The first page would probably satisfy most people's curiosity. I saw one place in the who article where a four-letter word was used, and I for one am not that interested in the queer politics of San Franciso, but any the article gives you probably a lot more detail than you and I know, I, would wnat to know.
People who believe that a new temple will be built are not saying it will replace the atonement of Christ. They are just saying it will be rebuilt by practicing Jews. It wouldn't be a Christian temple in any sort of way.
Youth in Asia...
The Tribulation won't end wickedness and death because at the end of the Millennial there will be an uprising against Christ and He will put them all to death.
Lurker writes:Second is calling this temple the "Millennial Temple". In my mind, the very first thing to do in an argument is make an iron clad, objective case from scripture that this temple actually will be built, served, and by whom during the reign of Christ. But not a word....... just an assumption and then building an argument on that assumption. Very poor argumentation.
Reminds me of how premils use Amos 9:11 as a proof text, even though James tells us in Acts 15 that this was fullfilled when the gospel went out to the gentiles to take out of them a people for Gods name.
Hearken, my beloved brethren, Hath not God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before the judgment seats? ββJamesβ¬ β2:5-6β¬
Kev wrote: Here is the link: https://www.raptureready.com/featured/ice/LiteralSacrificesInTheMillennium.html
I actually took the time to skim through the article a while ago followed by another read of Ezek 40-48. Two things:
First is the literal interpretation straight-jacket. It stands out like a sore thumb.
Second is calling this temple the "Millennial Temple". In my mind, the very first thing to do in an argument is make an iron clad, objective case from scripture that this temple actually will be built, served, and by whom during the reign of Christ. But not a word....... just an assumption and then building an argument on that assumption. Very poor argumentation.
GSMontana: I would probably say they got converted because of the tribulation, from the six seals/ 4 horsemen in revelation 6. Hence why I believe the purpose of the tribulation is to end to wickedness, which includes death and also repentance.
Kev writes: The whole idea of them rebuilding the temple that is in Ezekiel made me think if they started offering sacrifices for atonement of sin after Jesus did that I would have to say would be a horrible thing and directly against so many things.
To believe that God would return to types and shadows after offering himself on the cross in the person of Jesus Christ for the atonement our sins is beyond preposterous. This is what happens when you stick to a dogmatic literal interpretation no matter how silly instead of interpreting scripture with scripture.
Thank you lurker I don't know too much on this topic but like you said I also don't believe in dispensationalism. The whole idea of them rebuilding the temple that is in Ezekiel made me think if they started offering sacrifices for atonement of sin after Jesus did that I would have to say would be a horrible thing and directly against so many things. This is why I thought of Isaiah 66. Thanks for the help brother.
Kev wrote: Hey Lurker, did you see the article I listed below they want to rebuild the temple and have sacrifices for sin in this rebuilt temple. Could this be what Isaiah 66 is talking about and what the antichrist will enter a rebuilt temple and declare himself. I don't know much on this topic but looked up this Dr. Ice Jim gives links to....
Yes, I saw it Kev. Just so you know, I usually ignore Jim when he goes off on a dispy tangent. I've read a little of his favored Dr. Ice and all I can say is .
The temple and animal sacrifices towards the end of Ezekiel? Ha! That was the temple Nebuchadnezzar destroyed and Cyrus ordered re-built (Ezra 1). It's ancient history, Kev. The only reason the dispys see it as future is probably because of a preceding prophecy like the valley of dry bones (Ezek 37) which Jim thinks is going on right now (since 1948 when Jews returned to the land of Israel) when in reality it took place when Paul began to preach.
Such are the confusions brought on by a rigidly literal interpretation of the OT forced on the new covenant age writings.
Is 66:1? David (Branch of Jesse) builds that house (Zech 6:12), a spiritual house (1 Peter 2:5). See Acts 7:47-50. Not the same house that Cyrus ordered re-built.
Absolutely horrific βββ devils who think this is the answer/path for their religious plight are beyond any semblance of rational thought βββ ________________________________
On another note ββ
I've been listening to all this drivel on the Democratic national convention program ββ it's like these people are living in La La Land βββ nothing they are putting forth is based in reality βββ what a farceβ¦
Dress up a rabid dog in a custom-made pant suit ββ put lipstick on it and a nice wig and make up all kinds of stories and say nice things about it ββ and guess what ββ you've still got a rabid dog...
The worst thing that can happen to this country at this time in our history is for Hillary Clinton to get into the office of the presidency πΏπΉ