Jayrok

Have you even read Ezekiel?

Chapter 38 -- 22 I will execute judgment upon him with plague and bloodshed; I will pour down torrents of rain, hailstones and burning sulfur on him and on his troops and on the many nations with him. 23 And so I will show my greatness and my holiness, and I will make myself known in the sight of many nations. Then they will know that I am the LORD.'

This judgment is against gog and magog (same as Revelation!)

Chapter 39 -- " 'I will make known my holy name among my people Israel. I will no longer let my holy name be profaned, and the nations will know that I the LORD am the Holy One in Israel. 8 It is coming! It will surely take place, declares the Sovereign LORD. This is the day I have spoken of.


Ezekiel 48:35 -- "And the name of the city from that time on will be:
The LORD is There ."

1. gog/magog and many nations line up against Israel. God finally shows himself and rains sulfer on gog/magog and destroys them.

2. God then declares He will NO LONGER let his name be profaned. I'm sure you'll agree that this has certainly not occured as of yet.

3. The name of God's city, the new jerusalem, FROM THAT TIME ON, will be The Lord is there. "From that time on" indicates that God has no intentions of this city or temple being destroyed. Wouldn't you agree?

4. Ezekiel 47 describes how the river of life flows from this Temple, from the altar. Trees will line both sides of the river and their leaves WILL NOT WITHER, and their fruit will not fail to produce every month. Chapter 47, verse 9, says the water from this river will turn the sea into fresh water.

Anyone who reads this and doesn't see how Revelation takes it and changes it is delusional.

At any rate, you said just read Revelation. Fine, but how does that negate Ezekiel's temple? The temple where a river flows into the sea and turns the salt water fresh. The river where trees produce fruit each month year round.

When did this happen after the babylonian captivity, sugarhitman?

If this hasn't happened yet, then when will it happen? If it will not happen, then Ezekiel either lied or he was lied to by the angel. Either way, you have a problem.

But I imagine you'll do what every other christian does with that book and sweep it under the rug in favor of relying on Revelation... which was an addition to God's holy scriptures to the Jews.

Edit to add: Oh, and are you saying that gog/magog will gather armies of many nations on two separate occasions to attack Israel? Why the hell would God allow that??

If the NT is correct and the Ezekiel Temple was to be built after the captivity, then this is certainly a false prophecy as it never came true as described in Ezekiel. There was no river flowing out of any temple ever built that ran into the sea and caused the sea to become fresh water.

Conclusion = False prophecy

arnoldo

You do understand that Nebby destroyed the Jewish temple right? Then another temple was built and the Romans destroyed it in 70 AD, correct? Yeshua fullfilled the prophecy when he stated destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.

Sheshbazzar

Just to be clear,
You, and arnoldo, have been professing in several threads on these Forums that the events recorded in Ezekiel 38-39, and specificly about "Gog" are to be accepted as "last days" propheces that are yet to be fullfilled.
as for example;
But now you want to consign the rest of Ezekiel's "prophecy" (from chapter 40 onward) to being set in the far past? How convenient for your fantasy.

There has been much written by christian's regarding this so called "Third Temple" described in Ezekiel, enough that it might even be considered a christian consensus that it is in the future, of course you are free to differ with opinions, beliefs and teachings of your fellow christians.

To do so however presents its own set of problems.
1. When in past history was a Temple as described by Ezekiel built?
You said above "This temple was the temple to be built after the Babylonian Captivity." Do you have any evidence that it was built at that time?
If it was not built at that time, and also is not to be built in the future, then this Temple would never be built.
Thus, by your "interpretation" of the inspired, infallible word of scripture, the entire last 8 chapters of the prophecy of Ezekiel are devoted to the expounding in detail of a vision that is found to be both false and a lie.


2. But there is more than just a prophecy of a building in those chapters, for example;
A rather interesting geographical location, yes?
Would you care to point out to all of us ignorant Jew's, Christian's, and Atheist's you evidence for exactly where this House stood that had "waters issue out from under the threshold of the house eastward:"
And your evidence for the geographic location and identification of that;
"..... river that I could not pass over: for the waters were risen, waters to swim in, a river that could not be passed over..... issued out toward the east country, and go down into the desert, and go into the sea:"
And where we might locate this very uniqe flora and fruit.
"12. 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."

I have, as have most of the posters here, no need be condescending.
So you are here implying that Ezekiel devoted almost an entire quarter of his book of prophecy to the making up of a deception and lie that would only serve as "a little encouragement showing that Israel would be restored."?
NO, you have a lot of explaining left to do.

Jayrok

Do you mean the prophecy where God declared he would never let his name be profaned again (Ezekiel 39:7)? That one certainly didn't come true.

Or the prophecy where a river would flow from this temple where trees bare fruit all year round and the river flows into the sea and causes the sea to become fresh water? That never came true either.


Are you saying this temple, as described in Ezekiel, was built and then destroyed by the Romans in AD 70? If that is true, then God lied.

God said "And the name of the city from that time on will be:
The LORD is There ." Ezekiel 48:35

God didn't intend for this temple to ever be destroyed. He had already destroyed Israel's enemies prior to its construction.

arnoldo

What explanation is needed? The State of Israel will soon build another Jewish Temple, that is self evident.

Jayrok

Will it be the temple as described in Ezekiel? Will God live in it and require daily sacrifice for sin? Do you honestly believe modern Jews will sacrifice lambs and goats today?

Prophecy isn't about building a structure. This building is described in detail from God's lips. I assume you take the bible as God's word.

If God intended to send Jesus all along as his plan of salvation (since before time began), then why would God dictate these detailed plans for God's house in Jerusalem to include daily animal sacrifice for sin atonement to his prophet Ezekiel? Why would he do that?

Sheshbazzar

Didn't seem so self evident to your buddy sugarhitman.
So, arnoldo, is the Temple described in Ezekiel 40-48, that one that was built following the Babylonian captivity? (usually referred to as the "Second Temple", you know the one that the Romans destroyed?)
OR was Ezekiel describing a "Third Temple" that one that you are here alleging is yet to be built? Sounds like you and the 'hitman really need to have a talk.

arnoldo

Of coure he did. Yeshua looked at the 2nd temple and prophesied that "no two stones would be left upon on another" Immediately afterward he stated "destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up." History has proven that the temple was destroyed but was raised up again.

arnoldo

Not at all. There is a New Jerusalem which will have no temple.

arnoldo

I think you need to study the prophecies about the millenium.