Dedicated Altar

[Verifyveritas76]

Christianity thinks that because the Temple was destroyed, the Temple system and Levitical Priesthood are abolished.

I havent had a lot of time lately to reply, and I hate it that it feels like I’m posting and then absent for longer that I’d like to be, so my apologies if it seems that way. Life has just been crazy in many good ways lately and it has really demanded much more of my time than normal.

My perspective is that the Levitical priesthood was only ever meant to be substitutionary for a set period of time. God substituted it for the original priesthood of the firstborn or head of household in Numbers 3 but it was only to fill a gap til the original Firstborn took on flesh, dwelt among us, betrothed us to his household and exampled a perfect Melchizedek model.

The Levites and the relating passages definitely exampled for us how to perform the priesthood in many ways, but were just as imperfect as the men they were substituting for in so many ways.

I did take time to look at the Ezekiel passages, specifically 43 & 44.

1. It appears to me that the Ezekiel 40-42 are prophetic about the next temple (Joshua & Zerubbabels) which by context and time Ezekiel is prophesying forward approximately 70 ish years.
2. Ezekiel 43 seems to be prophetic about the Messiah entering the eastern gate in verse 2 and 4 and would be fulfilled by Christ in AD 31
3. I see an interesting distinction in verse 19 about the priests the Levites of the seed of Zadok (as opposed to the sons of Zadok) offering a bullock as a sin offering which was also fulfilled in Christs crucifixion by him being offered outside the sanctuary in verse 21
4. Verse 27 is a verse of massive import as I understand it, beginning with the phrase, when these days are expired . . . It shall be, that upon the eighth day, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt offerings upon the altar, and your peace offerings [but not your sin offerings] and I will accept you saith the Lord God.
5. Following this chapter, 44 begins with the eastern gate being shut, just as we have seen fulfilled in some ways by the destruction of the Temple. Verse 9 -14 is very explicit that the Levites are banned from priestly duties (verse 13) after this point in the Temple, but will be allowed to be door keepers and house servants.
6. But the priests the Levites, the sons of Zadok (not the seed) that kept the charge of my sanctuary when the children of Israel went astray from me, they shall come near to me to minister unto me, and they shall stand before me to offer unto me the fat and the blood, saith the Lord God.
7. There is much information available about the sons of Zadok via the Dead Sea Scrolls. There is a massive distinction between the seed of Zadok whom Solomon appointed, and the sons of Zadok who considered themselves priests and sons of The Melchi Zadok, or Lord of Light/Righteousness.
8. I believe that Ezekiel is making a distinction here between the two though he may not completely understand the vision. He also makes the same distinction in Chapter 45:4 &5 which is very interesting because in it the Levites are given a separate portion that doesnt match anything I’ve found in history, leading me to believe that this is a future fulfillment to come
9. The latter part of the chapter indicates that Passover will resume in the Temple as well as Tabernacles
10. 46 thru 48 is all about the Reign of Christ from a future temple, in which the Levites are not priests, but servants
11. In 48:13 the Levites are awarded a portion of land as an inheritance, something that was prohibited under the Levitical priesthood (while there was a priesthood) and they have a gate named for the tribe in verse 31 where they replace the tribe of Manasseh and Manasseh and Ephraim are represented by the Gate of Joseph in verse 32.

All of this to say that after the “eastern gate is closed”, the Levites will not perform priestly duties, will receive an inheritance portion of land with the other tribes, will be required to offer firstfruits, and will be ministers or servants only in the coming temple.

The sons of Zadok regained their priesthood as the firstborn/head of household under a Melchizedek priesthood, re-initiated and exampled after Christ, utilizing an eighth day sabbath (43:27) and will continue to perform it through the reign of Christ on earth.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

The sons of the Malchi Zadok?

I think that is changing the Hebrew just a bit.

 

[PeteR]

Verse 27 is a verse of massive import as I understand it, beginning with the phrase, when these days are expired . . . It shall be, that upon the eighth day, and so forward, the priests shall make your burnt offerings upon the altar, and your peace offerings [but not your sin offerings] and I will accept you saith the Lord God.

Couple problems with this... first, the verse is cited out of the context of a seven day purification and dedication of the altar, previously seen in other places in Scripture. Therefore assuming some great change on the eighth is eisegetical. Second, the bracketed addition that is not in the Hebrew is directly contrary to Ez. 45 that speaks multiple times of the Prince offering a sin offering. This doesn't mean the Prince is necessarily a sinner, just that he is obedient to the Torah in providing a sin offering for himself and all of the people of the Land.

• The latter part of the chapter indicates that Passover will resume in the Temple as well as Tabernacles

• 46 thru 48 is all about the Reign of Christ from a future temple, in which the Levites are not priests, but servants

We would agree... future Temple, celebrating the Feasts and the Messiah overseeing. What is the Messiah's Standard? What does the Standard demand? And, no where does it disqualify all Levites. Only those "who went far from Me when Israel went astray." (44:10)

I believe the Temple will be rebuilt, the Messiah will oversee, sacrifice will be reinstituted, etc... I do agree that this present altar being dedicated has some problems and may be a head fake that is used by the false messiah before the real son of David comes. Key is to watch very carefully, know the Scriptures and listen to the Father.

 

[Cap]

@Ancient Paths, why is it important that the animal sacrifices be reinstated and who would benefit from it? Serious question?

 

[PeteR]

@Ancient Paths, why is it important that the animal sacrifices be reinstated and who would benefit from it? Serious question?

Multiple reasons. But, before going there, Christendom is inculcated with the idea that sacrifice is somehow wrong, distasteful, unwanted by the Father, etc... I've even watched Christians express these opinions while cutting up a steak fresh off the grill... Rich irony! The truth is, the antipathy toward sacrifice is entirely unwarranted once the whole of Scripture is accepted as unchanging truth.... I won't debate all of that.

Reasons:

• Torah has never been fully kept righteously, yet God gave it and wants it walked out correctly, precisely the reason the Messiah will reign on earth before the New Heaven and New Earth. God will prove that even with the Messiah present and rightly administering His Torah, many men will still rebel. See Revelation 20.
  
• Sacrifice is about much more than sin offerings. Peace offerings, Thank offerings, simple obedience to the preparation for the festivals, food for celebrants, food for priesthood, physical cost to the sinner, etc.
• Memorials that point back to the Messiah's sacrifice just as all sacrifice before His death and resurrection was a forward looking act. I.e., no sacrifice has ever forgiven sin. All, before or after the Messiah has always pointed to THE sacrifice that does atone.
  
• Obedience on our part without questioning and changing the commands. (Submission to the will of the Father, just as you expect your brides to walk in obedience to you even if they do not understand everything behind why you give specific directions.)

Who would benefit: Anyone who is willing to walk in complete obedience to the Father's everlasting unchanging instructions.
Just a few thoughts that encompass a whole lot. If I ponder, I'm sure there are more.

 

[The Revolting Man]

The question is 'can He?' Personally, I don't think He can, therefore He wouldn't.

The point: in the Garden, before the fall, He sanctified the seventh day and set it apart. Can He UNsanctify that day in favor of any other? If so, where, when and how?

I would be unwiling to put limits on God by saying He "can't" do something. I agree with you that He wouldn't in this case.

 

[PeteR]

I would be unwiling to put limits on God by saying He "can't" do something. I agree with you that He wouldn't in this case.

He can't deny Himself. He can't lie..... He can't change. ... just some quick thoughts.

I remember a conversation with a pastor years ago and I asserted that God cannot break His covenant with Abraham to which the pastor snapped, 'God can do anything He wants.'

I immediately replied, 'you better be afraid. Very afraid. Because, if He can break covenant with Abraham, then all bets are off. Build an ark because He can flood the earth again, alter the plan of redemption and snatch every promise from you.'

Truth: God MUST be unchanging and entirely predictable according to His Word and promises or we are fools for placing our trust in a capricious being like the pagans. It is His unchanging promises and predictability that prove why the Jews are a reconstituted nation after 2000 years of exile. Has nothing to do with them or any merit they may think they have. Same for us, God alone is true and unfailing, therefore... He can't change.

 

[Cap]

He can't deny Himself. He can't lie..... He can't change. ... just some quick thoughts.

I remember a conversation with a pastor years ago and I asserted that God cannot break His covenant with Abraham to which the pastor snapped, 'God can do anything He wants.'

I immediately replied, 'you better be afraid. Very afraid. Because, if He can break covenant with Abraham, then all bets are off. Build an ark because He can flood the earth again, alter the plan of redemption and snatch every promise from you.'

Truth: God MUST be unchanging and entirely predictable according to His Word and promises or we are fools for placing our trust in a capricious being like the pagans. It is His unchanging promises and predictability that prove why the Jews are a reconstituted nation after 2000 years of exile. Has nothing to do with them or any merit they may think they have. Same for us, God alone is true and unfailing, therefore... He can't change.

God is never changing, but our understanding of Him is changing all the time.

 

[Pacman]

He can't deny Himself. He can't lie..... He can't change. ... just some quick thoughts.

I remember a conversation with a pastor years ago and I asserted that God cannot break His covenant with Abraham to which the pastor snapped, 'God can do anything He wants.'

I immediately replied, 'you better be afraid. Very afraid. Because, if He can break covenant with Abraham, then all bets are off. Build an ark because He can flood the earth again, alter the plan of redemption and snatch every promise from you.'

Truth: God MUST be unchanging and entirely predictable according to His Word and promises or we are fools for placing our trust in a capricious being like the pagans. It is His unchanging promises and predictability that prove why the Jews are a reconstituted nation after 2000 years of exile. Has nothing to do with them or any merit they may think they have. Same for us, God alone is true and unfailing, therefore... He can't change.

Disagree here he absolutely can. He is sovereign and perfectly able to do anything he chooses to do. He however won’t because of who he is. He won’t lie, he won’t deny himself and he won’t change. Those promises are kept by him because of his integrity and honesty etc... We serve an all powerful God and the fact that he can is part of that power.

 

[The Revolting Man]

He can't deny Himself. He can't lie..... He can't change. ... just some quick thoughts.

I remember a conversation with a pastor years ago and I asserted that God cannot break His covenant with Abraham to which the pastor snapped, 'God can do anything He wants.'

I immediately replied, 'you better be afraid. Very afraid. Because, if He can break covenant with Abraham, then all bets are off. Build an ark because He can flood the earth again, alter the plan of redemption and snatch every promise from you.'

Truth: God MUST be unchanging and entirely predictable according to His Word and promises or we are fools for placing our trust in a capricious being like the pagans. It is His unchanging promises and predictability that prove why the Jews are a reconstituted nation after 2000 years of exile. Has nothing to do with them or any merit they may think they have. Same for us, God alone is true and unfailing, therefore... He can't change.

Again, the difference is between can and would. God is not our business partner. We can't hold Him to some contract even if He will hold Himself to His Decrees.. We are His slaves, His bondservants. He can do whatever He wants. He could make an unmovable object and then move it. He can't change because He is reality and existence. If He decided to make a change, like He did when He gave the Law or when He came down in the flesh, reality and existence would conform to His change.

This is important. God made a change when He gave the Law. He made a change when came down. We can't look at the Levitical Law and say that it is immutable because it was itself a change.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

Again, the difference is between can and would. God is not our business partner. We can't hold Him to some contract even if He will hold Himself to His Decrees.. We are His slaves, His bondservants. He can do whatever He wants. He could make an unmovable object and then move it. He can't change because He is reality and existence. If He decided to make a change, like He did when He gave the Law or when He came down in the flesh, reality and existence would conform to His change.

This is important. God made a change when He gave the Law. He made a change when came down. We can't look at the Levitical Law and say that it is immutable because it was itself a change.

I disagree. In that He says things like: "perpetual", "everlasting", and "throughout all your generations", He cannot change that or it would make Him a liar. We know who is the father of lies.

Conversely, a lot of people think the covenant at Mt. Sinai is when ideas such as clean and unclean were introduced. That is beyond nonsense. Noah not only knew the difference in his time (he wasn't remotely a Jew, nor under the Sinai Covenant), but loaded them up onto the Ark by classification and sacrificed of the clean when he got off the boat.

The Covenant at Mt. Sinai was the marital contract to keep the rules of His house.

 

[The Revolting Man]

I disagree. In that He says things like: "perpetual", "everlasting", and "throughout all your generations", He cannot change that or it would make Him a liar.

You're saying that our all powerful God can not do something? There is something that limits Him? I can't go there.

Conversely, a lot of people think the covenant at Mt. Sinai is when ideas such as clean and unclean were introduced. That is beyond nonsense. Noah not only knew the difference in his time (he wasn't remotely a Jew, nor under the Sinai Covenant), but loaded them up onto the Ark by classification and sacrificed of the clean when he got off the boat.

It would seem that Noah had some special Revelation that was not transmitted to anyone else until Sinai. It clearly wasn't common knowledge as God went to such pains to be so specific about clean and unclean. Where there's no Law no sin is imputed and there was no Law condemning the eating of unclean animals before Moses.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

You're saying that our all powerful God can not do something? There is something that limits Him? I can't go there.

It would seem that Noah had some special Revelation that was not transmitted to anyone else until Sinai. It clearly wasn't common knowledge as God went to such pains to be so specific about clean and unclean. Where there's no Law no sin is imputed and there was no Law condemning the eating of unclean animals before Moses.

Incorrect. Wildly incorrect.

Firstly, if there is no Law prior to Sinai, why did God even flood the earth? Did they keep sneaking back into the garden to eat the fruit of the tree? Define the transgression of God's commands that equated sin that needed to purge the entire world.

Secondly, we have quite a bit of evidence that corrupt transmissions of His laws and holidays made it around the world through the descendants of Noah. A: The ancient Canaanites kept the Feast of Unleavened Bread, "Pentecost"/Feast of Weeks, and the Feast of Tabernacles. B: The Code of Hammurabi, which is often cited as being so very similar to the Torah in many respects, and not in others. I could go on.

Logically, when looking at all the evidence, Noah knew the ways of the Almighty. His descendants corrupted it through their generations. God, when inviting Israel to enter into covenant relationship, restored a pure and uncorrupted "rules of the house" to His bride-to-be.

Does He have power to do anything He wants? Sure. However, it would be against His nature to violate His own Word. In that sense, He can't. It simply isn't who He is. There is no lie in Him.

Hebrews 6:18
Numbers 23:19
1 Samuel 15:29

Besides, if His infallible truthfulness is something your theological paradigm cannot reconcile, I am happy to side with His Word over your opinion, for as it is written:

What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? to them were committed the oracles of God. some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect? Certainly not! Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. As it is written:

“That You may be justified in Your words,

And may overcome when You are judged.”

 

[FollowingHim]

Firstly, if there is no Law prior to Sinai, why did God even flood the earth? Did they keep sneaking back into the garden to eat the fruit of the tree? Define the transgression of God's commands that equated sin that needed to purge the entire world.

Secondly, we have quite a bit of evidence that corrupt transmissions of His laws and holidays made it around the world through the descendants of Noah. A: The ancient Canaanites kept the Feast of Unleavened Bread, "Pentecost"/Feast of Weeks, and the Feast of Tabernacles. B: The Code of Hammurabi, which is often cited as being so very similar to the Torah in many respects, and not in others. I could go on.

These are excellent points. Also, Cain knew he had sinned when he killed Abel, as he tried to hide this fact from God. When had God said that murder was sin? And did He give only this one rule, or did it come along with others?

At some point, Adam must have been taught at least the two commandments (love god / love thy neighbour) or words to that effect, as a bare minimum, in order for there to be any understanding of sin prior to Moses.

 

[The Revolting Man]

Incorrect. Wildly incorrect.

Firstly, if there is no Law prior to Sinai, why did God even flood the earth? Did they keep sneaking back into the garden to eat the fruit of the tree? Define the transgression of God's commands that equated sin that needed to purge the entire world.

Secondly, we have quite a bit of evidence that corrupt transmissions of His laws and holidays made it around the world through the descendants of Noah. A: The ancient Canaanites kept the Feast of Unleavened Bread, "Pentecost"/Feast of Weeks, and the Feast of Tabernacles. B: The Code of Hammurabi, which is often cited as being so very similar to the Torah in many respects, and not in others. I could go on.

Logically, when looking at all the evidence, Noah knew the ways of the Almighty. His descendants corrupted it through their generations. God, when inviting Israel to enter into covenant relationship, restored a pure and uncorrupted "rules of the house" to His bride-to-be.

Does He have power to do anything He wants? Sure. However, it would be against His nature to violate His own Word. In that sense, He can't. It simply isn't who He is. There is no lie in Him.

Hebrews 6:18
Numbers 23:19
1 Samuel 15:29

Besides, if His infallible truthfulness is something your theological paradigm cannot reconcile, I am happy to side with His Word over your opinion, for as it is written:

What advantage then has the Jew, or what is the profit of circumcision? to them were committed the oracles of God. some did not believe? Will their unbelief make the faithfulness of God without effect? Certainly not! Indeed, let God be true but every man a liar. As it is written:

“That You may be justified in Your words,

And may overcome when You are judged.”

I didn't say there was no Law before Moses. I said that the difference between clean and unclean was not articulated before Moses. And that's a great passage of scripture and it very clearly spells out what God will do, but it is very quiet on what He is able to do.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

Able to do? Is He not bound by His word? Sure, it could be argued that He chose to do so, but He has done so. It is finished.

Otherwise, no Christian is secure in any promise.

Clean and unclean may not have been written down, but Noah knew the difference. How? Must we assume that because the Bible never records God describing the difference at this point, or telling him to only sacrifice clean, he just got lucky? Able sacrificed a clean animal, and gave of the best and of the fat...

Cain, on the other hand, was just unlucky and God was displeased with him for not guessing the matter...

Somehow, in some non-recorded way, the info got to them as far back as Adam's family.

They knew the difference and God not only judged the difference but called Cain out on why his countenance had fallen... if he had done good, would he not have been accepted? He knew what was good to do but did not do it.

The knowledge was there. It is evident in the interaction with all these.

 

[Man@Home]

I don’t know whether it was instructed by Him directly in oral commands or not, but I immediately think of the verses in Romans 1:19-20 in this context (taken from the BLB, as I of course read mostly Dutch translations):

“Rom 1:19 - Because that which may be known of God is manifest in them; for God hath shewed itunto them.
Rom 1:20 - For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse:”

So, even if He did not give an explicit instruction in form of “you shall” or “you shall not” at that time one would be able to know His will.
On the other hand, when I read Genesis 3:8-10 it occurs to me that it was not the first time that He walked in the garden in the coolness of the evening and expected Adam there. I cannot imagine (although it is not said so literally) that they didn’t talk about such things and only were doing chitchat.

 

[Cap]

This is important. God made a change when He gave the Law. He made a change when came down. We can't look at the Levitical Law and say that it is immutable because it was itself a change.

God did not make a change when He gave the Law. God revealed the Law that already was. God did not change to Mercy, Grace and Forgiveness, but revealed it to us through His Son. The Law had to be revealed first so that Mercy, Grace and Forgiveness could then be revealed. Everything changes according to our perspective as He reveals things to us.

Again, God never changes, we do.

 

[Cap]

Multiple reasons. But, before going there, Christendom is inculcated with the idea that sacrifice is somehow wrong, distasteful, unwanted by the Father, etc... I've even watched Christians express these opinions while cutting up a steak fresh off the grill... Rich irony! The truth is, the antipathy toward sacrifice is entirely unwarranted once the whole of Scripture is accepted as unchanging truth.... I won't debate all of that..

I don't think 'Christians' find sacrifices as "somehow wrong, distasteful, unwanted by the Father, etc...", especially in reference to cooking something on the grill (which I find a really odd association), but in the mere fact that it is a spiritual thing against their belief in the salvation work they have come to understand.

• Torah has never been fully kept righteously, yet God gave it and wants it walked out correctly, precisely the reason the Messiah will reign on earth before the New Heaven and New Earth. God will prove that even with the Messiah present and rightly administering His Torah, many men will still rebel. See Revelation 20.

Why didn't the Son of God honor the Law on many occasions when he interacting with sinners when He was here the first time. Kinda strange that He would let things go on His first visit but on His second He decides to uphold them. (I do believe He did honor the Law in all He did here, but on a higher understanding than what we have.) The second thing that I asked a while back that did not get answered is, are there going to be 'stonings' when this time of keeping the Old Law comes back?

• Sacrifice is about much more than sin offerings. Peace offerings, Thank offerings, simple obedience to the preparation for the festivals, food for celebrants, food for priesthood, physical cost to the sinner, etc.

Again, I already asked, if I don't keep sheep does that mean that the tithe will be a requirement?

• Memorials that point back to the Messiah's sacrifice just as all sacrifice before His death and resurrection was a forward looking act. I.e., no sacrifice has ever forgiven sin. All, before or after the Messiah has always pointed to THE sacrifice that does atone.

This is the only statement needed. Is there a commandment that memorials are to be held for the atoning sacrifice? (I can find one for communion, the last supper)

• Obedience on our part without questioning and changing the commands. (Submission to the will of the Father, just as you expect your brides to walk in obedience to you even if they do not understand everything behind why you give specific directions.)

The question here is who exactly is determining the submission?

Who would benefit: Anyone who is willing to walk in complete obedience to the Father's everlasting unchanging instructions. Just a few thoughts that encompass a whole lot. If I ponder, I'm sure there are more.

What this all boils down to for me is, Romans 10:9 and the understanding of the finished work of salvation we as believers have come to understand and have built a saving faith on, compared to the view that the salvation work of Our Savior is not finished and that there needs to be more work.

I am sorry, but this whole thing for me, when it comes to a future temple sacrifice is within the realm of being uneaqually yoked to those who hold such a belief according to Romans 10:9 and other areas associated with the atoning work of Christ. If there is an Abomination of Desolation to come, this is it. Like it or not, this does get to the question of salvation for some.

 

[Shadowjak's Dancer]

I don't think 'Christians' find sacrifices as "somehow wrong, distasteful, unwanted by the Father, etc...", especially in reference to cooking something on the grill (which I find a really odd association), but in the mere fact that it is a spiritual thing against their belief in the salvation work they have come to understand.


Why didn't the Son of God honor the Law on many occasions when he interacting with sinners when He was here the first time. Kinda strange that He would let things go on His first visit but on His second He decides to uphold them. (I do believe He did honor the Law in all He did here, but on a higher understanding than what we have.) The second thing that I asked a while back that did not get answered is, are there going to be 'stonings' when this time of keeping the Old Law comes back?


Again, I already asked, if I don't keep sheep does that mean that the tithe will be a requirement?


This is the only statement needed. Is there a commandment that memorials are to be held for the atoning sacrifice? (I can find one for communion, the last supper)


The question here is who exactly is determining the submission?



What this all boils down to for me is, Romans 10:9 and the understanding of the finished work of salvation we as believers have come to understand and have built a saving faith on, compared to the view that the salvation work of Our Savior is not finished and that there needs to be more work.

I am sorry, but this whole thing for me, when it comes to a future temple sacrifice is within the realm of being uneaqually yoked to those who hold such a belief according to Romans 10:9 and other areas associated with the atoning work of Christ. If there is an Abomination of Desolation to come, this is it. Like it or not, this does get to the question of salvation for some.

What are you even talking about Him not honoring the law in the presence of sinners? Give any examples you can. I will happily shoot them down for you.