Zechariah 12

[Nomad]

Having desolations and being left desolate are 2 entirely different things. It's not a matter of interpretation, it is a matter of accepting what scripture plainly says and not re-interpreting it to fit a narrative.

There's one key verse being left out here that finishes Jesus thought:

‭‭Matthew‬ ‭23:37‭-‬39‬ ‭ESV‬‬
[37] “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! [38] See, your house is left to you desolate. [39] For I tell you, you will not see me again, UNTIL you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord'".

Aha, they did see him when they said, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord".
They said it as he entered the city of Jerusalem in what we now call the "triumphal entry". The quote is from Ps 118. It was fulfilled very shortly after his prediction. He didn't limit the condemnation, only his presence with the Jews to whom he was speaking.
Only if you take it out of it's context and impose a futuristic mindset can you make it say something more than was intended. "Let God be true..."

A text taken out of context becomes a pretext.

By your reading: He's talking about the future desolations of Jerusalem (presumably 70 AD) and then He jumps backwards to an event that happened previously and says that they will not see him again until he makes His triumphal entry which happened back in Matthew Ch. 21? I'm not sure I follow that line of thinking...but if that works for you then OK...

[gcdonner]

Where was their "house" in Second Chronicles?

From the Tanakh....

36:14 Moreover all the chief of the priests, and the people, transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen; and polluted the house of the LORD which he had hallowed in Jerusalem.

36:15 And the LORD God of their fathers sent to them by his messengers, rising up betimes, and sending; because he had compassion on his people, and on his dwelling place: 36:16 But they mocked the messengers of God, and despised his words, and misused his prophets, until the wrath of the LORD arose against his people, till there was no remedy.

36:17 Therefore he brought upon them the king of the Chaldees, who slew their young men with the sword in the house of their sanctuary, and had no compassion upon young man or maiden, old man, or him that stooped for age: he gave them all into his hand.

36:18 And all the vessels of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king, and of his princes; all these he brought to Babylon.

36:19 And they burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof.

36:20 And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia: 36:21 To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.

You are confusing the "house of God", ie the temple, with the "House of God" no made with human hands. One was a physical place the other is a spiritual place.

Heb_3:6 But Christ as a son over his own house; whose house are we, if we hold fast the confidence and the rejoicing of the hope firm unto the end.

1Pe 2:5 Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ.

Eph 2:19 Now therefore ye are no more strangers and foreigners, but fellowcitizens with the saints, and of the household of God;
20 And are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone;
21 In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord:
22 In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

Don't conflate the earthly temple with the heavenly temple.

2Co_4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

[gcdonner]

There's one key verse being left out here that finishes Jesus thought:

‭‭Matthew‬ ‭23:37‭-‬39‬ ‭ESV‬‬
[37] “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the city that kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to it! How often would I have gathered your children together as a hen gathers her brood under her wings, and you were not willing! [38] See, your house is left to you desolate. [39] For I tell you, you will not see me again, UNTIL you say, ‘Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord'".

Aha, they did see him when they said, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord".
They said it as he entered the city of Jerusalem in what we now call the "triumphal entry". The quote is from Ps 118. It was fulfilled very shortly after his prediction. He didn't limit the condemnation, only his presence with the Jews to whom he was speaking.
Only if you take it out of it's context and impose a futuristic mindset can you make it say something more than was intended. "Let God be true..."

A text taken out of context becomes a pretext.

By your reading: He's talking about the future desolations of Jerusalem (presumably 70 AD) and then He jumps backwards to an event that happened previously and says that they will not see him again until he makes His triumphal entry which happened back in Matthew Ch. 21? I'm not sure I follow that line of thinking...but if that works for you then OK...

You got me. I shouldn't have been posting so late at night...
The phrase is part of the Passover celebration which lay shortly ahead as Jesus spoke these words. He was leaving Jerusalem only to return to be crucified. All the Jews recited Ps 118 during the Passover meal, which Jesus anticipated as his last meal when he instituted what we call "communion". Indeed the phrase was sung during his triumphal entry, but again during the Passover.
I confounded the two applications and did exactly what I was warning of, taking a text out of context... I demonstrated how easy it is to make the mistake, even unintentionally.

[Nomad]

Aha, they did see him when they said, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord".
They said it as he entered the city of Jerusalem in what we now call the "triumphal entry". The quote is from Ps 118. It was fulfilled very shortly after his prediction. He didn't limit the condemnation, only his presence with the Jews to whom he was speaking.
Only if you take it out of it's context and impose a futuristic mindset can you make it say something more than was intended. "Let God be true..."

A text taken out of context becomes a pretext.

By your reading: He's talking about the future desolations of Jerusalem (presumably 70 AD) and then He jumps backwards to an event that happened previously and says that they will not see him again until he makes His triumphal entry which happened back in Matthew Ch. 21? I'm not sure I follow that line of thinking...but if that works for you then OK...

You got me. I shouldn't have been posting so late at night...
The phrase is part of the Passover celebration which lay shortly ahead as Jesus spoke these words. He was leaving Jerusalem only to return to be crucified. All the Jews recited Ps 118 during the Passover meal, which Jesus anticipated as his last meal when he instituted what we call "communion". Indeed the phrase was sung during his triumphal entry, but again during the Passover.
I confounded the two applications and did exactly what I was warning of, taking a text out of context... I demonstrated how easy it is to make the mistake, even unintentionally.

Thats ok. You obviously have knowledge of the Bible and I won't hold it against you. I've done it myself!

[Bootstrap]

I don't think there are any promises that the Jewish Temple will be restored. Instead, there are prophecies that the Jewish Temple will be destroyed:

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

Jesus does not go on to promise that the temple will be restored after that. The Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque now sit on the site of the Jewish Second Temple. There is no promise in Scripture that this will ever change.

The heavenly temple in the Revelation does not mention animal sacrifice - there is one Lamb who is worthy, the Lamb who was slain. All the saints are gathered around the throne in worship and praise.

In the New Testament, we are the temple of the living God. Jesus is both our great high priest and the sacrifice. This is a major theme in Hebrews.

[Bootstrap]

When we read Old Testament prophecy, it's important to consider when they were written. Zechariah tells us exactly when the prophecy came to him:

In the eighth month of the second year of Darius, the word of the Lord came to the prophet Zechariah.

Ezra 4 tells us who this Darius was and when he lived. So Zechariah's prophecy was fulfilled when Israel was restored after the Babylonian exile.

The last books in the Old Testament were written as they were still rebuilding Israel and the temple after the Babylonian Exile. I think Old Testament prophecy needs to be read in that light. The promises of Israel's restoration and rebuilding the temple have already been fulfilled. The physical temple was destroyed in 70 AD.

There have been mosques on that site for over a thousand years.

[Nomad]

I don't think there are any promises that the Jewish Temple will be restored. Instead, there are prophecies that the Jewish Temple will be destroyed:

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

Jesus does not go on to promise that the temple will be restored after that. The Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque now sit on the site of the Jewish Second Temple. There is no promise in Scripture that this will ever change.

The heavenly temple in the Revelation does not mention animal sacrifice - there is one Lamb who is worthy, the Lamb who was slain. All the saints are gathered around the throne in worship and praise.

In the New Testament, we are the temple of the living God. Jesus is both our great high priest and the sacrifice. This is a major theme in Hebrews.

I'm curious how you would interpret Ezekiel vision in chapters 40 through 48? He describes a massive Temple with a platform that would hold millions of people, twice the size of Herods temple, sacrifices with a different number of animals previously set by the Law, no veil or Ark of Covenant spoken of, and laid out in such detail you could draw it just like the Tabernacle laid out with Moses. Also, the 12 tribes are given land in a different arrangement than before with the Levites also given land when previously no land was given to the Levites...on top of this there is a mysterious prince that is described that also gives sin offerings to the Lord. I personally see it as the Millennial Temple...however I've heard different theories from amillennialist...

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating there is no truth to our bodies as Temples of the Holy Spirit. I'm actually advocating for both a future Temple and our bodies as Temples as being truth. I don't see any evidence in the Bible that The OT prophecies of a Temple get transcended by NT promises of a spiritual Temple being our bodies. I see both together.

[Bootstrap]

I'm curious how you would interpret Ezekiel vision in chapters 40 through 48? He describes a massive Temple with a platform that would hold millions of people, twice the size of Herods temple, sacrifices with a different number of animals previously set by the Law, no veil or Ark of Covenant spoken of, and laid out in such detail you could draw it just like the Tabernacle laid out with Moses. Also, the 12 tribes are given land in a different arrangement than before with the Levites also given land when previously no land was given to the Levites...on top of this there is a mysterious prince that is described that also gives sin offerings to the Lord. I personally see it as the Millennial Temple...however I've heard different theories from amillennialist...

I haven't thought about this vision as much as you have. Let me think about it for a few days ...

[gcdonner]

I don't think there are any promises that the Jewish Temple will be restored. Instead, there are prophecies that the Jewish Temple will be destroyed:

Jesus left the temple and was walking away when his disciples came up to him to call his attention to its buildings. “Do you see all these things?” he asked. “Truly I tell you, not one stone here will be left on another; every one will be thrown down.”

Jesus does not go on to promise that the temple will be restored after that. The Dome of the Rock and the Al Aqsa mosque now sit on the site of the Jewish Second Temple. There is no promise in Scripture that this will ever change.

The heavenly temple in the Revelation does not mention animal sacrifice - there is one Lamb who is worthy, the Lamb who was slain. All the saints are gathered around the throne in worship and praise.

In the New Testament, we are the temple of the living God. Jesus is both our great high priest and the sacrifice. This is a major theme in Hebrews.

I'm curious how you would interpret Ezekiel vision in chapters 40 through 48? He describes a massive Temple with a platform that would hold millions of people, twice the size of Herods temple, sacrifices with a different number of animals previously set by the Law, no veil or Ark of Covenant spoken of, and laid out in such detail you could draw it just like the Tabernacle laid out with Moses. Also, the 12 tribes are given land in a different arrangement than before with the Levites also given land when previously no land was given to the Levites...on top of this there is a mysterious prince that is described that also gives sin offerings to the Lord. I personally see it as the Millennial Temple...however I've heard different theories from amillennialist...

Just to be clear, I'm not advocating there is no truth to our bodies as Temples of the Holy Spirit. I'm actually advocating for both a future Temple and our bodies as Temples as being truth. I don't see any evidence in the Bible that The OT prophecies of a Temple get transcended by NT promises of a spiritual Temple being our bodies. I see both together.

You can't have your cake and eat it too. The visions in Ezekiel are looking forward to the fulfillment mentioned in Revelation 21, which is a spiritual fulfillment. The New Jerusalem is described as "the bride of the Lamb". Who is that? Christians are the bride of the lamb, the temple therein and the river are the same as those in Ezekiel, spiritual realities.
Too many confuse "spiritual" with a non-reality, but there is more "reality" in the Spirit than what you are experiencing here. Paul put it this way:

1Co 2:9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

And in another place he said:

2Co 4:18 While we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen: for the things which are seen are temporal; but the things which are not seen are eternal.

If you'll be satisfied with temporal things, you won't see the reality that is in Christ.

Joh 3:3 ... Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Think about that.

Do you enjoy swimming?

[Steven Donnelly]

Hi,

This is my first post on here apart from an introductory greeting. While the following quote wasn't addressed to me, I hope it's not presumptuous to offer some text-based thoughts on the matter.
 

I'm curious how you would interpret Ezekiel vision in chapters 40 through 48?

It seems to me that one legitimate way to view the book of Ezekiel is in view of the three visions at the structure of the book. That is, it looks like the visions recorded in chaps. 1-3:15, 8-11, and 40-48 lay out a framework that outlines the rest of the contents. In some sense, all of these visions highlight the glory/honor of Yahweh.

The first vision that opens the book involved the divine chariot and Ezekiel's calling (1-3:15). Caution: I think some rabbis warned about meditating on this vision of the chariot, maybe it had something to do with God's glory appearing via the image of a man?

During the second vision (chaps. 8-11) Ezekiel was lifted by his hairlocks and led on a divinely guided tour to the temple back in Jerusalem (he'd been in exile since around 597 BC). In the process he was shown a sequence of unthinkable deeds that abominated the temple and those connected to it. The image of jealousy of chap. 8 seemed to head off the parade of sacrilege. All of the acts that the prophet encountered during his tour were clearly dishonoring to God. The temple became a vehicle for the denigration of God's honor. Chaps. 10-11 describe the migration of God's glory/honor toward the eastern threshold, and ultimately toward his moving out of the temple. Maybe in parallel fashion to Jesus' standing on the Mount of Olives in Matt. 24/Mark 13/Luke 21, God abandoned the house and went to the mountain to the east of Jerusalem (the Mount of Olives), leaving the temple vulnerable to the Babylonian invasion of 586 BC.

The temple was raised, but in 572 BC (according to Ezekiel 40:1) the prophet was again transported back to Israel, this time at the peak of a high mountain where another, final vision scape unfolds (chaps. 40-48). Fast forwarding to the point, in chapter 43 the glory of God was described as reentering the visionary temple. In a curious reversal, it came from the east and by way of the eastern gate. Ezekiel noted that the glory was comparable to a previous encounter and proceeded to fall prostrate, adding that the glory filled the house. Verses 7-9 record an oracle by which Ezekiel was informed that the repatriated exiles would have to put away their past harlotry and abominations in order for Yahweh to take up permanent residence in their midst. In verse 10 Ezekiel is instructed to show/tell the house to the exilic/postexilic community, so they will be ashamed. Presumably, the lack of shame (discretion or disgrace?) had something to do with their inability to maintain the first temple with sanctity. (Mention of the image of jealousy is suggestive that the people's idolatry stirred up divine jealousy for the sanctity of God's name.) The verse implies that the people were expected to show forth some repentance.

Finally, verse 11 involves a conditional statement (at least in the Masoretic Text), suggesting that *if* the people will be ashamed of their deeds then they may move on to the next stage toward acquiring the illustrious temple vision and accompanying social structure. It seems to me that this is quite a weighty prerequisite that is often overlooked. Perhaps it's comparable to Exodus 19:5-6 when Yahweh revealed to the people that they could be a kingdom of priests *if* they would obey his voice. Instead of a kingdom of priests, the community became a kingdom with priests. Given that Ezekiel's temple model was never constructed, it appears that the people also failed to meet the condition in Ezek. 43:11. Perhaps this also helps explain why Ezra 9:6 reveals that Ezra cried out in shame to God at the condition of the nation during his day--after another temple had been constructed. The people proceeded to break off ungodly relationships.

Thanks for indulging me in such a long message, particularly seeing that I'm new on the block.
Steven