Posted on 09/29/2006 8:27:34 AM PDT by Buggman
I don't think either of us would follow it to that conclusion. :^)
God knows, just like He knows the identity of all the other tribes (Rev. 7) and families (Zec. 12:12-14).
2Pe 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come like a thief, in which the heavens will pass away with a roar and the elements will be destroyed with intense heat, and the earth and its works will be burned up.
The New Jerusalem has no temple and the one that you guys are referencing now will be built with human hands, right? So it will have to be destroyed before the new heaven and the new earth arrive, no? It makes no sense to me to have animal sacrifices just for the sake of having them. But, again, I spend most of my time studying about the past apostasies and what we need to do now in order to be a witness to these marvels :)
I don't know how the Levitical priesthood's role will change in Eternity--the Bible doesn't give us enough information on that Age to do more than speculate wildly. By the same token, we don't know how King Yeshua's role will change--He won't need to rule the nations "with a rod of iron" when all evil is done away with, I'd imagine. That doesn't mean that He won't continue to rule, nor does the end of history mean that the Levites won't continue to minister in a role particular to them.
That's a good point. In the heavenly realm there seem to be certain classes of angels with certain responsibilities. Cherubin for example, and seraphim. There's no reason to think that glorified humans won't have specific roles in eternity.
But just so much speculation.
If the most fundamental of relationship, marriage, will be radically changed in eternal state (Matt. 22:30), what make us think such mundane and time limited matters like the levitical priesthood would remain?
"You are a priest forever, accordng to the order of Melchizedek."
In reality, the new Jerusalem is represented symbolically as the holy of holies. It is describe as a perfect cube.
"The city is laid out as a square; its length is as great as its breadth. And he measured the city with the reed: twelve thousand furlongs. Its length, breadth, and height are equal." (Rev. 21:16; cf. 1 Kings 6:20)
This represents how the people of God are made to be priests forever (Rev. 5:10), since we all live within the most holy place. We live in the same place where Jesus entered by His own blood.
Folks need to recognize how any notion of a continuation of the levitical priesthood once Messiah has appeared and offered His perfect sacrifice once for all is a fundamental denial of Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King.
You mean besides the fact that Jer. 33 says it will?
In reality, the new Jerusalem is represented symbolically as the holy of holies. It is describe as a perfect cube.
That's one speculative interpretation. Another is that it is a pyramid, and is referred to in the Tanakh as the Mountain of God or Mount of Assembly (i.e., the spiritual truth to which Mt. Zion on earth points).
Folks need to recognize how any notion of a continuation of the levitical priesthood once Messiah has appeared and offered His perfect sacrifice once for all is a fundamental denial of Christ as Prophet, Priest, and King.
Then I guess all the Apostolic Jewish believers were in denial, since they continued to worship daily in the Temple (Acts 2:46, 3:1ff, etc.), which meant participating in the daily burnt offerings at the very least. And those under Ya'akov (James) who thought it no unusual thing to take a Nazrite oath, which required no less than four animal sacrifices when it came time to shave their heads (Acts 21:20ff) were also apostates. And Sha'ul was likewise an apostate for joining them--or else a liar and a hypocrite who lacked the courage of his convictions.
Simply stating a position does not constitute an argument, TC. If you want to discuss the role or not of sacrifices in the End Times and post-Second Coming period, I wrote practically a whole article defending the position that the Levite priesthood will continue which you have to refute.
But, lest anyone think that this is a point which one can use to go after Messianic worship in general, let me state again: Not all Messianics share my view. Many agree with you that the Levitical priesthood is done away with forever. However, neither that position nor my own that the High Priesthood is transferred to Yeshua (though without canceling God's promises to the heirs of Phineas) aborogate us from the commands of God; it simply transfers the sacrificial part of those commands to the Holy of Holies in Heaven.
Again, the discussion of the priesthood is an intellectual eschatological one, not one which affects our current practice. it's a side-issue to the primary one on this thread.
So then, on Yom Kippur, it is Yeshua who intercedes before the Father on our behalf as our High Priest (as indeed He does every day), but it is still for us to take a sabbath-rest, to deny and humble ourselves, and to gather in a holy convocation which takes special note of His intercession. Not for salvation, but out of obedience to the God we love.
In the new covenant all the saints are priests of God (Rev. 5:10). Under the old covenant types, the Levitical priesthood and the sacrifices were simply shadows of the work of Messiah. So the prophecy tend to reflect that perspective. To take them literally while ignoring the NT is a fatal error.
Since Christ is on the throne of David in heaven, and ministering in according to the order of Melchizedek (a better priesthood) I don't see why Jer. 33 is an issues unless one is given to an artificial literalism on OT prophecies that ignores the NT reality.
"In reality, the new Jerusalem is represented symbolically as the holy of holies. It is describe as a perfect cube."
That's one speculative interpretation. Another is that it is a pyramid, and is referred to in the Tanakh as the Mountain of God or Mount of Assembly (i.e., the spiritual truth to which Mt. Zion on earth points).
Well that a curious statement coming from one wanting to emphasize the basically Hebrew nature of the Scriptures.
Why would God give the Jewish John the Revelator a vision of a pyramid?
"Then he built the twenty-cubit room at the rear of the temple, from floor to ceiling, with cedar boards; he built it inside as the inner sanctuary, as the Most Holy Place. ... The inner sanctuary was twenty cubits long, twenty cubits wide, and twenty cubits high. He overlaid it with pure gold, and overlaid the altar of cedar." (1 Kings 6:16,20)
"The city is laid out as a square; its length is as great as its breadth. And he measured the city with the reed: twelve thousand furlongs. Its length, breadth, and height are equal." (Rev. 21:16)
The language in these two passages is virtually identical. Unless you allow for the most holy place being a pyramid, why would you think the new Jerusalem is a pyramid?
Mt. Zion was not literally pyramid shaped, since the city of David was constructed on it. I'm just curious, are there any identifiable God-constructed pyramids in the Bible?
Note also other feature of its construction:
"The construction of its wall was of jasper; and the city was pure gold, like clear glass."
"And the street of the city was pure gold, like transparent glass."
Look back on 1 Kings:
"He overlaid it with pure gold ..."
""And the floor of the temple he overlaid with gold, both the inner and outer sanctuaries."
We also read about other parallels with Ezekiel's temple:
"And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb."
One is reminded of Jesus' words in John 4, "but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life."
"He brought me out by way of the north gate, and led me around on the outside to the outer gateway that faces east; and there was water, running out on the right side. And when the man went out to the east with the line in his hand, he measured one thousand cubits, and he brought me through the waters; the water came up to my ankles. Again he measured one thousand and brought me through the waters; the water came up to my knees. Again he measured one thousand and brought me through; the water came up to my waist. Again he measured one thousand, and it was a river that I could not cross; for the water was too deep, water in which one must swim, a river that could not be crossed." (Ezek. 47)
Edersheim comments on the priestly background of the writer of Revelation:
Indeed, the Apocalypse, as a whole, may be likened to the Temple services in its mingling of prophetic symbols with worship and praise. But it is specially remarkable, that the Temple-references with which the Book of Revelation abounds are generally to minutiae, which a writer who had not been as familiar with such details, as only personal contact and engagement with them could have rendered him, would scarcely have even noticed, certainly not employed as part of his imagery. They come in naturally, spontaneously, and so unexpectedly, that the reader is occasionally in danger of overlooking them altogether; and in language such as a professional man would employ, which would come to him from the previous exercise of his calling.He also says about some of the details in Rev. 21, “Of the four distinctive articles in the high-priest’s dress, the breast-plate, alike from its square form and the twelve jewels on it, bearing the names of the tribes, suggest ‘the city four-square,’ whose ‘foundations’ are twelve precious stones (Rev 21:16, 19, 20).”But it seems highly improbable that a book so full of liturgical allusions as the Book of Revelation—and these, many of them, not to great or important points, but to minutia —could have been written by any other than a priest, and one who had at one time been in actual service in the Temple itself, and thus become so intimately conversant with its details, that they came to him naturally, as part of the imagery he employed.
Given this understanding it seems far more likely that Rev. 21 has the temple as its backdrop rather than a pagan symbol like a pyramid.
These are obviously non-literal images depicting spiritual reality. The new Jerusalem is not really a physically construct literally a cube overlayed with gold and miles on a side. It merely represents the truth of our position in Christ based on His sacrifice for His people. The old covenant holy place was a type of the new Jerusalem. But we, the church, are the new Jerusalem.
There's certainly no speculation that there will be roles fulfilled by glorified humans. Scripture is clear on this. For example, glorified Christians are to be "kings and priests" or "kingdom of priests"
Rev 1:6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion forever and ever. Amen.
Now a kingdom of priests would seem to have priestly duties to fulfill, whatever those may be.
Luk 22:29 And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me;
Luk 22:30 That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
There are just a couple. And as I said, it's well within the range of possiblity that there will be a role for the Levitical priesthood. That exact role is open for debate, but all glorified humans will have some type of role.
But nothing based on racial distinctions.
Buggman points to Jer. 33 as somehow endorsing this view, but it's interesting to alo read Isaiah 66:19-21 where we see God raising up "Levites" even from among the gentiles.
"'I will set a sign among them; and those among them who escape I will send to the nations: to Tarshish and Pul and Lud, who draw the bow, and Tubal and Javan, to the coastlands afar off who have not heard My fame nor seen My glory. And they shall declare My glory among the Gentiles. Then they shall bring all your brethren for an offering to the Lord out of all nations, ... And I will also take some of them for priests and Levites,' says the Lord."
Of course the fuller revelation of the NT makes it clear that we are all "kings and priests" in the household of faith regardless of our ethnic background.
Amen. Who can read Hebrews and not understand that?
For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law. For he of whom these things are spoken pertaineth to another tribe, of which no man gave attendance at the altar. For it is evident that our Lord sprang out of Juda; of which tribe Moses spake nothing concerning priesthood... For there is verily a disannulling of the commandment going before for the weakness and unprofitableness thereof. For the law made nothing perfect, but the bringing in of a better hope did; by the which we draw nigh unto God... By so much was Jesus made a surety of a better testament. And they truly were many priests, because they were not suffered to continue by reason of death: But this man, because he continueth ever, hath an unchangeable priesthood. Wherefore he is able also to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them. For such an high priest became us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and made higher than the heavens; Who needeth not daily, as those high priests, to offer up sacrifice, first for his own sins, and then for the people's: for this he did once, when he offered up himself. For the law maketh men high priests which have infirmity; but the word of the oath, which was since the law, maketh the Son, who is consecrated for evermore." -- Hebrews 7:11-14;18-19;22-28 "If therefore perfection were by the Levitical priesthood, (for under it the people received the law,) what further need was there that another priest should rise after the order of Melchisedec, and not be called after the order of Aaron?
It is a question of context and direct audience. It is a question of Hermeneutics. Was Hebrews a message sent to Greek Pagans
b'shem Y'shua.
who had become believers in the Jewish Messiah
or was it a message to Jewish believers
who had accepted Y'shua as there Messiah ?
Sure enough, I just opened a Protestant Bible (NKJV) and it sure does say: "The Epistle to the HEBREWS". Just for kicks, I looked at all of Paul's letters and they all say, "The Epistle of Paul the Apostle to the ROMANS, CORINTHIANS (both 1 and 2), GALATIANS, etc". Very interesting.
Which makes the extent and manner of the renouncing of the old covenant shadows even more significant.
Some people wish to cling to certain aspects of the old covenant ceremonies without benefit of a human priesthood, but such a view is not authorized by God in His Scriptures.
For the church to hold to some of the Jewish ceremonies will result in the same sort of false syncretism in worship that the Jewish nation faced when they allowed certain of the Canaanites to remain in the land of promise.
"For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect." (Heb. 10:1)
This is GREAT news, TC! Since you have decided to limit your worship to that which is authorized by God, then can we expect you at services the Sabbath after next, after everyone gets back from the Feast?
The address is:
3100 South Crysler
Independence, MO
Bible study is at 2, Services at 3. I look forward to finally meeting you.
Chris
Don't hold your breath, Hoss!
Except I read all the Bible, not just the old testament.
God nowhere in His word authorized the church (Jews and gentiles together) to worship on the old covenant last day sabbath, or with the shadows of the new moons and feast days of the Jews.
"Now on the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to break bread, Paul, ready to depart the next day, spoke to them and continued his message until midnight." (Acts 20:7)
The apostle Paul brought the church together on the first day of the week to "break bread" (the Lord's Supper; 1 Cor. 10:16) and to hear the preaching of the word. IOW, to worship as the church.
You are left with the undeniable fact that nowhere do we find Christ's church (Jews and gentiles together) worshipping on the last day sabbath of the Jews. Nowhere, unless you have a verse or two hidden up your sleeve.
So, unless you worship on Sunday as the apostles did, I will stay home, thanks.
Act 13:44 The next Sabbath nearly the whole city assembled to hear the word of the Lord.
Act 13:45 But when the Jews saw the crowds, they were filled with jealousy and began contradicting the things spoken by Paul, and were blaspheming.
Act 13:46 Paul and Barnabas spoke out boldly and said, "It was necessary that the word of God be spoken to you first; since you repudiate it and judge yourselves unworthy of eternal life, behold, we are turning to the Gentiles.
Act 13:47 "For so the Lord has commanded us, 'I HAVE PLACED YOU AS A LIGHT FOR THE GENTILES, THAT YOU MAY BRING SALVATION TO THE END OF THE EARTH.'"
Act 13:48 When the Gentiles heard this, they began rejoicing and glorifying the word of the Lord; and as many as had been appointed to eternal life believed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.