sacrificial system

[cyberlizard]

just recently i heard someone say that when Yeshua returns and establishes the davidic kingdom, sacrifices will still be offered.

please can someone point me in the direction of help in this respect and tell me if this is the case or not?


many thanks

Steve

(p.s. like i said before not overly knowledgeable)

the only reference i can vaguely find is the last verse in zechariah!

[HaNotsri]

Read Ezekiel 40-48

[fritz300]

Yes, this is true, Yeshua will actually be doing sacrifices with us... He will teach us and show us how all things point to and back to Him...

I honestly can't imagine... sitting their in the temple removing poop from an animal intestines... being all nasty and stuff and then the righteous King of Kings looking me in the eyes and saying... "This is what I do to you."..

My heart would drop... how He cleanses us of sin... Him pointing at a skinned ram hanging up and saying, "This is how I see you.." straight to the core.. bare and skinned before His Father's face...

I am very excited I can't wait to do offerings.

Regards,
fritz

[dvd_holc]

Ah, what is the picture of a sacrifice? Is not the Hebrew word Korbah from the root karov picturing drawing close to God? If then the curtain was tore and God’s Shekhinah rested on the faithful, why then do we need more sacrifices? Also, if a sacrifice is a picture of God's covenant guarantee, has not God already shed His blood for us? Why then do we need more sacrifices? Was not Zechariah and the sacrifical system anticipating Christ?

[GerTzedek]

Ah, what is the picture of a sacrifice? Is not the Hebrew word Korbah from the root karov picturing drawing close to God? If then the curtain was tore and God’s Shekhinah rested on the faithful, why then do we need more sacrifices? Also, if a sacrifice is a picture of God's covenant guarantee, has not God already shed His blood for us? Why then do we need more sacrifices? Was not Zechariah and the sacrifical system anticipating Christ?
IF the sacrifices anticipated Yeshua's death, could it not also be that sacrifices will remember Yeshua's death?

AND, is this the ONLY purpose of sacrifice????

AND, aren't we forgetting that not all sacrifices were for sin or atonement?

Think outside the box.

[muffler dragon]

just recently i heard someone say that when Yeshua returns and establishes the davidic kingdom, sacrifices will still be offered.

please can someone point me in the direction of help in this respect and tell me if this is the case or not?


many thanks

Steve

(p.s. like i said before not overly knowledgeable)

the only reference i can vaguely find is the last verse in zechariah!

Another thing to keep in mind, CL: even with Jesus' death, sacrifices continued. ;)

[dvd_holc]

IF the sacrifices anticipated Yeshua's death, could it not also be that sacrifices will remember Yeshua's death?

AND, is this the ONLY purpose of sacrifice????

AND, aren't we forgetting that not all sacrifices were for sin or atonement?

Think outside the box.Good questions

Is death being done away with?

[cyberlizard]

i came to this question after reading something on the FFOZ passage on ezekiel which suggested that in the millenial kingdom, sacrifices and marriage will continue, people will still have children, people will die and the priests will sweat as the weather is warm.

i balked when i read this as jesus said that in the coming age, people will neither be married nor be given in marriage.

i suspect there is a difference between the millenial kingdom where these things will be re-instituted and the final kingdom where death will be swept aside.

one very confused bible student (i am confused as i am trying to come to the tanakh with new eyes (ones that don't replace israel with the church)!

anyone get any specific scriptures for the above issues?

[visionary]

Good questions

Is death being done away with?I believe all death including all of God's creatures is done away with.

But until the last death, there will again be instituted sacrifices.

[ContraMundum]

Another thing to keep in mind, CL: even with Jesus' death, sacrifices continued. ;)

...without God's blessing. Here is one of many reasons why that it obvious. (http://www.messianicart.com/chazak/anti/scarletthread.htm)

I'd wipe the smiley off your post. This is no laughing matter.

[ContraMundum]

.......i balked when i read this...

That was probably the Holy Spirit telling you to be careful. This is a spiritual minefield.

I would listen to the Spirit and hear what He says about this chiliasm that is being floated around in 20th Century theology. Check it- test it. Look to its origins. As the saying goes, The Devil is in the details.

one very confused bible student (i am confused as i am trying to come to the tanakh with new eyes (ones that don't replace israel with the church)!

You are right to reject replacement theology, but that doesn't mean you have to buy everything others who reject replacement theology believe.

anyone get any specific scriptures for the above issues?

These people are teaching you a modernist system known as "Dispensationalism". While they reject a portion of the Dispensational system (eg. replacement theology) they fully embrace the rather strange and unscriptural eschatology of the Dispensational viewpoint. Only Dispensationalists (who haven't been around for very long) teach that animal sacrifices will again be necessary (even as a teaching tool, as some fantasies imagine- we have the New Testament to teach the whole world all it needs about the Atonement.)

Heb 8:8-12 identifies Israel with the New Covenant, which has no animal sacrifical system. (cf Jer. 31:33,34). In fact, the very next verse declares the the Old sacrificial system obsolete. This means that the New Covenant, given to the Church (to the Jew first) is for everybody. There will be no Levites killing animals in the future with God's blessing, just as there hasn't been since He ended it.

Christ is our Passover (1 Cor 5:7). We don't need another sacrifice and even the very idea of another sacrifice for sin (eg. crucifying the Lord again) is considered an abomination (Heb. 6:6)

The Dispensational view of the future is impossible to believe if you believe the whole Bible in the light of the finished work of the Cross. (Heb. 10:10).

[debi b]

Hebrews 1:1-2
Elohim (God), who at various times and in various ways spoke in time past to the fathers by the prophets, has in these last days spoken to us by His Son, whom He has appointed heir of all things, through whom also He made the worlds;

Hebrews 2:5
For He has not put the world to come of which we speak....

It is necessary to understand this framework :) If you try to mix - well, just don't.

[Steve Petersen]

i came to this question after reading something on the FFOZ passage on ezekiel which suggested that in the millenial kingdom, sacrifices and marriage will continue, people will still have children, people will die and the priests will sweat as the weather is warm.

i balked when i read this as jesus said that in the coming age, people will neither be married nor be given in marriage.

i suspect there is a difference between the millenial kingdom where these things will be re-instituted and the final kingdom where death will be swept aside.

one very confused bible student (i am confused as i am trying to come to the tanakh with new eyes (ones that don't replace israel with the church)!

anyone get any specific scriptures for the above issues?

Judaism generally recognizes the difference between the Messianic Era and The World to Come. In the Messiainic Era things will be pretty much as they are. In The World to Come everything will change.

[muffler dragon]

...without God's blessing. Here is one of many reasons why that it obvious. (http://www.messianicart.com/chazak/anti/scarletthread.htm)

I'd wipe the smiley off your post. This is no laughing matter.

CM:

1) Don't chastise me publicly for a stupid smiley. My intent was not malicious.

2) The link you present is flawed.
Here are a few things that the author doesn't take into consideration or misunderstands what others have stated:

- Which year was Jesus supposedly crucified? 30 or 33 CE?
- The miracles started to cease after the death of Shimon HaTzaddek (nearly 300 years earlier).
- The holiness of Herod's Temple never matched that of the first.
- The Hellenization of the Jews is just as good a reason for the decline in holiness of the Temple.
- The hatred by Jew for fellow Jew is just as good a reason for the decline in holiness of the Temple.
- The Sanhedrin was not even in the Hall of Hewn Stone, which also shows the degradation of holiness.
- Not all of the miracles ceased in 30CE.
Let's enumerate some:

No woman ever miscarried from the aroma of the burning offerings;

The sacrifices themselves never became offensive;

No fly was ever seen where the offerings were prepared;

The High Priest never experienced a defilement on Yom Kippur;

Rains never extinguished the altar fire;

The altar smoke always rose to heaven in a straight line;

No disqualification was ever found in the barley offering, twin loaves and showbread;

All would stand compact together in the Courtyard - Yet when it came time to bow prostrate, all would have ample space;

No snake or scorpion ever caused harm in Jerusalem;

...and not one man ever said to another: "Jerusalem is too crowded for me to find lodging overnight."

And, lastly, let's not forget that Qorban sacrifices continued (even by members of the Jesus community).

[Steve Petersen]

And, lastly, let's not forget that Qorban sacrifices continued (even by members of the Jesus community).

A good point. One that is often missed.!:thumbsup:

[debi b]

Acts 2:43-47
And they continued steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, in the breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Then fear came upon every soul, and many wonders and signs were done through the apostles.

Now all who believed were together, and had all things in common,

and sold their possessions and goods, and divided them among all, as anyone had need.

So continuing daily with one accord in the temple, and breaking bread from house to house, they ate their food with gladness and simplicity of heart,

praising God and having favor with all the people.

This last verse the Peshitta words a bit different:
And ones joined to Elohim (God) everyday He caused to be added to our Adon (Lord).

Yep - in this present world the sacrifices are not an offense to Him. They are the very things he gave to teach us about Himself IMO. In fact when Yeshua is talking in Matt 5:48 "Therefore be perfect, just as your Father in heaven is perfect". The word in Aramaic for perfect is the word that is used to describe whole burnt offernings. How to follow Messiah He gave us when he used these types of comparisons (which have no meaning to us from any other frame of reference).

[TheRabbi]

Contra,
With all due respect, the article that you referenced falls flat on a number of points.

1. The "Yeshu Hanotzri" mentioned in the Talmud lived about 400 years before your Jesus. Surely, you also see the identification of his 5 disciples with your 12 rather forced.

2. As Tovia Singer pointed out and your author failed to pick up on, the quote from the Gemara is totally misused by Christians. If you have a look at the text it tells us that beginning with the death of Shimon Hatzaddik, over 350 years before the death of Jesus, the thread stopped turning white on a regular basis. This itself is a far cry from the Christian claim that the thread suddenly stopped turning white in the year 30. If we accept that the thread stopped turning white every year and stopped about forty years before, then we must also accept that it turned white for the last time around this time period. Otherwise, the Talmud has no time reference for that it stopped totally around this time.

My question then, would not be "Why did it stop turning white?" (That's already obvious in the spiritual decline that began 350 years earlier and worsened every year until the destruction). A far more interesting question would be, "What did the Jewish people do around the year 30 to merit what had become a rarely seen sign of God's favor?".

[ContraMundum]

CM:

1) Don't chastise me publicly for a stupid smiley. My intent was not malicious.

It was not a chastisement, md. Not at all. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that if Yeshua is both Messiah and God, then what He said is absolutely true, His Apostles are infallible Prophets and their writings are 100% correct. What this means is that there is a Hell, and we should all do our best to avoid it. Therefore, if someone is outside of the New Covenant, according to an honest rendering of the NT writings, they are in danger of Hellfire. No smiling matter at all. This was not a personal comment directed at you, just a general comment.

2) The link you present is flawed.
Here are a few things that the author doesn't take into consideration or misunderstands what others have stated:

- Which year was Jesus supposedly crucified? 30 or 33 CE?
- The miracles started to cease after the death of Shimon HaTzaddek (nearly 300 years earlier).
- The holiness of Herod's Temple never matched that of the first.
- The Hellenization of the Jews is just as good a reason for the decline in holiness of the Temple.
- The hatred by Jew for fellow Jew is just as good a reason for the decline in holiness of the Temple.
- The Sanhedrin was not even in the Hall of Hewn Stone, which also shows the degradation of holiness.
- Not all of the miracles ceased in 30CE.
Let's enumerate some:



And, lastly, let's not forget that Qorban sacrifices continued (even by members of the Jesus community).

I faily to see how this impacts on the original point. None of this provides any compelling reason for me to change my opinion on the Temple- all these points are not points of contradiction, but rather, they seem to strengthen and confirm the base thesis. They assist the doctrine of Christianity quite a bit. There are many reasons why God judged Israel, and why the Temple is no more. All point to a period in history that overthrew the very basis of animal sacrifices.

[TheRabbi]

Also, if you could please clarify your statement about Jesus being your Passover sacrifice and not needing anymore sin sacrifices.

I don't understand what one has to do with the other, as the Passover was not a sin sacrifice.

Don't take my questions the wrong way. I'm not trying to chip away at Christianity. I just don't see how you can ignore Ezekiel's detailed description of every minute detail of the future temple and its sacrificial system. I would think that you'd need to somehow work future sacrifices into your theology.

I think that's what some of the posters here are attempting to do. Why don't you feel that you have to do the same? I'm asking this with the utmost respect and genuine curiosity.

[ContraMundum]

Contra,
With all due respect, the article that you referenced falls flat on a number of points.

1. The "Yeshu Hanotzri" mentioned in the Talmud lived about 400 years before your Jesus. Surely, you also see the identification of his 5 disciples with your 12 rather forced.

2. As Tovia Singer pointed out and your author failed to pick up on, the quote from the Gemara is totally misused by Christians. If you have a look at the text it tells us that beginning with the death of Shimon Hatzaddik, over 350 years before the death of Jesus, the thread stopped turning white on a regular basis. This itself is a far cry from the Christian claim that the thread suddenly stopped turning white in the year 30. If we accept that the thread stopped turning white every year and stopped about forty years before, then we must also accept that it turned white for the last time around this time period. Otherwise, the Talmud has no time reference for that it stopped totally around this time.

My question then, would not be "Why did it stop turning white?" (That's already obvious in the spiritual decline that began 350 years earlier and worsened every year until the destruction). A far more interesting question would be, "What did the Jewish people do around the year 30 to merit what had become a rarely seen sign of God's favor?".

These are fair answers, and I don't agree with the article 100% (because the authors are not from my school anyway), but I don't think your points make any bearing on the base thesis, as I have said above. The Temple is gone. The system is over. Everything else had to be re-defined- even the most basic Jewish history book attests to that, one that you could buy at any Judaica shop.

It's over. Sorry my friend, but you need to ask yourself if the answers they give you are not just mere "answers and objections", but whether or not they are *good*and thorough answers that clearly cover all points, and go from there. I did that years ago, and I found the answers of the Rabbis wanting. I paid the social price for it too, but I gained the Holy Spirit in my life and joy unspeakable!

[ContraMundum]

Also, if you could please clarify your statement about Jesus being your Passover sacrifice and not needing anymore sin sacrifices.

I don't understand what one has to do with the other, as the Passover was not a sin sacrifice.

The Passover was a salvation from death and slavery (deliverence) sacrifice. That's obvious to anyone. Christ delivers us from the slavery and tyranny of our sins and leads us to the promised land.

This is what true Christianity teaches- salvation from sin, and that all the sacrifices, laws and promises of the times before His advent were types and shadows of what true deliverence would do through the Messiah, Yeshua. They were types and shadows of what was to come, but the substanbce of those types and shadows was the Messiah and His Kingdom: one not merely earthly, which will happen, but spiritual through salavtion from sin and the Holy Spirit.

Don't take my questions the wrong way. I'm not trying to chip away at Christianity. I just don't see how you can ignore Ezekiel's detailed description of every minute detail of the future temple and its sacrificial system. I would think that you'd need to somehow work future sacrifices into your theology.

Some Christians do attempt to do that- I don't. I tend to be more orthodox and apostolic. Can I recommend some decent reading on this to you?

I think that's what some of the posters here are attempting to do. Why don't you feel that you have to do the same? I'm asking this with the utmost respect and genuine curiosity.

Good observations. I'll dig up some stuff for you.

[TheRabbi]

It's over. Sorry my friend, but you need to ask yourself if the answers they give you are not just mere "answers and objections", but whether or not they are *good*and thorough answers that clearly cover all points, and go from there. I did that years ago, and I found the answers of the Rabbis wanting. I paid the social price for it too, but I gained the Holy Spirit in my life and joy unspeakable!

A generation ago, this argument was phrased a bit differently. Those who hold your position trumpeted the idea that the Temple and Jewish nationalism were over and done. We have undone one of these and there is no reason to believe that we won't undo the other. Having said that, it must be admitted that these thing don't happen because of the common sense and pure desires of the rabbis and the people. They happen due to cataclysmic events that overthrow the standard jewish thought process.

[cyberlizard]

where in the passover is there any forgiveness of sins. As i understand it, the original passover events and later celebration are indicative of how HaShem redeemed his people Israel from a hand that was too strong, namely Pharaoh.

We see in Messiah, that he is our passover lamb that was sacrificed. This sacrifice was to deliver us from a hand that was too strong, namely sin. It was a redemptive payment, not a sin offering. (he gave his life as a ransom for many)

i think we need to see Messiah's outworking of a different festival for forgiveness of sins.


(the ramblings of a Brit' again)

p.s. in yom kippur where we would see Messiah's sacrifice for sin outworked, wasn't the atonements for the temple. Although done 'on your behalf' which people have taken to mean (particularly Christians) that it removes sin from an individual... yom kippur was for atoning the temple on behalf of peoples (including the priest) sin. i.e. it made the temple clean (as the sin of the people which polluted it had been removed from it - the temple - not the people) so that God could dwell there.

Would this be a fair appraisal?

[TheRabbi]

Cyberlizard,
The Biblical text specifically tells us that Yom Hakippurim is to atone for both the people and the sanctuary. So it was indeed for removing sin from the individual.

[muffler dragon]

It was not a chastisement, md. Not at all. I'm not saying that. What I'm saying is that if Yeshua is both Messiah and God, then what He said is absolutely true, His Apostles are infallible Prophets and their writings are 100% correct. What this means is that there is a Hell, and we should all do our best to avoid it. Therefore, if someone is outside of the New Covenant, according to an honest rendering of the NT writings, they are in danger of Hellfire. No smiling matter at all. This was not a personal comment directed at you, just a general comment.

I suggest a different wording in the future then.

I faily to see how this impacts on the original point. None of this provides any compelling reason for me to change my opinion on the Temple- all these points are not points of contradiction, but rather, they seem to strengthen and confirm the base thesis. They assist the doctrine of Christianity quite a bit. There are many reasons why God judged Israel, and why the Temple is no more. All point to a period in history that overthrew the very basis of animal sacrifices.

The author of that link distinctly states that the crucifixion was the reason for the thread no longer turning white. The very first point I bring up IS contradictory to this statement. Was it 30 CE or 33 CE that Jesus was crucified? If the time frame is wrong; then this point is false.

[ContraMundum]

The author of that link distinctly states that the crucifixion was the reason for the thread no longer turning white. The very first point I bring up IS contradictory to this statement. Was it 30 CE or 33 CE that Jesus was crucified? If the time frame is wrong; then this point is false.

I don't think so. There is often a period of grace before judgement comes (consider the story of Noah. I believe, IIRC, that even the Chumash you use agrees with this). This is why the exact time is pretty much irrelevant. Ball park is fine- the result is the same and we can all date the whole gamut to a final conclusion at around 70 Anno Domini, as prophecied.

I would, however, hasten to add that I don't agree with everything the article states. I think there are many contributing factors that led to God's judgement upon us. This incident was merely one warning sign given. No matter how one interprets the times, the result was the most terrible culmination and was obviously judgement from God. I don't think many would disagree.

[Steve Petersen]

A point that needs to be clarified: why are the sacrifcial system and faith in God's redemptive act through Yeshua mutually exclusive. Can't one be seen as 'temporal' and one as 'eternal'?

By 'temporal' I mean, 'as long as heaven and earth abide' that is, until The World to Come. If Acts is to be believed, there were many priests who became followers of Yeshua:

Acts 6:7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

[ContraMundum]

A generation ago, this argument was phrased a bit differently. Those who hold your position trumpeted the idea that the Temple and Jewish nationalism were over and done. We have undone one of these and there is no reason to believe that we won't undo the other. Having said that, it must be admitted that these thing don't happen because of the common sense and pure desires of the rabbis and the people. They happen due to cataclysmic events that overthrow the standard jewish thought process.

This is true of some. However, those in my school of thought have had no surprises as yet. But, I'm sure prophecy never ends up being exactly like one might have thought it would - would you agree with that? ( I know Rabbi Singer agrees!)

[ContraMundum]

A point that needs to be clarified: why are the sacrifcial system and faith in God's redemptive act through Yeshua mutually exclusive. Can't one be seen as 'temporal' and one as 'eternal'?

One is temporal and one is eternal. Christ was slain from the foundation of the world- in other words, the Cross took place on earth in time and space but it is an eternal sacrifice (Rev 13:8 etc.). The blood of animals would not have been salvific if not for the eternal sacrifice of Christ in eternity.

A mystery for sure.

By 'temporal' I mean, 'as long as heaven and earth abide' that is, until The World to Come. If Acts is to be believed, there were many priests who became followers of Yeshua:

Acts 6:7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

True, many priests became believers, but their priesthood took on a different shape, especially after the Temple was destroyed.

[Steve Petersen]

True, many priests became believers, but their priesthood took on a different shape, especially after the Temple was destroyed.


Different in what sense? In how they interpreted the significance of their duties? Difference in how they carried out their duties in the Temple? Or different in the sense of the book of Hebrews?

Then, how would that square with the Tanak?

[ContraMundum]

Different in what sense? In how they interpreted the significance of their duties? Difference in how they carried out their duties in the Temple? Or different in the sense of the book of Hebrews?

Different for each individual- according to what he was called to do in the ekklesia, I would say. The ekklesia has different, but similar, ministries. There is no need for a Levitical-type priesthood in the ekklesia (and in fact here is none functioning anywhere on the earth anyway).

Then, how would that square with the Tanak?

I don't see a problem.

Must go...talk later.

[muffler dragon]

I don't think so. There is often a period of grace before judgement comes (consider the story of Noah. I believe, IIRC, that even the Chumash you use agrees with this). This is why the exact time is pretty much irrelevant. Ball park is fine- the result is the same and we can all date the whole gamut to a final conclusion at around 70 Anno Domini, as prophecied.

Who's talking about 70CE? The premise that the author presents in your link is that the crucifixion coincides with the end of the thread turning white. There is no plus/minus or grace period on the time frame.

I would, however, hasten to add that I don't agree with everything the article states. I think there are many contributing factors that led to God's judgement upon us. This incident was merely one warning sign given. No matter how one interprets the times, the result was the most terrible culmination and was obviously judgement from God. I don't think many would disagree.

You presented that link as a refutation to the return of sacrifices being performed in the Third Temple. If you don't agree with the author's presumption; then why present it especially considering the fact that the article is faulty? Do you have anything else that substantiates your POV that sacrifices will NOT occur again within the Third Temple?

[TheRabbi]

Furthermore, how does one explain Ezekiel?

[GerTzedek]

...without God's blessing. Here is one of many reasons why that it obvious. (http://www.messianicart.com/chazak/anti/scarletthread.htm)

I'd wipe the smiley off your post. This is no laughing matter.
Contra, why do you say, "Without G-d's blessing"???? I see no evidence of that in scripture. In fact, you'd THINK that if Yeshua wanted sacrifices to stop, it would have been one of the things he covered before his ascension. The fact that the community of his Jewish disciples continued offering sacrifices is all the evidence I need.

[GerTzedek]

A point that needs to be clarified: why are the sacrifcial system and faith in God's redemptive act through Yeshua mutually exclusive. Can't one be seen as 'temporal' and one as 'eternal'?

By 'temporal' I mean, 'as long as heaven and earth abide' that is, until The World to Come. If Acts is to be believed, there were many priests who became followers of Yeshua:

Acts 6:7 And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.
Mark Kinzer's paper for the Borough Park symposium was regarding salvation, and the different things which are meant by this word. He points out that in the New Testament scriptures there actually seem to be two very different sorts of spiritual salvation. The first that of becoming one of the believer's community, along with which we receive certain grace. Indeed, the whole reason of becoming a believer is to receive grace. But there is a second form of spiritual salvation for which he uses the phrase "Having a share in the world to come," and for this people will be judged on their works, not their belief set.

When we speak of the world to come, I know I'm not speaking of the Messianic age. I'm talking about the New heaven and NEW earth. At that time, HaShem will make a New Covenant with Israel, and the law will be written upon their hearts. Since we aren't there yet, we don't know the nature of this new covenant. However, having the law upon their hearts is a way of saying that in that glorified state there is no need for law to guide Israel. And without sin, there is no need for sin offereing.

Will there be other forms of offrering? I really don't know. Come on, NONE of us really know. However, if there is no death, then there is NO DEATH. Whatever laws of nature guide the new earth, they would also apply to that wolf lying down with the lamb.

So I guess before the discussion goes further, I need clarification. Are we talking about sacrifice in THIS world, and if so, before or after the Messianic age? OR are we talking about sacrifice in the new heaven and new earth?

[Steve Petersen]

Mark Kinzer's paper for the Borough Park symposium was regarding salvation, and the different things which are meant by this word. He points out that in the New Testament scriptures there actually seem to be two very different sorts of spiritual salvation. The first that of becoming one of the believer's community, along with which we receive certain grace. Indeed, the whole reason of becoming a believer is to receive grace. But there is a second form of spiritual salvation for which he uses the phrase "Having a share in the world to come," and for this people will be judged on their works, not their belief set.

When we speak of the world to come, I know I'm not speaking of the Messianic age. I'm talking about the New heaven and NEW earth. At that time, HaShem will make a New Covenant with Israel, and the law will be written upon their hearts. Since we aren't there yet, we don't know the nature of this new covenant. However, having the law upon their hearts is a way of saying that in that glorified state there is no need for law to guide Israel. And without sin, there is no need for sin offereing.

Will there be other forms of offrering? I really don't know. Come on, NONE of us really know. However, if there is no death, then there is NO DEATH. Whatever laws of nature guide the new earth, they would also apply to that wolf lying down with the lamb.

So I guess before the discussion goes further, I need clarification. Are we talking about sacrifice in THIS world, and if so, before or after the Messianic age? OR are we talking about sacrifice in the new heaven and new earth?

There is an opinion expressed in the Talmud? that in the World to Come all offerings will cease EXCEPT for the Thank Offering. Really cool:thumbsup:

[ContraMundum]

OK...whatever. I'm no longer interested in discussing eschatology with Dispensationalists and Jesus- rejectors. The information is out there for people that have minds sharp enough to care about the details. I'm not paid to be your teacher.

Enjoy yourselves.

[cyberlizard]

when i set up the thread, i was talking about sacrifices in the messianic kingdom NOT the world to come (for an earlier post)!

Steve

[TheRabbi]

OK...whatever. I'm no longer interested in discussing eschatology with Dispensationalists and Jesus- rejectors. The information is out there for people that have minds sharp enough to care about the details. I'm not paid to be your teacher.

Enjoy yourselves.

Okay, I just wanted to know how you interpet Ezekiel's vision. That's all.

[Steve Petersen]

Okay, I just wanted to know how you interpet Ezekiel's vision. That's all.


I believe Ezekiels Temple visions are completely relevant to the OP. From them I would opine that there will be animal sacrifices 'in that day' as the Tanak says. The question for some here would be, what is meant by 'in that day?'

Does it mean 'when it happens' or 'at a specific time?' From what I have read in various Jewish sources this refers to the Messianic Era.

[ContraMundum]

Okay, I just wanted to know how you interpet Ezekiel's vision. That's all.

There are as many ways to interpret Zeke's vision in Christianity as there are in Judaism- maybe less, actually, but you get my drift.

The questions remain about Ezekiel's Temple: vision or prophecy or both or neither? Literal or apocalyptic? When -if literally at all- and how and where? There's problems/questions with the geography and the proposed architecture, and the whereabouts of the Sons of Zadok etc etc etc.

While I find it increasingly difficult to deal with Dispensationalists (not saying you are one- certainly not!), I'm happy to hear what you've got to say on your version of events, but I probably won't get too involved because my perspective is pretty complex when explained from point 1- there isn't enough common ground to give a brief overview that would give my beliefs any form of just hearing/airing.

[ChazakEmunah]

CM:

1) Don't chastise me publicly for a stupid smiley. My intent was not malicious.

2) The link you present is flawed.
Here are a few things that the author doesn't take into consideration or misunderstands what others have stated:

- Which year was Jesus supposedly crucified? 30 or 33 CE?
- The miracles started to cease after the death of Shimon HaTzaddek (nearly 300 years earlier).
- The holiness of Herod's Temple never matched that of the first.
- The Hellenization of the Jews is just as good a reason for the decline in holiness of the Temple.
- The hatred by Jew for fellow Jew is just as good a reason for the decline in holiness of the Temple.
- The Sanhedrin was not even in the Hall of Hewn Stone, which also shows the degradation of holiness.
- Not all of the miracles ceased in 30CE.
Let's enumerate some:



And, lastly, let's not forget that Qorban sacrifices continued (even by members of the Jesus community).
I can't believe I overlooked this thread. Well said MD! :thumbsup:

[ChazakEmunah]

Contra, why do you say, "Without G-d's blessing"???? I see no evidence of that in scripture. In fact, you'd THINK that if Yeshua wanted sacrifices to stop, it would have been one of the things he covered before his ascension. The fact that the community of his Jewish disciples continued offering sacrifices is all the evidence I need.
I reached the same conclusion when I was a Messianic too.

[ContraMundum]

I reached the same conclusion when I was a Messianic too.

No wonder you left!

[ChazakEmunah]

No wonder you left!
That's not why I left, but okay... I came to that conclusion as a Messianic, and know quite a few others who believe the same.

[ContraMundum]

I came to that conclusion as a Messianic, and know quite a few others who believe the same.

It breaks my heart that there weren't better teachers for you and those who came to the same conclusions. Oh well, God willing the Messianic movement will learn from that.

[TheRabbi]

Contra,
I don't understand. Are you saying that there are so many ways to understand Ezekiels temple that you don't have an opinion?

[GerTzedek]

No wonder you left!
This forum seems to have a habit of pushing people out of mainstream MJ and into rabbinical Judaism. It is a genuine stumbling block. I'm doing much better since I limited my involvement. I don't think those present even have a CLUE just how gentile protestant their faith is, and how poorly it sits with Judaism.

[GerTzedek]

A **BIG** deal is made about Ezekial at my synagogue, because Ezekial speaks regarding the future of the Jewish people. We read it with an attitude of "This is what G-d has planned. Now what can WE do to join in and help advance His plan, to be of service to him, to help bring these things about?" The third temple is not figurative. But then, I don't think you even have to believe that Ezekial is being literal to see in real life how things are moving, and that a third temple is inevitable.

My synagogue's mission statement is taken directly from Yechezkel 37:
21. And say to them, So says the Lord God: Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the nations where they have gone, and I will gather them from every side, and I will bring them to their land.
22. And I will make them into one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be to them all as a king; and they shall no longer be two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms anymore.
23. And they shall no longer defile themselves with their idols, with their detestable things, or with all their transgressions, and I will save them from all their habitations in which they have sinned, and I will purify them, and they shall be to Me as a people, and I will be to them as a God.
24. And My servant David shall be king over them, and one shepherd shall be for them all, and they shall walk in My ordinances and observe My statutes and perform them.
25. And they shall dwell on the land that I have given to My servant, to Jacob, wherein your forefathers lived; and they shall dwell upon it, they and their children and their children's children, forever; and My servant David shall be their prince forever.
26. And I will form a covenant of peace for them, an everlasting covenant shall be with them; and I will establish them and I will multiply them, and I will place My Sanctuary in their midst forever.
27. And My dwelling place shall be over them, and I will be to them for a God, and they shall be to Me as a people.
28. And the nations shall know that I am the Lord, Who sanctifies Israel, when My Sanctuary is in their midst forever."

From this we have formed the following statement (given in the same order as in the scriture):
We are a Westside Jewish congregation passing on to the next generation our joyful commitment to:

The Land of Israel
Jewish Unity
Spiritual Renewal
The Messiah
Torah Living

[ContraMundum]

Contra,
I don't understand. Are you saying that there are so many ways to understand Ezekiels temple that you don't have an opinion?


Of course I have an opinion. What's yours?

[GerTzedek]

Of course I have an opinion. What's yours?
What is up with you tonight? Why won't you just answer the man's question???? It makes you come across like you are embarrassed about your opinion, or scared to say it.

I don't know about TheRabbi, but I find that people who start playing the evasion game become very difficult to carry on a conversation with.

[ContraMundum]

What is up with you tonight? Why won't you just answer the man's question???? It makes you come across like you are embarrassed about your opinion, or scared to say it.

I don't know about TheRabbi, but I find that people who start playing the evasion game become very difficult to carry on a conversation with.

I'm not *allowed* to state my position, Ger.

[GerTzedek]

I'm not *allowed* to state my position, Ger.
A. Why are you not allowed to state your position? You are on the list of those with christian icons approved to talk freely. I'm sure whatever your position is, it can't be worse than many of the other bizarre things I've seen posted in this forum.

B. If you can't answer, it would be kind to let the person asking you the question that you can't, and give somewhat of an explanation why, if for no other reason than politeness.

[ContraMundum]

A. Why are you not allowed to state your position? You are on the list of those with christian icons approved to talk freely. I'm sure whatever your position is, it can't be worse than many of the other bizarre things I've seen posted in this forum.

I'm theoretically allowed to write as I please, but in reality I'm flypaper for reports when I state a view on certain subjects that rub a couple of people up the wrong way. It's material, not formal.

B. If you can't answer, it would be kind to let the person asking you the question that you can't, and give somewhat of an explanation why, if for no other reason than politeness.

When I wrote those replies I was way beyond my limits of patience. I simply can't explain things in one post which would take a book to write, and especially on this topic, which is basically filled to the brim with 19thC Dispensationalism and primitive chiliasm. :)