain. 18 If the Egyptian people do not go up and take part, they will have no rain. The Lord will bring on them the plague he inflicts on the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles. 19 This will be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to celebrate the Festival of Tabernacles."

Could the water flowing out of Jerusalem mentioned in verse 8 - be flowing out of the Temple?  If this is the 8th Millennium. All the wicked will be dead early in the millennium, so there would be no need for the Lord to send a plagues to the survivors of all the nations that don't come to Jerusalem to celebrate the feast of tabernacles.

The "survivors" are those few people who survive the bowls of God's wrath just prior to Jesus' coming.

Of course you know that I believe the "survivors from all the nations" will be the redeemed.  They will "survive" because they are removed from this planet on the day the last 7 bowls are poured out. 

The "peoples of the earth" will be "the nations".   These will be "the rest of the dead", who will be resurrected at the 8th millennium.  Just how long it will take to educate these people in "His ways", we don't know.  At some point most of them will rebel, joining together to form the Gog/Magog army. 

The "family of Egypt" was a euphemism for the "mixed multitude" who joined with Israel when they left Egypt. 

The Jubilee year was a rest year.  So was the 7th year.  No seed was to be sown, and no harvest gathered.  If "sowing" and "reaping" also refer to sowing the "seed" of truth, and gathering in the "harvest" of souls, then such will not be done during the 7th millennium.  The earth will "rest".   Desolation is rest, according to Jeremiah. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest
2 hours ago, Ron Amnsn said:

If those priests came to you on the day after the Holy Spirit was poured out in Jerusalem at the Feast of Weeks (Pentecost) to ask your advice, which Scripture passages would you share with them to convince them that their work at the Temple was no longer necessary? (The New Testament wasn't available yet.)  Which teachings of Jesus would you point them to that would convince them to not show up for work at the Temple? 

Truth is not revealed all at once - like an explosion.  It would take time, for the people to adjust to a new way of doing things (or not doing things) - as they came to understand that they could be "justified" through Jesus, who had "made atonement" for them. 

The believers all left Jerusalem when they saw the army of Titus temporarily pull back.  The believers understood that "not one stone" would "remain standing upon another".   So wonderful that before that awful day,  the believers understood that they could receive forgiveness/atonement/justification without the animal sacrifices.   And the Gentiles understood they could also receive those things without that Temple. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest

Galatians 3:24 "Thus the law had become our guardian until Christ, so that we could be declared righteous by faith. 25 But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a guardian." (NET)

I don't believe Paul is talking about the Ten Commandments or doing away with the Ten.  He is talking about being "declared righteous".  What must one do to be "declared righteous" - justified?   Paul says "we are no longer under" the guardian that led us to Christ FOR justification.   What then was the guardian?   Answer:  the system of sacrifices which began at the gates of Eden. 

One is not justified by the Ten Commandments.  

Romans 3:24 "But they are justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus." (NET)

Romans 5:1 "Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,"

Romans 5:9 "Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from wrath through Him."

1 Corinthians 6:11 "And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God." (NIV)

Titus 3:7 "And so, since we have been justified by his grace, we become heirs with the confident expectation of eternal life." (NET)

Seeking to be justified by any other means, was to sever oneself from Christ.

 Galatians 5:4 "You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace." (NKJ)

You will say that you are not seeking to be justified through animal sacrifices.  You just want to continue doing something that God commanded Ancient Israel to do.   I understand your position.   I just see no merit or benefit from the continued/restored slaughter of animals and the presentation of such to God.   God doesn't want them.  He said that He found no pleasure in them.  

Psalm 40:6 "Sacrifice and offering you did not desire-- but my ears you have opened-- burnt offerings and sin offerings you did not require." (NIV)  Hebrews 10:8 Previously saying, "Sacrifice and offering, burnt offerings, and offerings for sin You did not desire, nor had pleasure in them" (which are offered according to the law), (Heb 10:8 NKJ)

Some say it will be good instruction for those of the nations who come up to the House of the LORD, to learn His ways.  Really?  If I can "get it" - can understand by reading the Scriptures, and seeing drawings or models, why can't they?  Why do they need to see animals bled out, and then burned?   Why is it not enough to describe the activities, and then say that prophecy was fulfilled by Christ Jesus?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest

The priesthood has been changed. 

It was "changed" at Mount Sinai, from "the firstborn" to "Aaron and his descendants".   When Jesus carried the sin of the golden calf rebellion with Him to the cross, "the priesthood was changed" BACK to "the firstborn".   Jesus is THE "firstborn over all creation" (Eph 1:15).   Without this change of the priesthood, Jesus could not become High Priest, and we could not become "priests of God and of Christ". 

Any descendants of Aaron who found justification through Jesus Christ by faith, will also become "priests of God and of Christ" - along with all those delivered from this age.  The promises God made to them will be fulfilled - not forgotten.  They just won't be the only priests.  The priesthood has been expanded - to include all of us who belong to Christ. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8thdaypriest

Let's just say the Temple is rebuilt on the Mount at Jerusalem, and reconsecrated with the ashes of the Red Heifer.  Let's say a priesthood of men with the right DNA is consecrated to minister there.  Do you really think they will admit Christians?  No way!  They will require Pharisaic circumcision, with instruction, and likely a verbal rejection of Jesus as Messiah. 

Even if they do restore the Temple, with sacrifices, I doubt any one of us would be admitted there.  

So glad that Christ has already made atonement - for me, and I am justified before God, by faith. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


If you find some value to this community, please help out with a few dollars per month.



×
×
  • Create New...