Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 01, 2015 2:24 pm

The last nine chapters of Ezekiel speak of a temple. The second temple followed the Babylonian captivity. Can we make a definitive statement to affirm or deny whether the second temple was that temple?

I do not know for certain about the dimensions of the temple, in specific if what was written in Ezekiel can be compared with the dimensions of the second temple.

Of course a question about Ezekiel's temple could be whether or not it is physical or spiritual.
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

steve7150
Posts: 2551
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:44 am

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by steve7150 » Tue Sep 01, 2015 3:15 pm

Of course a question about Ezekiel's temple could be whether or not it is physical or spiritual





I think it may have been a conditional promise based on the peoples obedience which fell short.

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by robbyyoung » Tue Sep 01, 2015 6:47 pm

JacobMartinMertens wrote:The last nine chapters of Ezekiel speak of a temple. The second temple followed the Babylonian captivity. Can we make a definitive statement to affirm or deny whether the second temple was that temple?

I do not know for certain about the dimensions of the temple, in specific if what was written in Ezekiel can be compared with the dimensions of the second temple.

Of course a question about Ezekiel's temple could be whether or not it is physical or spiritual.
Hi JacobMartinMertens,

There can never be another God sanctioned O.T. style priesthood ever again. Why? Because one must PROVE their lineage from Aaron and his two sons (to serve as High Priest), as well as, their lineage to one of the three clans (Kohathites, Gershonites, and Mereites) to perform their Priestly duties.

And of course, 70 A.D. destroyed, altogether, any proof of this lineage to follow-on generations. THIS PROOF is mandatory, as seen in Ezra 2:62 "These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood."

Therefore, this will NEVER, EVER happen. Whatever, mock set-up anyone attempts to create will be nothing more than a delusion and counterfeit to what was legitimized by God long ago and then replaced/fulfilled in Christ during the 1st Century.

God Bless.

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 01, 2015 7:04 pm

steve7150 wrote:Of course a question about Ezekiel's temple could be whether or not it is physical or spiritual

I think it may have been a conditional promise based on the peoples obedience which fell short.
Are you saying you believe the temple spoken of, be it physical, will never or may never be built? The question here is if it was built. That is, if the temple spoken of was to be a physical temple.

When we think of prophecy we think either of conviction of sin or of a thing that will happen in the future. If not the second temple, Ezekiel's temple may have not been predictive of a future temple.
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 01, 2015 7:22 pm

robbyyoung wrote:
JacobMartinMertens wrote:The last nine chapters of Ezekiel speak of a temple. The second temple followed the Babylonian captivity. Can we make a definitive statement to affirm or deny whether the second temple was that temple?

I do not know for certain about the dimensions of the temple, in specific if what was written in Ezekiel can be compared with the dimensions of the second temple.

Of course a question about Ezekiel's temple could be whether or not it is physical or spiritual.
Hi JacobMartinMertens,

There can never be another God sanctioned O.T. style priesthood ever again. Why? Because one must PROVE their lineage from Aaron and his two sons (to serve as High Priest), as well as, their lineage to one of the three clans (Kohathites, Gershonites, and Mereites) to perform their Priestly duties.

And of course, 70 A.D. destroyed, altogether, any proof of this lineage to follow-on generations. THIS PROOF is mandatory, as seen in Ezra 2:62 "These sought their register among those that were reckoned by genealogy, but they were not found: therefore were they, as polluted, put from the priesthood."

Therefore, this will NEVER, EVER happen. Whatever, mock set-up anyone attempts to create will be nothing more than a delusion and counterfeit to what was legitimized by God long ago and then replaced/fulfilled in Christ during the 1st Century.

God Bless.
I consider Ezekiel to be a prophet of God.

The question is if what we find in the book of Ezekiel relates to a temple that would be, as it does not appear to be the temple that already was. In this we must ask if the second temple was that temple, if it was a physical or spiritual temple being spoken of (physical dimensions were given), or if there is an alternative to the temple he spoke of being predictive prophecy.
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by robbyyoung » Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:09 pm

JacobMartinMertens wrote: I consider Ezekiel to be a prophet of God.

The question is if what we find in the book of Ezekiel relates to a temple that would be, as it does not appear to be the temple that already was. In this we must ask if the second temple was that temple, if it was a physical or spiritual temple being spoken of (physical dimensions were given), or if there is an alternative to the temple he spoke of being predictive prophecy.
Hi Jacob...,

That Temple CANNOT be taken as a wooden-literalism because the earthly priesthood was destroyed. All records that were required to prove someone claiming to be of the exact lineage is forever gone. This is how I know its irrelevant to hold to a paradigm involving some earthly temple/priesthood. So the only logical inferrence would be that of a spiritual reality, just as it was depicted by the last prophets of the N.T., who correctly interpreted the O.T. prophets - from types and shadows to fulfillment in their day. Afterall, the N.T. prophets tells us, the believers are the Temple of God, we are also The New Jerusalem, IMHO these are clearly spiritual realities.

God Bless.

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Tue Sep 01, 2015 9:42 pm

robbyyoung wrote:
JacobMartinMertens wrote: I consider Ezekiel to be a prophet of God.

The question is if what we find in the book of Ezekiel relates to a temple that would be, as it does not appear to be the temple that already was. In this we must ask if the second temple was that temple, if it was a physical or spiritual temple being spoken of (physical dimensions were given), or if there is an alternative to the temple he spoke of being predictive prophecy.
Hi Jacob...,

That Temple CANNOT be taken as a wooden-literalism because the earthly priesthood was destroyed. All records that were required to prove someone claiming to be of the exact lineage is forever gone. This is how I know its irrelevant to hold to a paradigm involving some earthly temple/priesthood. So the only logical inferrence would be that of a spiritual reality, just as it was depicted by the last prophets of the N.T., who correctly interpreted the O.T. prophets - from types and shadows to fulfillment in their day. Afterall, the N.T. prophets tells us, the believers are the Temple of God, we are also The New Jerusalem, IMHO these are clearly spiritual realities.

God Bless.
Are you dealing with the question of if the temple spoken of by Ezekiel is not physical? The thread title shows that the question of Ezekiel's temple cannot relate to the first temple and so must be considered first in regard to the second temple, for which I put forth the question about dimensions.

Would you say that the last nine chapters of Ezekiel are about a spiritual temple and not a physical temple?

I understand that you accept Old Testament prophets and New Testament prophets. I understand also that you are making a statement to the effect of an earthly priesthood having been destroyed.

About the Levitical priesthood (being changed and/or perhaps coming to an end) I can in keeping with scripture only reference that which pertains to the Levitical priesthood from the book of Hebrews. The confusion here is only if the Levitical priesthood ceased to be or if Jesus' priesthood is just being seen in contrast to it. This seems unrelated to what you have brought up, including your referencing scripture and your perspective on it (perhaps also with a conclusion you have drawn from what may be seen as the data available to you).

As for if Levitical priests served in the second temple, have you considered the question of if they did? Are you saying you believe they did not?
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by robbyyoung » Tue Sep 01, 2015 11:18 pm

JacobMartinMertens wrote:Are you dealing with the question of if the temple spoken of by Ezekiel is not physical? The thread title shows that the question of Ezekiel's temple cannot relate to the first temple and so must be considered first in regard to the second temple, for which I put forth the question about dimensions.
I beleive Ezekiel's temple vision has nothing to do with a physical temple. All references to this vision equates to a spiritual reality addressed by the N.T. prophets.
JacobMartinMertens wrote:Would you say that the last nine chapters of Ezekiel are about a spiritual temple and not a physical temple?
Yes.
JacobMartinMertens wrote:About the Levitical priesthood (being changed and/or perhaps coming to an end) I can in keeping with scripture only reference that which pertains to the Levitical priesthood from the book of Hebrews. The confusion here is only if the Levitical priesthood ceased to be or if Jesus' priesthood is just being seen in contrast to it. This seems unrelated to what you have brought up, including your referencing scripture and your perspective on it (perhaps also with a conclusion you have drawn from what may be seen as the data available to you).
It's NOT unrelated if a wooden-literalistic approach is taken. The priesthood MUST be proven as per God instructions, but we know this is impossible since God Himself destroyed all possibilities for this to happen. Therefore, Christ priesthood is the spiritual reality that remains.
JacobMartinMertens wrote:As for if Levitical priests served in the second temple, have you considered the question of if they did? Are you saying you believe they did not?
The rebuilt temple after the captivity WAS NOT Ezekiel's vision temple. Look at some of the distinguishing factors if taken literally:
  • No wall of partition to exclude Gentiles
    No Court of Women
    No Laver
    No Table of Shewbread
    No Lampstand or Menorah
    No Golden Altar of Incense
    No Veil
    No Ark of the Covenant
There are other differences as well and the temple built after the captivity WAS NOT built to the specifications according to Ezekiel's vision.

God Bless.

User avatar
JacobMartinMertens
Posts: 222
Joined: Wed Aug 26, 2015 6:43 pm
Location: The United States of America; Washington State

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by JacobMartinMertens » Wed Sep 02, 2015 12:01 am

robbyyoung wrote:It's NOT unrelated if a wooden-literalistic approach is taken. The priesthood MUST be proven as per God instructions, but we know this is impossible since God Himself destroyed all possibilities for this to happen. Therefore, Christ priesthood is the spiritual reality that remains.
What instructions are you referring to?

Are you going by this?

Ezra 2:62 These searched among their ancestral registration, but they could not be located; therefore they were considered unclean and excluded from the priesthood.

Nehemiah 7:64 These searched among their ancestral registration, but it could not be located; therefore they were considered unclean and excluded from the priesthood.
The rebuilt temple after the captivity WAS NOT Ezekiel's vision temple. Look at some of the distinguishing factors if taken literally:
  • No wall of partition to exclude Gentiles
    No Court of Women
    No Laver
    No Table of Shewbread
    No Lampstand or Menorah
    No Golden Altar of Incense
    No Veil
    No Ark of the Covenant
There are other differences as well and the temple built after the captivity WAS NOT built to the specifications according to Ezekiel's vision.

God Bless.
To be honest I am not familiar with this comparison you are making.

Am I correct that you believe that Ezekiel's temple with dimensions given was not a physical temple to be?
John 1:41, 49 NASB - 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

User avatar
robbyyoung
Posts: 811
Joined: Tue Sep 17, 2013 2:23 am

Re: Was the second temple the temple spoken of in Ezekiel?

Post by robbyyoung » Wed Sep 02, 2015 1:44 am

JacobMartinMertens wrote:What instructions are you referring to?

Are you going by this?

Ezra 2:62 These searched among their ancestral registration, but they could not be located; therefore they were considered unclean and excluded from the priesthood.

Nehemiah 7:64 These searched among their ancestral registration, but it could not be located; therefore they were considered unclean and excluded from the priesthood.
Yes, but Ezekiel's vision is more specfic, only the lineage of Zadok is authorized! (Eze 43:19). Again, an impossibility to prove; There's no more record.
JacobMartinMertens wrote:Am I correct that you believe that Ezekiel's temple with dimensions given was not a physical temple to be?
Yes.

God Bless.

Post Reply

Return to “Judaism”