### Introduction Ezekiel 44-46 relates a prophecy about a restored Jerusalem with a temple which is quite different in dimensions (it's gigantic) from either the 1st or 2nd Temples. The Israelites are following the laws and regulations of God: > A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you, and I will remove from your body the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. I will put my spirit within you and make you follow my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances (Ezekiel 36:26-27) The people are ruled by a prince who is of the line of David: > I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall feed them; he shall feed them and be their shepherd. And I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David shall be prince among them; I the Lord have spoken. (Ezekiel 34:23-24) The prince provides various offering in the Temple for himself and the people: > “In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month, you shall celebrate the Festival of the Passover, and for seven days unleavened bread shall be eaten. On that day the prince shall provide for himself and all the people of the land a bull for a purification offering. And during the seven days of the festival he shall provide as a burnt offering to the Lord seven bulls and seven rams without blemish, on each of the seven days, and a male goat daily for a purification offering. He shall provide as a grain offering an ephah for each bull, an ephah for each ram, and a hin of oil to each ephah. In the seventh month, on the fifteenth day of the month and for the seven days of the festival, he shall make the same provision for purification offerings, burnt offerings, and grain offerings and for the oil. (Ezekiel 45:18-25) This Davidic prince will also have an inheritance and children to whom he may give to. He is not allowed to take from the people and give to his children: > “Thus says the Lord God: If the prince makes a gift to any of his sons out of his inheritance,[a] it shall belong to his sons; it is their holding by inheritance. But if he makes a gift out of his inheritance to one of his servants, it shall be his to the year of liberty; then it shall revert to the prince; only his sons may keep a gift from his inheritance. The prince shall not take any of the inheritance of the people, thrusting them out of their holding; he shall give his sons their inheritance out of his own holding, so that none of my people shall be dispossessed of their holding.” (Ezekiel 46:16-18) ### Identity? Traditional Jewish interpretation of these passages is that the prince is the promised Messiah. Who do Christian denominations believe this prince is? Do Christians believe this is a prophecy of the future? If so, why are sacrifices occurring in the future?

Both Ezekiel 38-39 and Revelation 20 speak of this ‘entity’ Gog & Magog, both in battle based scenarios. Are these events the same or different? The Revelation 20 version gives a fairly clear, explicit timeline, the Ezekiel account is much more obscure. How can one decipher the timeline for the Ezekiel battle if it differs from Revelation?

This morning I read an article claiming that during the millennial kingdom the temple described in Ezekiel chapter 40 points to a new temple that will exist during the millennial kingdom on Earth. I understand this view is held by some premillennialists who adopt a literal interpretation of the thousand year reign of Christ. They say Jesus will literally come to earth to rule from the city of Jerusalem. Here is an extract from the article in question: >Most premillennial scholars agree that the purpose of animal sacrifice during the millennial kingdom is memorial in nature. As the Lord’s Supper is a reminder of the death of Christ to the Church today, animal sacrifices will be a reminder during the millennial kingdom. To those born during the millennial kingdom, animal sacrifices will again be an object lesson. During that future time, righteousness and holiness will prevail, but those with earthly bodies will still have a sin nature, and there will be a need to teach about how offensive sin is to a holy and righteous God. Animal sacrifices will serve that purpose, "but in those sacrifices there is a reminder of sins year by year" (Hebrews 10:3). https://www.gotquestions.org/millennial-sacrifices.html The article concedes that a primary objection to this point of view is that Christ offered a perfect sacrifice for sin, and there is therefore no need to sacrifice animals for sin. However, it then goes on to assert that since animal sacrifices did not take away sins in the Old Testament the need for animal sacrifices during the (literal) thousand year reign of Christ (ruling from Jerusalem) will serve as an object lessons for human sinners who will be alive after the second coming of Christ Jesus. Is this the view of “most premillennial scholars”? Is Ezekiel chapter 40 a description of a physical new temple to be built in Jerusalem where animal sacrifices will once again happen under a Jewish priesthood from the lineage of Zadok the Priest?

In Ezekiel chapter 4 the prophet was instructed to lie on his left side for 390 days, a day for each year of the sin of Israel, and then to lie on his right side for 40 days for the sin of Judah. What historical period is being referred to here? When did the 390 years begin and end? Also for the 40 year period, when did it begin and end?

These verses were used to teach conditionalism/ human souls are mortal. What is the “traditionalist” response to these verses. (1 Timothy 6:16): “who alone is immortal and who lives in unapproachable light, whom no one has seen or can see. To him be honor and might forever. Amen.” (Ezekiel 18:20 ): “The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child. The righteousness of the righteous will be credited to them, and the wickedness of the wicked will be charged against them.”

In Matthew when Jesus and Satan interacted, in one of the temptations given by Satan we get the sense that he has authority over all nations : > Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their glory. And he said to him, “All these I will give you, if you will fall down and worship me.” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭4‬:‭8‬-‭9‬ ‭ESV‬ However, it is mentioned in the Old Testament that wars and conflicts do exist between nations, such as Babylon coming to destroy Egypt. > Thus says the Lord God: “I will put an end to the wealth of Egypt, by the hand of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon. He and his people with him, the most ruthless of nations, shall be brought in to destroy the land, and they shall draw their swords against Egypt and fill the land with the slain.” ‭‭Ezekiel‬ ‭30‬:‭10‬-‭11‬ ‭ESV‬‬ But later in Matthew, Jesus uses the argument that Satan's kingdom can’t be divided. > “Knowing their thoughts,” he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand. And if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then will his kingdom stand?” ‭‭Matthew‬ ‭12‬:‭25‬-‭26‬ ‭ESV‬‬ My question is: given that Satan has/had authority over the nations in the past as well as these satanic nations then conquering one another as shown in Ezekiel, how does Jesus’s argument hold up that Satan's kingdom can’t be divided? Is he speaking only spiritually or something else?

Ezekiel 37:9-10. > Then he said to me, “Prophesy to the breath; prophesy, son of man, and > say to the breath, Thus says the Lord God: Come from the four winds, O > breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.” 10 So I > prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they > lived and stood on their feet, an exceedingly great army.ESV The choice of translators in English is to take "breath" instead of "spirit." Regardless of this, what is supposed to mean. Breath would be the spirit of the trichotomists? Clearly the concept of Soul seems to be absent in this text. How was this interpreted throughout history?

Genesis 2:7 NKJV > 7 And **the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life**; and man became a living being. Ezekiel 37:1-14 NKJV > 37 The hand of the Lord came upon me and brought me out in the Spirit of the Lord, and set me down in the midst of the valley; and it was full of bones. 2 Then He caused me to pass by them all around, and behold, there were very many in the open valley; and indeed they were very dry. 3 And He said to me, “Son of man, can these bones live?” > > So I answered, “O Lord God, You know.” > > 4 Again He said to me, “Prophesy to these bones, and say to them, ‘O dry bones, hear the word of the Lord! 5 Thus says the Lord God to these bones: **“Surely I will cause breath to enter into you, and you shall live**. 6 **I will put sinews on you and bring flesh upon you, cover you with skin and put breath in you; and you shall live. Then you shall know that I am the Lord**.” ’ ” > > 7 So I prophesied as I was commanded; **and as I prophesied, there was a noise, and suddenly a rattling; and the bones came together, bone to bone**. 8 **Indeed, as I looked, the sinews and the flesh came upon them, and the skin covered them over; but there was no breath in them**. > > 9 Also He said to me, “Prophesy to the breath, prophesy, son of man, and say to the breath, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe on these slain, that they may live.” ’ ” 10 **So I prophesied as He commanded me, and breath came into them, and they lived, and stood upon their feet, an exceedingly great army**. > > 11 Then He said to me, “Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel. They indeed say, ‘Our bones are dry, our hope is lost, and we ourselves are cut off!’ 12 Therefore prophesy and say to them, ‘Thus says the Lord God: “Behold, O My people, I will open your graves and cause you to come up from your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel. 13 Then you shall know that I am the Lord, when I have opened your graves, O My people, and brought you up from your graves. 14 I will put My Spirit in you, and you shall live, and I will place you in your own land. Then you shall know that I, the Lord, have spoken it and performed it,” says the Lord.’ ” Ezekiel 37 offers a vivid and detailed depiction of God's power to instantly create a biological body, breathe life into it, and make it a living being. This rapid, almost instantaneous process contrasts sharply with the millions of years of gradual changes proposed by evolution. Does this not provide insight into the interpretation of Genesis 2:7? If so, how do theistic evolutionists reconcile this with their understanding of Adam's creation within the broader framework of the theory of evolution?

From my understanding of dispensationalism , at some point in the future, I believe either prior to or just after the rapture, the temple on Moriah will need to be rebuilt. However, presumably, the reason for rebuilding the temple would be to resume the temple sacrifices that were going on there until the Romans destroyed it. This motivation seems even more likely (to me), given the imagery of the Millennial Temple in Ezekiel 40-48 , where animal sacrifices are taking place. But, if, as Paul seems to be saying below that all Israel will be saved, then what would the motivation be to rebuild a temple, given "sacrifice for sin is no longer necessary" (Hebrews 10:1-18 ) ? Romans 11:25-26a > I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers and > sisters, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a > hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in, > and in this way all Israel will be saved. How do adherents of dispensationalism explain this? Where is my confusion?

> You were anointed as a guardian cherub, for so I ordained you. You were on the Holy Mount of God. (Ezekiel 28:14, NIV) God is an all powerful God, the creator of Heaven and Earth both the visible and the invisible. This raises a number of questions ... Why would an infinite and powerful God need a created cherub to guard the Holy Mountain? What is there in the Holy Mountain that needs to be guarded upon and from whom? Are the created angels seen as maybe the subject and the possible intruder to the Holy Mount? Is there a treasure there that the angels might steal? The question I would like answered is: **why is there a need to guard the Holy Mountain of God as all the angels even combined cannot match the infinite power of God?**

Ezekiel 18:19-20 NKJV : > 19 “Yet you say, ‘Why should the son not bear the guilt of the > father?’ Because the son has done what is lawful and right, and has > kept all My statutes and observed them, he shall surely live. 20 The > soul who sins shall die. The son shall not bear the guilt of the > father, nor the father bear the guilt of the son. The righteousness of > the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked > shall be upon himself. Ezekiel 18:19 says the reason the son cannot bear the guilt of the father is because the son has done what is lawful and right. Since Jesus is sinless (1 Peter 2:22) how can he bear the guilt of anyone? Similarly how can our wickedness be upon Jesus (2 Corinthians 5:21), if as per verse 20, it must be upon ourselves?

I think many people assume that Sodom and Gomorrah were destroyed because of their sexual immortality, and this may at least be part of the reason. However, I recently read Ezekiel and in Ezekiel 16:49-50 > **49** Now this was the sin of your sister Sodom: She and her daughters were arrogant, overfed and unconcerned; they did not help the poor and needy. **50** They were haughty and did detestable things before me. Therefore I did away with them as you have seen. It seems that Ezekiel is turning the traditional interpretation on its head, although there is certainly room for argument in the phrase "did detestable things before me". Is there any kind of doctrinal consensus or majority view on why exactly Sodom and Gomorrah was destroyed?

According to Roman Catholics and Orthodox Christians, Ezekiel 44:1-2 >And he brought me back to the way of the gate of the outward sanctuary, which looked towards the east: and it was shut. And the Lord said to me: This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall pass through it: because the Lord the God of Israel hath entered in by it, and it shall be shut is a prophecy of the blessed Virgin Mary. They believe that this is not only a biblical belief but an historical one and claim that St. Augustine believed and taught that Ezekiel 44:1-2 is a prophecy of Mary, therefore confirming the perpetual virginity of Mary. Is this in any way true?

Catholicism interprets that Ezekiel 44:2 is about the blessed Virgin Mary and shows evidence of the perpetual virginity of Mary, but did any Early Church Fathers believe that Ezekiel 44:2 is about or prophesies Mary? Ezekiel 44:2 reads: > Then said the Lord unto me; This gate shall be shut, it shall not be > opened, and no man shall enter in by it; because the Lord, the God of > Israel, hath entered in by it, therefore it shall be shut.

First of all, the source: > Ezekiel 18:4 (GNT): The life of every person belongs to me, the life of the parent as well as that of the child. The person who sins is the one who will die. God states clearly that even if there is someone willing to die for my sins (or settle on my behalf), still not possible due to God's method of settling the issue of sin. IF this is the case, Jesus die for nothing? His death doesn't settle anything for the wicked...

> Ezekiel 29:13-15 KJV Yet thus saith the Lord God ; At the end of forty years will I gather the Egyptians from the people whither they were scattered: And I will bring again the captivity of Egypt, and will cause them to return into the land of Pathros, into the land of their habitation; and they shall be there a base kingdom. It shall be the basest of the kingdoms; neither shall it exalt itself any more above the nations: for I will diminish them, that they shall no more rule over the nations. Above are verses from Ezekiel 29. He’s prophesying the destruction and desolation of Egypt apparently by Nebuchadnezzar 2nd. In the prophecy Ezekiel states that the Egyptians will be carried away and the land will be desolate for forty years. After this period they’ll return but will be henceforth a lowly kingdom. I can be convinced of the forty year captivity period to a point. Nebuchadnezzar was known to carry away and enslave citizens of places he’d conquered. And the period between his unsuccessful invasion of Egypt and Cyrus the Great’s edict to release those of whom had been enslaved by the Babylonians was roughly 40 years. However, what seems obviously wrong about this prophecy is the aftermath of the 40 years and return of the Egyptian captives: the kingdom of Egypt forever becoming a “base kingdom”. Egypt as a “kingdom” was never a lowly kingdom afterwards and it did rule over other nations, particularly the Ptolemaic Empire. One might say “This prophecy concerns the Egyptian people, whereas the Ptolemaic Empire was *Greek*.” However Ezekiel says Egypt will become a lowly **kingdom** not ‘nation’ or ‘people’, clearly meaning, I presume, the country. It seems to me that this part of the prophecy completely fails. Others then might suggest that this whole prophecy is one yet to be fulfilled but I personally see no indication of that in the text. With the frequent mentioning of Nebuchadnezzar it seems clear to me personally that chapter 29 refers to his unsuccessful invasion of Egypt. Can anyone who is familiar with this prophecy shed some more light on it. I’m assuming there is something I have missed.

Here is my translation:1 >**Ezekiel 18:20-32** > >The soul that sins, the same [only] shall die: the son shall not bear the guilt of the father, nor the father the guilt of the son: the righteousness of the righteous will fall to the righteous, and the wickedness of the wicked to the wicked. 21 And a wicked man who turns away from all he sins which he had comitted, and observes all of my statues, and does righteousness, and judgement, the same shall live: he shall not die. 22 And none of his transgressions shall be remembered or held against him: by his righteousness he shall live. > >23 Do I enjoy the death of the wicked, says the Lord God, Would I not rather see him turn from his ways and live? 24 But when a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, and does iniquity, after the manner of the deeds which wicked men are wont to do, shall he do it and live? > >25 Yet you say, The way of the Lord is perverse. Listen, O house of Israel! Is my way not right, and your ways perverse rather? 26 When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness, and does iniquity, and he dies therein, the same shall die in his iniquity. 27 Again, when a wicked man turns from the wickedness which he committed, and does judgement, and righteousness, the same shall keep his soul alive: 28 when he examines [himself], and turns back from all his trespasses, he shall live, and shall not die. > >29 But the house of Israel say, The ways of the Lord are perverse. Are my ways not right, and your ways perverse rather, O house of Israel? Are not rather your ways perverse? > >30 Therefore: I shall judge a man according to his ways, thou house of Israel, says the Lord God. Repent, and turn from all your transgressions, and your sin shall not be an obstacle to you. 31 Cast off from yourselves all of your transgressions wherein you have transgressed, and create for yourselves a new heart, and a new spirit: for what reason would you then die, O house of Israel? > >32 For it is not my desire that anyone should die, says the Lord God: turn therefore, and live! This seems to teach that sin directly corresponds to condemnation, and righteous living directly corresponds to life. However, this would seem to be at odds with the Protestant doctrine of *simul justus et peccator* (at once a sinner and just[ified]). Question -- How do Protestants interpret this passage? I would like to anticipate a couple responses: - 'Keeping the law perfectly' clearly isn't in view here, since God expects people to be able to keep his statutes in general: it must therefore refer to an attitude of holding them as necessary and as pertaining to justification, *even if* you fall short (for which repentance is here recommended). In other words, the space given for repentance doesn't make them not necessary for justification. - This is not about capital punishment under the Mosaic Law, but justification—life and death of the soul: "Therefore I [God] will judge you according to your ways." "A new heart and a new spirit."2 However, feel free to challenge these. Thanks in advance. --- 1 Avoids doctrinally relevant 'surprises' pertaining to translation. 2 This need not be conflated with a later dispensation in the New Covenant era (He's speaking to people in Ezekiel's time, and expecting them to obey) or regeneration proper. In context it simply means here turning your life around.

Upon being referred to the statements of Thomas Aquinas in _Summa Theologia_, I read this: > It is written (Ezekiel 44:2): "This gate shall be shut, it shall not be opened, and no man shall pass through it; because the Lord the God of Israel hath entered in by it." Expounding these words, Augustine says in a sermon (De Annunt. Dom. iii): "What means this closed gate in the House of the Lord, except that Mary is to be ever inviolate? What does it mean that 'no man shall pass through it,' save that Joseph shall not know her? And what is this--'The Lord alone enters in and goeth out by it'--except that the Holy Ghost shall impregnate her, and that the Lord of angels shall be born of her? And what means this--'it shall be shut for evermore'--but that Mary is a virgin before His Birth, a virgin in His Birth, and a virgin after His Birth?" It seems to me that the context of this passage is about the temple that Ezekiel is to have built than any idea about the future. Indeed, the vision takes Ezekiel to other gates and other parts of the temple. I cannot find any New Testament writer (or subject) who alludes to this text. Why would someone conclude that this passage is about Mary, the Mother of Jesus?

Exodus 20:5 (NASB) says, > You shall not worship [idols] or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, But Ezekiel 18:20 (NASB) says > The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father’s iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son’s iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself. How are these two passages reconciled?

> NIV Ezekiel 37: > > 24 My servant David will be king over them, and they will all have > one shepherd. They will follow my laws and be careful to keep my > decrees. 25 **They will live in the land I gave to my servant Jacob, the > land where your ancestors lived. They and their children and their > children’s children will live there forever, and David my servant will > be their prince forever.** And are the "laws" the Torah?