Ezekiel 45:17

[Guest]

Steve,

I just heard a popular dispensational teacher explain that the sacrifices in this verse are by Jesus as He identifies with sinners during the millennium. He compared this with Jesus being baptized by John the Baptist in order to identify with sinners. He also shared the typical dispensational thought that these sacrifices are for memorials.

The text plainly indicates they are for reconciliation/atonement/propitiation, so I understand the verse to be speaking of Christ's first advent. Have you ever heard the "identification" line of reasoning given by dispensationalists?

Thanks

[Guest]

I had heard often before of the "memorial" explanation, but I don't recall ever having heard the "identification" part previously.

The idea that Jesus is the one offering these sacrifices arises from the mis-identification of "the prince" in the passage with Jesus, and by applying this whole section to an alleged future millennium, to be established after Jesus returns. This interpretation is entirely uncalled-for, and involves several serious doctrinal difficulties.

First, because the prince in the passage cannot be Jesus. For one thing, the prince (like most everyone else), is a married man, with children (Ezek.46:16).

Also, the sacrifices the prince presents are "for himself and for all the people...a bull for a sin offering" (Ezek.45:22).

It is anathema to suggest that Jesus must offer a bull to atone for his OWN sins—and it is bizarre enough to suggest that He would offer a bull "to make atonement" (v.17) for the sins of the people, when He has already offered His own blood once and for all for that very purpose (Heb.9:27; 10:10, 14)!

The prince in this section is not Jesus. It depicts the generic ruler of Judah, living under the Old Covenant system, prior to the time of Christ's first coming.

We must necessarily rule-out any fulfillment of Ezekiel 40-48 in any time-frame after the death nof Christ—since the whole passage is occupied with a temple, animal sacrifices and a levitical priesthood, all of which are clearly stated to have been eliminated with the coming of the New Covenant at Calvary (John 4:21/ Acts 7:48-50/Heb.7:11-12, 18; 10:18).

Additionally, after the second coming of Christ, the dead will all have been raised (John 5:28-29), in a resurrection where there will no longer be any marriage (Matt.22:30). Yet, the priests and people in Ezekiel 40-48 are married (44:22; 47:22).

There is just no way, therefore, that these chapters could be describing conditions after the second coming of Christ—nor even after the cross. We should recognize that God was here describing a restored Old Testament order which would be realized after the Babylonian exile, if only the Jews would whole-heartedly repent (Ezek.43:10-11)—which they mostly did not. Therefore the restoration blessings described, being conditional, never materialized to this degree envisaged, because the conditions were not met.

Even if all of the Jews had repented and if this temple systemhad been restored, as described in these chapters, the whole thing would still have eventually been rendered obsolete by the death and resurrection of Christ, five-hundred years later. This has nothing to do with the future.

[Guest]

Thanks Steve. The notion of Christ offering sacrifices upon His return has always struck me as bizarre. I can only conclude that well well meaning men will do anything to hold fast to their entrenched positions. It was odd to listen to this teacher, because he read the verse but gave no commentary on the part about the offering being for the reconciliation of Israel.

I have yet to listen to your commentary on Ezekiel. Concerning chapters 40-48, do you share any points of agreements with the idealists?

Thanks

[Guest]

Yes, I do.

Though I believe that the temple description was intended to be a literal temple (conditional upon repentasnce) that God would have the returning exiles construct, I believe that, like the tabernacle and Solomon's temple, the structure and the rituals were supposed to reflect spiritual realities. These ideals are realized in Christ and the Church in the present age.

Some of the spiritual ideals that one author felt are depicted in the vision are:

1. The perfection of God's plan (seen in the symetry of the structure)

2. The centrality of worship in the lives of God's people

3. God's dwelling among His people (Rev.21:3)

4. Spiritual blessing flowing to the thirsty world (depicted as a river in Ezek.47:1ff/ Joel 3:18/ Zech.14:8/ Rev.22:1)

5. The orderly distribution of duties (gifts) among God's people (1 Cor.12)


Some features near the end (e.g., the miraculous river) probably were intended entirely in an idealist sense (as it is unlikely that such a river would have literally existed in the rebuilt temple), but I think the whole structure and ritual were at least as symbolic in import as was Moses' tabernacle.