Temple Institute Blueprints

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

What third temple? Please give me proper NT scripture that tells of a third temple that God accepts. When all the prophecys dealing with the temple were written in NT the temple in Jerusalem was still standing so had to be speaking of that temple. No where in the book of Revelation does it speak of a new man made earthly temple that had been rebuilt or was new.

Something else to think about when checking into this, What did the Jewish temeple revolve around? Animal sacrifices for the sins commited my man. Why do the Jews want to build anew temple for? To began to re offer animal sacrifices. Why would this please God?

His son became the last sacrifice for all mankind don't you think that for the Jew to restart animal sacrifices that it would be like spitting in the face of God? God destroyed the temple in Jerusalem and Jerusalem in 70ad because those people would not repent for what they had done when they crucified the Son of God. And you beleive that now God will smile on the Jew for rebuilding a temple he God destroyed 2000 years ago, and you further beleive that God will smile on a people that still refuse to accept his salvation through his blood?

This is what some don't understand. Just because the Jews build a temple doesn't mean that it fits into God's redemptive plan.

[Jason B]

Was reading Ezekiel tonight (not because of this topic, just been reading it the last couple weeks) and happened acrss the last of chapter 37 "then my Sanctuary will be amongst them." Of course then chapters 40-48 talk about "ezekiels temple" Just curious what are some views on this? I would reject "herods Temple" as filling the bill in Ezk. 37 and also Ezk.40-48 because IMO Ezk. 37 is a future prophecy. For only Judah was released from captivity, the 10 tribes did not return to the land at that time. I am open to the possibility (I'd say probability) that what we have seen happen over the last generation plus is leading up to the fulfillment of Ezk. 37.

Concercning "Ezekiels Temple" is it a "third temple", is it a "millenial temple" or a "heavenly temple"? Thoughts?

[Austin]

Originally Posted by Godsdrummer

What third temple? Please give me proper NT scripture that tells of a third temple that God accepts. When all the prophecys dealing with the temple were written in NT the temple in Jerusalem was still standing so had to be speaking of that temple. No where in the book of Revelation does it speak of a new man made earthly temple that had been rebuilt or was new.

Something else to think about when checking into this, What did the Jewish temeple revolve around? Animal sacrifices for the sins commited my man. Why do the Jews want to build anew temple for? To began to re offer animal sacrifices. Why would this please God?

His son became the last sacrifice for all mankind don't you think that for the Jew to restart animal sacrifices that it would be like spitting in the face of God? God destroyed the temple in Jerusalem and Jerusalem in 70ad because those people would not repent for what they had done when they crucified the Son of God. And you believe that now God will smile on the Jew for rebuilding a temple he God destroyed 2000 years ago, and you further believe that God will smile on a people that still refuse to accept his salvation through his blood?

But the Jews don't know that. They see it as not having a sacrifice for their sins since 66-70 AD. and another interesting thing is, Jesus said there won't be one stone standing upon another, But not all the stones were thrown down when the temple was destroyed. And when in that time of 70 AD was there a person who stood in the holy place and caused the abomination of desolation. And following the destruction of the temple there should have been an effort to destroy the Jewish people altogether in the valley south of the city. And in that situation is where Jesus should have appeared and every eye should have seen him as he said it would be.
The Jews are just blind as the bible said until an appointed time. And I believe some of them will be blind along with some professing Christians up until the coming of Christ.

[Godsdrummer]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Was reading Ezekiel tonight (not because of this topic, just been reading it the last couple weeks) and happened acrss the last of chapter 37 "then my Sanctuary will be amongst them." Of course then chapters 40-48 talk about "ezekiels temple" Just curious what are some views on this? I would reject "herods Temple" as filling the bill in Ezk. 37 and also Ezk.40-48 because IMO Ezk. 37 is a future prophecy. For only Judah was released from captivity, the 10 tribes did not return to the land at that time. I am open to the possibility (I'd say probability) that what we have seen happen over the last generation plus is leading up to the fulfillment of Ezk. 37.

Concercning "Ezekiels Temple" is it a "third temple", is it a "millenial temple" or a "heavenly temple"? Thoughts?

Eze 37:26 Moreover I will make a covenant of peace with them; it shall be an everlasting covenant with them: and I will place them, and multiply them, and will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore.
Eze 37:27 My tabernacle also shall be with them: yea, I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

let me answer this with a new testemant scripture,

Heb 9:11 But 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;

Act 7:48 Howbeit the most High dwelleth not in temples made with hands; as saith the prophet,

Act 17:24 God that made the world and all things therein, seeing that he is Lord of heaven and earth, dwelleth not in temples made with hands;

Originally Posted by Austin

But the Jews don't know that. They see it as not having a sacrifice for their sins since 66-70 AD. and another interesting thing is, Jesus said there won't be one stone standing upon another, But not all the stones were thrown down when the temple was destroyed. And when in that time of 70 AD was there a person who stood in the holy place and caused the abomination of desolation. And following the destruction of the temple there should have been an effort to destroy the Jewish people altogether in the valley south of the city. And in that situation is where Jesus should have appeared and every eye should have seen him as he said it would be.
The Jews are just blind as the bible said until an appointed time. And I believe some of them will be blind along with some professing Christians up until the coming of Christ.

Austin is'nt it funny, what does it matter if the Jew see it or not old testement prophecies are clear that the sacrifices and oblations were for a time and that one would come to finish them. The problem is, just as we have come to the same frame of mind. We are looking for a material earthly kindom and not one that is spiritual. Did not Jesus say on more than one occation, my kindom is not of this world?

As for being litural in fulfiment, like, (every stone upon another)? Go back through OT prophecy you will find something in every prophecy that did not have comeplete physical fulfillment yet we still concider them as having been fulfilled.

The Jews are just blind as the bible said until an appointed time. And I believe some of them will be blind along with some professing Christians up until the coming of Christ

Just a question, do you honestly beleive that something that has never happened before in the history of mankind is going to happen? Every profesing Jew on the face of the earth is going to come to beleive and see Christ as thier messiah? Is that now what scripture says will happen?

Rom 11:26 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:

As far as I am concerned that is the same as saying not every stone has or was standing upon another. Let me ask you this from what history book do you get that not all stones were pulled apart? Did you not know that the Jews have tried to rebuild the temple acouple of times and God has stopped them?

[Bowas]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Was reading Ezekiel tonight (not because of this topic, just been reading it the last couple weeks) and happened acrss the last of chapter 37 "then my Sanctuary will be amongst them." Of course then chapters 40-48 talk about "ezekiels temple" Just curious what are some views on this? I would reject "herods Temple" as filling the bill in Ezk. 37 and also Ezk.40-48 because IMO Ezk. 37 is a future prophecy. For only Judah was released from captivity, the 10 tribes did not return to the land at that time. I am open to the possibility (I'd say probability) that what we have seen happen over the last generation plus is leading up to the fulfillment of Ezk. 37.

Concercning "Ezekiels Temple" is it a "third temple", is it a "millenial temple" or a "heavenly temple"? Thoughts?

I believe "Ezekiels temple" is "...the tabernacle of David, which is fallen down..." mentioned in Acts 15.

[mfblume]

Ezekiel's temple is GOD AND THE LAMB.

When we read ch. 47 and see a river coming from the temple with trees on both sides of the banks for healing and food we see the same river in Rev 22 coming from the throne of GOD AND THE LAMB. And then when we read Rev 21 we find that GOD AND THE LAMB ARE THE TEMPLE!

Ezekiel 47:1 KJV Afterward he brought me again unto the door of the house; and, behold, waters issued out from under the threshold of the house eastward: for the forefront of the house stood toward the east, and the waters came down from under from the right side of the house, at the south side of the altar.

Ezekiel 47:12 KJV And by the river upon the bank thereof, on this side and on that side, shall grow all trees for meat, whose leaf shall not fade, neither shall the fruit thereof be consumed: it shall bring forth new fruit according to his months, because their waters they issued out of the sanctuary: and the fruit thereof shall be for meat, and the leaf thereof for medicine.

Revelation 22:1-2 KJV And he shewed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. (2) In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations.


Revelation 21:22 KJV And I saw no temple therein: for the Lord God Almighty and the Lamb are the temple of it.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Austin

But the Jews don't know that. They see it as not having a sacrifice for their sins since 66-70 AD.

Austin, we've had some great talks in the last few months. Consider what I say, since I used to believe what you now believe, but could not any more as I believe God corrected me big-time. I never even heard the word PRETERISM when God showed me these things.

Hebrews 10:1-2 says that when a sacrifice is offered that could perfect the comer thereunto, then sacrifices would cease to be offered. Hebrews 10:14 says Jesus perfected forever them that are sanctified. We must notice that Hebrews is true and cannot be false. Sacrifices cease to be offered when a perfect sacrifice is made. This means that as far as God is concerned, NOTHING was offered since Christ's death, since He did not accept anything. God would not even call those vain offerings by the term "sacrifices".

When Israel continued to offer sacrifices, it was all in vain.

So what are we going to go by? God's perspective in Heb 10 or unbelieving Israel's perspective? Did Jesus offer a perfect sacrifice or not? If He did, as Heb 10:14 says He did, then that means sacrifices ceased to be offered. But if they continued in the temple until it was destroyed in AD70, does that make Heb 10:1-2 a lie? Of course not. The fact is that God does not CONSIDER them after the cross. That is the only way to fit it all together. That means that in one perspective, that of Heb 10, sacrifices ceased at the cross despite the continued offerings of Jews.

So as far as God was concerned, the TEMPLE WAS DONE. Destroy it. Remove it. Continued activity is an affront to the cross. Israel actually tried to rebuild a temple in the 300's at, but an earthquake hindered it! HMMMM......

Bar Kochba revolt
The forces of Shimon ben Kosiba, more commonly known as Simon bar Kokhba, captured Jerusalem from the Romans in AD 132, and construction of a new temple began, as well as renewed temple services. The failure of this revolt led to the writing of the Mishna, as the religious leaders believed that the next attempt to rebuild the temple might be centuries away and memory of the practices and ceremonies would otherwise be lost.

Julian
There was an aborted project by the Roman emperor Julian (361–363) to allow the Jews to build a "Third Temple", part of Julian's empire-wide program of restoring/strengthening local religious cults. Rabbi Hilkiyah, one of the leading rabbis of the time, spurned Julian's money, arguing that gentiles should play no part in the rebuilding of the temple.

According to various sources of that time, including Sozomen (c. 400–450) in his Historia Ecclesiastica and the pagan historian and close friend of Julian, Ammianus Marcellinus,[5] the project of rebuilding the temple was aborted because each time the workers were trying to build the temple, using the existing substructure, they were burned by terrible flames coming from inside the earth and an earthquake negated what work was made:

Julian thought to rebuild at an extravagant expense the proud Temple once at Jerusalem, and committed this task to Alypius of Antioch. Alypius set vigorously to work, and was seconded by the governor of the province; when fearful balls of fire, breaking out near the foundations, continued their attacks, till the workmen, after repeated scorchings, could approach no more: and he gave up the attempt.

The failure to rebuild the Temple has been ascribed to the Galilee earthquake of 363, and to the Jews' ambivalence about the project. Sabotage is a possibility, as is an accidental fire. Divine intervention was the common view among Christian historians of the time.[7] Shortly thereafter, Julian was killed in battle, and the Christians reasserted control over the empire.

and another interesting thing is, Jesus said there won't be one stone standing upon another, But not all the stones were thrown down when the temple was destroyed.

But Jesus did not say the stones would be destroyed. He said the BUILDINGS of the temple's stones would be thrown down. The context is speaking about the BUILDINGS OF THE TEMPLE. And that occurred in AD70. This referred to the temple structure itself, not the stones of the surrounding groundwork that people walked on.

Matthew 24:1-2 KJV And Jesus went out, and departed from the temple: and his disciples came to him for to shew him the buildings of the temple. (2) And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

Rome razed the temple and everything else in Jerusalem to the ground in AD70.

And when in that time of 70 AD was there a person who stood in the holy place and caused the abomination of desolation.

Jerusalem was called the HOLY PLACE as well as the temple.

ADAM CLARKE :

Mat 24:15
The abomination of desolation, spoken of by Daniel - This abomination of desolation, St. Luke, (Luk_21:20, Luk_21:21), refers to the Roman army; and this abomination standing in the holy place is the Roman army besieging Jerusalem; this, our Lord says, is what was spoken of by Daniel the prophet, in the ninth and eleventh chapters of his prophecy; and so let every one who reads these prophecies understand them; and in reference to this very event they are understood by the rabbins. The Roman army is called an abomination, for its ensigns and images, which were so to the Jews. Josephus says, (War, b. vi. chap. 6), the Romans brought their ensigns into the temple, and placed them over against the eastern gate, and sacrificed to them there. The Roman army is therefore fitly called the abomination, and the abomination which maketh desolate, as it was to desolate and lay waste Jerusalem; and this army besieging Jerusalem is called by St. Mark, Mar_13:14, standing where it ought not, that is, as in the text here, the holy place; as not only the city, but a considerable compass of ground about it, was deemed holy, and consequently no profane persons should stand on it.

And following the destruction of the temple there should have been an effort to destroy the Jewish people altogether in the valley south of the city. And in that situation is where Jesus should have appeared and every eye should have seen him as he said it would be.

This DID happen in AD70. Every eye seeing is actually referring to the SIGN of the son of man in Heaven, not the Son of man in Heaven, Himself. If your church has a SIGN of the church in your town, then the SIGN is not the church itself. Same with this. The son of man is in Heaven, sitting on the throne, and THERE WAS A SIGN OF THAT in the temple destruction.

ADAM CLARKE HAD IT RIGHT:

Mat 24:30
Then shall appear the sign of the Son of man - The plain meaning of this is, that the destruction of Jerusalem will be such a remarkable instance of Divine vengeance, such a signal manifestation of Christ’s power and glory, that all the Jewish tribes shall mourn, and many will, in consequence of this manifestation of God, be led to acknowledge Christ and his religion. By της γης, of the land, in the text, is evidently meant here, as in several other places, the land of Judea and its tribes, either its then inhabitants, or the Jewish people wherever found.

The Jews are just blind as the bible said until an appointed time. And I believe some of them will be blind along with some professing Christians up until the coming of Christ.

This has nothing to do with Matthew 24, though.

[mfblume]

I edited my previous post and added more.

Austin, what grabs me about this view is that is centralizes the CROSS in the midst of all the prophecy of the bible. It puts the gloom and doom of judgment on the generation who perpetrated the cross, and the cross should be central to EVERYTHING anyway!

[mfblume]

All of this came to me in the mid-90's while studying the cross in the most in-depth manner I ever had in my life. No way did I expect to get into PROPHECY by studying the cross! But this view of prophecy is the most cross-focused view there is.

[Austin]

Funny how people can twist the scriptures and make them conformable to their personal indoctrinations. This teaching of the coming of Christ and the end time including the Temple teaching on the destruction of it in 66-70 AD is one of the biggest misconceptions of truth I think I have ever heard. Now, That's just my opinion not argument. it would be endless for me to try and respond to these issues, simply due to the fact, first I'm out gunned on this forum, and secondary I guess in my opinion which is what a forum is about, If some of you chose to follow this particular teaching what is it to me!