Millennial Sacrifices

The sacrifice of living animals in the
Millinnial Kingdom of our Blessed
Lord and Savior: Messiah Yeshua,
shall be for purpose of memoralizing,
in a very graphic way, the sacrifice
of Savior Jesus, the perfect Lamb of God.

Amen!

 

Scriptures please.

 

How about, the last 12 chapters of Ezekiel?

The purposes are similar to that of the Lord's supper. They have ZERO salvific relevance. They are only a memorial.

 

I don't really understand. Why memorialize when you have the actuality? Why participate in that which is the shadow and the fore-image, when the light and realization of that fore-image is right in front of you? Why carry out actions from the obsolete covenant, when it has been replaced and superseded?

I think the question should be flipped: What is the purpose of the Old Covenant sacrifices? Once you know that, it may give you a better perspective on the New Covenant.

 

They are both memorial in nature as well as theocratic (for living int eh covenant community). Brian asks, Why memorialize when you have the reality? The answer is worship. We memorialize the death of Christ in communion even though it is real. The fact that he is with us does not mean that we cannot worship and memorialize through sacrifices.

The purpose of OT sacrifices was several: 1) theocratic (civil restitution); 2) thanks and praise; 3) sin; 4) helping others. Perhaps some more that I can't think of. Suffice it to say that "atonement" alone is an insufficient answer and, as Brian says, it does give some insight into the Millennial sacrifices ... however, probably not in the way that he intended.

 

I have offically declared this the sister thread to "Sin in the millenium" with the binding rule that anyone who posts in this thread must also post in the other.

So Gunther, Pastor Larry, get over there. . . . RIGHT . . . . NOW!!!

 

Good point.

 

I admit that I have been mystified by Ezekiel 40-48 for many years. The standard interpretation is that the sacrifices are memorial, but a plain reading of the text indicates that they are sin offerings. And who is "the prince" mentioned several times in this passage? He doesn't seem to be Jesus (he has sons), so who is he?

Some scholars have suggested that this section presents an ideal vision of what Israelite worship should have been like, not necessarily a prediction of what would someday happen. I'm not sure I can endorse that theory, since it raises new problems about literal interpretation, but it does give food for thought.

[ September 08, 2003, 12:14 PM: Message edited by: Singleman ]

 

Jesus said, "IT IS FINISHED!" while he was on the cross, then he yield up his soul. It means, all prophecies of Old Testament already fulfilled concerning on Christ and calvary, also, fulfilled the old covenant - sacrifices of the animals are no longer, now we are under the new covenant. Christ is our temple and the Lamb, we are 'priests', we have right to ask Christ to forgive our sins everyday as His blood forgive our sins everyday 24 hours.

When Christ comes to earth at the second advent.

Suppose any mortal Christians who will be make it at the second advent after survive through tribulation(those who will miss the rapture- but it is unbiblical!) will enter millenninal kingdom. So, a mortal Christian will looking for to find a very pure lamb out anywhere outside. When find a lamb, then kill it. And to offer dead lamb to God.

Then God saying to a mortal Christian, "I don't need it!!! LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOK AT JESUS!!!!

But, Jesus is GOD! We do not need another sacrifice during supposed "1000 years" millennial kingdom. Because we all will change into immortal body at the second advent - 1 Cor. 15:51-54. There shall be NO mortal people on new earth after the second advent.

Immortal people shall have NO sin nature or mortal. Then, why shall immortal people need another animal sacrifce while they have NO sin???

Later this week, I will discuss on Ezekiel 40-48 more deep.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 - Amen!

 

1. I am pretty sure I said that they have ZERO salvific relevance.

2. The sacrifices are for the mortals, not the immortals. Before you try and trash a position, actually learn what it is they believe first.

 

Sacrifice and offerings thou wouldest not but a body has thou prepared me!... Again what is the reason for the sacrifice?... Present your bodies as a living sacrifice wholly and acceptable unto the Lord which is your reasonable service... Sounds to me like a bunch of baloney... Slavic... Memorial... Whatever!... Oops strike BALONEY ... We don't want another sacrifice ... Brother Glen

Jesus Christ is the end of ALL sacrifices!

 

Glen ... We do not disagree that Jesus Christ was the ultimate sacrifice and the end of atoning sacrifices. But neither will we deny that Ezek tells of a time to come when sacrifices will be instituted again. When Scripture says this, we cannot simply pretend like it isn't there. We have to arrange our own theology around the text of Scripture. That is why we believe that there will be sacrifices in the millennium ... God said there would be.

 

I agree wholeheartedly that we must shape our beliefs according to what God has revealed, not to what is convenient to our theology. If Ezekiel 40-48 was meant as a prophecy of future events, then it must be taken literally. That's where the confusion enters. The sacrifices in this passage are regularly called sin offerings, so we have little reason to label them as merely memorial or symbolic. Chapter 44 is very detailed about priestly practices regarding what is clean and unclean, similar to OT restrictions. Apparently these laws will still apply in the Millennium (Ezekiel gives no indication of a time span). And the people of this period will be ruled by a prince who apparently is mortal and capable of sin. The problem for those of us who are committed to an inerrant Bible comes from trying to reconcile Ezekiel's vision with NT expectations. The question will probably never be answered to everyone's satifaction. We simply don't have enough details. Some say that 43:10-11 indicates that the whole vision was given to the people of Ezekiel's time to humble and shame them, not as a future prediction. As I said before, I'm somewhat uneasy with this theory. So, I suppose the question comes down to this: Does our concept of inerrancy allow for a symbolic interpretation of this passage, or at least of some parts of it? I'm not certain of the answer.

 

Until it happens it is ALL speculation... Like I said again for what reason?... Why the shedding of blood again since the blood of bulls and bullocks didn't suffice... For what reason?... For God?... Says who?... Again speculation... For a memorial?... More speculation?... SACRIFICES HAVE CEASED!... You Baptist going to sacrifice with the Jews?... Again redundant IMHO!... That is how I see it!... You disagree fine!... Brother Glen

 

Bro. Glen,

Glad to see you're still fired up about defending New Testament theology over O.T. "literalism"!

In Christ,

Tim

 

Wow...I agree with Brother Glenn!

 

Somebody has to show they have some Baptist backbone... It is called the Old Testament for a reason... It was replaced by the New!... You Jewish Baptist get your sacrifices ready... We are in the GRACE DISPENSATION of time... Law worship is OLD NEWS!... As far as these having revelence as a memorial... Shame on you Baptist... The Lord Supper is the memorial... Do this in rememberance of me until I come again!... To take my children home!... Brother Glen

 

I have one question that I would like to pose to those who believe in millenial sacrifice... In 70 A.D. God destroyed Jerusalem and not long after that ALL sacrifices ceased... Because they were a stench in his nostrils... Question are they still a stench in his nostrils?... If they were then they are now and nothing has changed... They are an abomination now and in the millenium... Maybe to others they are a memorial but to God they are an abominable putrid stench so who are you Jewish Baptist sacrificing to?... Something to think about!... Brother Glen