So I’ve made a few threads about Ezekiel’s Temple, how that has been giving me a bit of trouble as of late. I’m open to both a literal temple and a symbolic one, but I’m also beginning to experiment a bit with the idea that it was just a promise that wasn’t fulfilled. An Orthodox Jewish friend believes that Ezekiel 36:22-23 is proof that that Ezekiel’s Temple is something that’s going to be built no matter what because God says he’s doing it for his glory and not the Israelites’. That wouldn’t really make a difference, would it? He does everything He does for His own glory, but we still have to earn those things, right? I think the promise of the Temple could still be conditional even in light of Ezekiel 36:22-23.
seems to me that the Temple outlined in Ezekiel 40 onwards is the same one that Ezra rebuilt after the decree by Cyrus to return to Jerusalem.
Ezekiel was a contemporary to Daniel, and most probably even knew him whilst in captivity in Babylon (given Ezekiel was a priest and Daniel a prince). I would suggest that the two books written by these individuals are closely related…along with Ezra and Nehemiah.
This topic was automatically closed 6 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.