By David Kowalski
The Visionary Ezekiel Temple plan drawn by the 19th century French architect and Bible scholar Charles Chipiez. 1
Some people have difficulties with the description of animal sacrifices during the millennial period as these are described in Ezekiel, chapters 40-48. Since Christ’s sacrifice for believers is said to suffice for our cleansing for sin, making animal sacrifices unnecessary, some people see the description of millennial sacrifices as contradicting New Testament teaching about the finality and sufficiency of Christ’s sacrifice on the cross.
The details of this prophecy by Ezekiel have not been fulfilled in any historical temple and though differing schools of interpretation and thought have been identified, I think Evangelical views can most commonly and concisely be classified as two: the symbolic interpretation (most often represented by amillennialists); and the literal, millennial interpretation (often referred to as the dispensationalist interpretation, though this view is not exclusively dispensationalist — many if not most non-dispensationalist premillennialists also interpret this section of Scripture as a literal description of the temple during the millennium). I believe both views are respectable and within the bounds of biblical and historic orthodoxy.
The descriptions of animal sacrifices are no problem for the symbolic school since these interpreters see the section as at least borderline, apocalyptic literature that speaks to us in pictures that are not to be taken literally. Thus, we are to glean eternal truths from the section rather than see actual, temporal events yet to occur.
Compare Flights and Hotels with ease
The descriptions of animal sacrifices are not a problem for the literal, millennial view either, though it takes a bit more explanation to say why this is so. This view does not see the sacrifices as efficacious but only as memorials (much like the Lord’s Supper still observed today).
Hebrews 10:1-25 teaches that the Mosaic system was not given to be efficacious in atoning for sin since animal sacrifices could not suffice as penal substitutions for mankind. Only Christ’ sacrifice on the cross could achieve this. Thus, the Mosaic sacrifices only looked forward to the finished work to be accomplished.
There are other OT passages that fill out the picture of millennial worship and the omissions (admittedly an argument from silence) are worth noting. There is no high priest, no Day of Atonement, and no Ark of the Covenant where atoning blood would be sprinkled.
Millennial literalists believe any sacrifices offered after the cross (during the millennium) would then look backward as memorials to that finished work (again, much like the Lord’s Supper) and would not be meant as efficacious in themselves.
Whether one takes the symbolic or the literal view, the sacrifices described in Ezekiel 40-48 pose no insoluble difficulties for Evangelicals.
© Copyright 2019, David Kowalski. All rights reserved. Links to this post are encouraged. Do not repost or republish without permission.
Notes:
- This image was edited from the original, public domain image found at Wikipedia ↩
Article details
Related topic(s): David Kowalski, ezekiel
First published (or major update) on Monday, September 30, 2019.
Last updated on October 08, 2019. Original content is © Copyright Apologetics Index. All Rights Reserved. For usage guidelines see link at the bottom.
Ezekiel’s description of a temple portrayed the 2nd temple. The reason why it is not as fabulous as described is due to the fact that the returned Hebrews failed to obey God and therefore the promises fell short as well. It did not take the returned Hebrews long to rebel against God once again.
Just like their disobedience after entering the Promised Land led to them not obtaining the full extent of the land that God said was theirs. God’s promises were conditional in the Old Covenant.
Jesus clearly taught us that the temple is his body, which is the church also. He said that His kingdom is not of this world therefore there will never be an earthly kingdom with Jesus sitting on a throne ruling the world from Jerusalem having the Jews as his holy priests.
Christians have been destroying their own religion by accepting such GROSS HERETICAL doctrines of demons and are BETRAYING Jesus Christ their saviour by blessing those who he cursed when he called them the synagogue of satan.
I sincerely doubt that you have the integrity to post opposing comments here. Since you fear the Jews and their evangelical minions.
Lea: To respond to your comments, I think I should start by defining the term Evangelical. An Evangelical is a believer in Christ who considers the Bible the literal, inspired Word of God — His objective, propositional revelation to man. Under that umbrella, believers take varying views regarding God’s kingdom and what role physical Israel might eventually play in its fulfillment after Christ’s return. The point of my short article is that the sacrifices portrayed in Ezekiel 40-48 do not undermine the faith of Christians who believe the Bible to be inspired and inerrant, whether those Christians take a symbolic view of the sacrifices or a literal view. I know of no Evangelical who believes God’s kingdom will be administered by Old Covenant priests who are exclusively of Jewish lineage. Perhaps you have read some aberrant literature that made such a claim or heard some preacher who said there were people in the Church who believed such a thing. Let me assure you that this is not an Evangelical view. Taking the Bible literally, we believe the Old Covenant has passed away and that in Christ, “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is no male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:28). The writer of Hebrews repeatedly teaches that we have entered a new covenant that is superior to the old one that was designed to show us our need for salvation in a new covenant.
Because Evangelicals take this conservative view of the Bible, we are not, however, antisemitic. We do not believe Jews are subhuman people who cannot be saved. Indeed, the Bible says Jesus Himself was of Jewish lineage and that apostles such as Paul, Peter, James, and John were Jewish. Thus, we believe Jews can be saved if they put their faith in Christ as their Savior. Your apparent belief that all Evangelicals who take the Bible literally (regardless of their more specific theological camp) are minions of the Jews does put you in opposition to my belief in the inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture. However, your posture still does not disprove my view that the sacrifices mentioned in Ezekiel 40-48 do not undermine the Evangelical, high view of Scripture (regardless of our theological affiliation if we have put our faith in Christ alone for salvation) — which is the argument presented in this article.