The Blood of Bulls and Goats

If you're anything like me, you are anxiously looking forward to the Rapture and the events that follow it, especially the Millennial Kingdom. That's when we will literally rule and reign with Christ right here on good old terra firma, which will have been restored to a veritable paradise.

It seems, however, that many people within the Church, even among the small and dwindling percentage that rightly understand that there will even be such a thing as a Millennial Kingdom, don't fully grasp certain things about the coming kingdom that are given to us in Scripture, and that is the reason for this article.

As I've stated in the past, I write articles for this website first and foremost to teach myself. The Father knows I learn best by writing, so He places topics on my heart and I do my best to follow the Spirit's leading and crank out my best effort on whatever He's led me to. If others can benefit in some small way from what I write, that's wonderful, and I give God all the praise and glory for it. Well, this article is no exception.

As I studied Ezekiel 38–39 last month in writing about the Battle of Gog-Magog and how the Rapture must come before its conclusion, I got pulled into a study of the rest of the book of Ezekiel for the first time in a rather long time. Yeah, the rest of Ezekiel.

New Flash: Guess what?! There are still nine more chapters left in Ezekiel after the battle of Gog-Magog!

Ezekiel 40–48: Few ever talk about it. Even fewer ever preach about it. And I am convinced that fewer still properly understand it.

As I did so, I finally came to realize something about the Millennial Kingdom that, to be perfectly blunt, blew my hair back. At the same time, it made me realize that I didn't possess as mature an understanding of the nature and purposes of the Levitical sacrificial system under the Law of Moses as I thought I did. The reason I say that is because I learned something about the kingdom that had never quite penetrated my consciousness before, and I hope I can communicate it to you clearly.

My goal in this article is to lay out for you why the following statements are 100 percent true concerning Ezekiel's vision in chapters 40–48:

1. Ezekiel is describing a literal future temple.
2. The time frame of Ezekiel 40–48 is the Millennial Kingdom.
3. There will be real animal sacrifices during the Millennial Kingdom.

In regard to no. 3, I want to gently bring you face to face with the reality that these sacrifices will not be merely ceremonial in nature:

The animal sacrifices offered in the Millennial Temple during the Millennial Kingdom will be both essential and efficacious, yet they will not detract from Christ's work of atonement for our sin...not one molecule.

Easily the most controversial of the above is no. 3, so do me a favor and lock your pitchfork in the closet before proceeding. My goal is not to shock you or stir up arguments—my goal is to help you gain a deeper, more mature, and more scripturally grounded understanding of the nature of the Millennial Kingdom. Why? Because we're going to be an integral part of it in just a few short years, that's why. And if you can hang with me till the end of the article, I hope you will agree that it was worth the effort.

Hey, that's what it says:

1. Ezekiel is describing a literal future temple.

The book of Ezekiel is actually a series of visions, with chapters 40–48 representing the final vision of the book. Ezekiel's final vision has long been extremely controversial (which explains why it's seldom preached on), especially for those who hold to a dispensational premillennial view of Scripture. These final nine chapters of Ezekiel have been caustically referred to as the Achilles heel of dispensationalism by those (such as the Roman Catholic Church) who would spiritualize it into Malto Meal.

Speaking of which, there are several competing interpretations of Ezekiel 40–48, and the most widely held among them do exactly that.

First of all, some believe Ezekiel is describing the first temple, or Solomon's Temple...all while ignoring the abundance of contradicting details in their respective descriptions. Fail.

If you doubt what I say, just brew yourself an extra stout cup of coffee and compare the details of Ezekiel 40–43 with 1 Kings 6 and 2 Chronicles 3–4.

Others believe Ezekiel is describing the second temple, or Zarubbabel's Temple. Fail, and for the same reason. There are creative variations on both of the above, and they all fall to the ground with an equally loud thud. There is no evidence whatsoever that any temple ever built anywhere on earth at any time in history matches the description of Ezekiel's Temple.

Another popular view sees the entire vision as a sort of prophetic parable, and sincerely attempts to pay due respect to a portion of God's Word, but without going to the extreme of interpreting it (gulp) literally. (After all, doing so will brand one as a dispensationalist, a Hawthornesque fate that requires one to sew a scarlet "D" to one's lapel.) This interpretation sees the vision as a prophetic/figurative depiction of God's promise to dwell with His people, a vison intended to bring comfort to Ezekiel's fellow exiles during their 70-year Babylonian captivity.

The obvious problem is the massive number of exacting details given in Ezekiel's vision—exacting (and completely unnecessary) details that apparently have meanings that only the most wildly imaginative of Bible scholars have been able to guess at...and guess they do.

Arguably the most widespread view of Ezekiel 40–48 and the temple described therein is the allegorical view, which sees it as symbolizing Christ's finished work of atonement and God's promises being fulfilled in the Church (which, of course, has replaced Israel as God's people). This has been the view held by the Roman Catholic Church for many centuries, as well as most of the Protestant Reformers.

The first difficulty with this view is what I have already stated—why the overkill in terms of mundane, mind-numbing details? Catholic and Reformed scholars through the ages have worn themselves slick trying to come up with creative ways to interpret the cornucopia of minute details in these nine chapters, and the results are about the closest thing to entertainment you'll find coming from such learned men.

Plus, for the umpteen millionth time, the Church is not Israel and Israel is not the Church, and the thickest smoke and the most highly polished mirrors that claim otherwise can be flatly and resoundingly refuted from the plain text of Scripture.

Last but not least, we have the literal interpretation, long championed by premillennial dispensationalists, who almost by definition hold to a pretribulational view of the Rapture. These are the folks who insist on interpreting Scripture as literally as common sense and context allow. These people go by the motto:

"When the plain sense of Scripture makes good sense, seek no other sense—lest you end up with nonsense."

That's all well and good in most cases, but admittedly Ezekiel 40–48 has proven to be an exegetical minefield for even the most scripturally adroit dispensationalists, and here's why: A literal interpretation of this portion of Scripture would seem to undermine the essence of the gospel. And that would be the absolute sufficiency and efficacy of Christ's one-time atonement for sin two thousand years ago.

There are several reasons why I am completely satisfied that we can take God at His Word and interpret Ezekiel 40–48 as describing a literal future temple (and I say "future" because, as I said, no temple matching its description has ever existed in history).

First of all, Ezekiel spends several chapters on a skull-numbing plethora of minute technical details concerning the temple's construction. In fact, it's just as skull-numbing as the details given in Scripture for the ark that saved Noah and his family from the Flood.

And they built it.

It's just as skull-numbing as the details given for the original tabernacle in the days of Moses.

And they built it.

It's just as skull-numbing as the details given for Solomon's Temple.

And they built it.

Oh, but Ezekiel's Temple?

Build it?! Don't be ridiculous! It's clearly just pie-in-the-sky allegory.

Ezekiel is told (Ezek. 40:4; 43:11) to reveal the details of this vision to the people of Israel. Now, when the Israelites saw these detailed plans, how would you expect them to interpret them? Do you expect me to believe they would have understood that this was merely a typological picture of God dwelling among His people, or that it symbolized the work of a future Messiah in some kind of spiritual body that would be called the "Church"?

Help me out: If you want me to believe that this degree of minute detail is symbolic, then help me out here. How do I interpret the fact that there are seven steps that lead up to the south gate (Ezek. 40:26), but eight steps that lead to the gateways of the inner court (Ezek. 40:31)? What's the spiritual takeaway from that? How does this inform my understanding of how God will dwell among His people some fine day? What insight does this give me as to the function of the Church on earth, or how the blessings promised God's Chosen People have been summarily transferred to the body of Christ in some mysterious (and unscriptural) manner?

It is clear that the degree of detail used in Ezekiel's description of the temple virtually shouts at us for a literal interpretation, while an allegorical one leaves us adrift in ocean of alleged "symbols" with nothing substantial in sight to pin them to.

I am convinced that the primary reason people feel compelled to interpret Ezekiel 40–48 allegorically is because interpreting it literally brings them uncomfortably up close and personal with a radioactive bit of reality that we'll get to in a moment. But first, let's see if we can settle an issue that seems to confuse a few people, and that's the issue of when.

He's not the only one: Incidentally, Ezekiel is not the only Old Testament prophet who speaks of a future temple during the Millennial Kingdom. Joel (Joel 3:18) and Isaiah (Isa. 2:2–4; 60:13) also speak of a sanctuary that will stand during the 1,000-year reign of Christ. But Ezekiel gives us the blueprints.

...and that's why they call it the "Millennial" Temple:

2. The time frame of Ezekiel 40–48 is the Millennial Kingdom.

Since no temple like that described in Ezekiel 40–48 has ever been built in history, that leaves us with four basic time frames during which Ezekiel's Temple could conceivably exist:

(a) Any time between now and the beginning of the Tribulation.
(b) The Tribulation itself.
(c) The Millennial Kingdom that follows the Tribulation.
(d) The eternal state that follows the Millennial Kingdom.

We can dispense with (d) right off the bat, because Revelation 21 makes it reasonably clear that no impurity of any kind will exist in the eternal state. In the time of Ezekiel's Temple, however, sin and impurity must still exist because throughout Ezekiel 43–46 we clearly have repeated references to priests offering sacrifices to cleanse that ritual impurity. So scratch (d).

As far as (a) and (b) are concerned, remember that the purpose of the Tribulation is to rain judgment on the Christ-rejecting nations of the world, and to purge Israel and bring forth a believing remnant who will ultimately embrace Christ as their Messiah. Why? So when Christ returns at the Second Coming they can be ushered alive into the Millennial Kingdom, where God will once again dwell with His people on earth in a temple, just as...uhm, described in Ezekiel 40–48.

Don't look now, but (a) and (b) just got nipped in the bud.

Now, if you want to stubbornly cling to (b) and insist on placing Ezekiel's Temple in the Tribulation period, consider this:

The Shekinah glory of God will take up residence in Ezekiel's Temple from the beginning. The result?

Since the very presence of God will dwell in Ezekiel's Temple, no one who is uncircumcised in heart will ever enter it.

On the other hand, we have this:

These verses are all describing the same event: the Antichrist's cotillion, better known as the abomination of desolation. The man of sin will enter the temple and defile it, presenting himself as God.

This is at the midpoint of the seven-year Tribulation, and will effectively mark the beginning of its second half, often called the Great Tribulation. Since at that point Israel will reject the Antichrist as their Messiah (whom they are convinced will not have a divine nature), Satan's man will launch a wave of persecution against the Jewish people that will make the Holocaust look like a handful of punks spray-painting swastikas on Jewish headstones.

Now, in your considered scriptural opinion:

Q. Does the Antichrist qualify as someone who is "uncircumsized in heart"?

A. Duh...

This proves, at least to my satisfaction, that the temple that will exist during the Tribulation—the one the Antichrist enters and defiles—cannot be the same temple described in Ezekiel 40–48, and so Ezekiel's Temple cannot be the temple that exists during Daniel's 70th Week.

And that leaves us with (c). There is in fact widespread agreement among dispensational scholars that Ezekiel 40–48 is set completely within the time frame of the Millennial Kingdom.

So, yeah...that's why they call it the "Millennial" Temple.

The blood of bulls and goats

3. There will be real animal sacrifices during the Millennial Kingdom.

Yep. Here's a little taste:

Burnt offerings, sin offerings, and blood sprinkling, oh my! Yikes! It sounds like the Law of Moses all over again, doesn't it?

He's not the only one: By the way, Ezekiel is not the only Old Testament prophet who speaks of sacrifices during the Millennial Kingdom. Isaiah (Isa. 56:7), Jeremiah (Jer. 33:18), Zechariah (Zech. 14:16–21), and Malachi (Mal. 3:3–4) also speak of sacrifices being offered during the 1,000-year reign of the Messiah on earth. And this begs the question: Why would five of Israel's prophets speak of such things if we were not meant to interpret them literally?

Welcome to the crux of the issue. This is without a doubt the primary reason why for the past two millennia the vast majority of the Church has defaulted to some type of allegorical interpretation of Ezekiel 40–48, or knocked themselves silly trying to force it to be one of the historical temples, or just gone glassy-eyed and wandered off to study something else:

Animal sacrifices...in the Millennial Kingdom?!

Say it ain't so! As soon as many born-again believers today are confronted with this idea (which exceedingly few have been, as far as I can tell), their reaction is as classic as it is predictable:

"WHAT?! Do you even KNOW what Christ did on the cross?! I can't wait to hear how you're gonna twist this: 'For it is NOT POSSIBLE that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.' Ring any bells? Do you even UNDERSTAND the gospel?!"

This is the reaction you can expect from other believers when you try to tell them there will genuine, blood-and-guts animal sacrifices offered in the Millennial Temple all throughout the Millennial Kingdom. If you say this to a believer today, I suggest you stand back because his head is liable to explode. And after he gathers up the scattered blobs of his cerebrum, he will no doubt flip to the book of Hebrews and proceed to rip you a new one without ever bothering to consider what all of God's Word actually says.

Go ahead—ask me how I know this.

Now, when a lot of believers get their minds around the fact that Ezekiel clearly stipulates that there will be animal sacrifices offered in the Millennial Temple during the Millennial Kingdom, they instinctively assume they must be memorial in nature—just ceremonial, nothing more. Nothing like the real McCoy in the Old Testament or anything.

They blithely assume these sacrifices must be something ceremonial that just points back to the cross, or that reminds us of Christ's perfect work of atonement (which in a sense they will, but there's more to it than that). They liken them to Communion, which as Jesus says in Luke 22:19, is to be done "in remembrance of me." That's exactly what I thought too, even as I set to work on this article.

But as I began to study this out, I quickly realized that I was dead wrong.

"After all," the dispensationalist's argument goes, "didn't the Old Testament sacrifices point forward to the cross? That must be it—they must be meant as a memorial that looks back and reminds us of what Christ did! They certainly can't be efficacious in any way, right? After all, that would blatantly contradict the book of Hebrews, wouldn't it?"

Indeed it would:

It would indeed contradict the book of Hebrews, if the animal sacrifices Ezekiel is describing had the power to remove the sin from and cleanse the consciences of individuals, as does the precious blood of Jesus.

It's just like Paul said—nothing has changed, and it never will. The blood of bulls and goats couldn't remove sin in the Old Testament, it can't today, and it certainly won't be able to in the Millennial Kingdom. It never could and it never will, because God never intended it to—He left that task to His Son.

OK, but if that's true—and it is true, then what in the world is the story with these "essential and efficacious" animal sacrifices in Ezekiel 40–48?

Correcting assumptions

Before we go any further, there are two key misconceptions that most believers have concerning (a) the animal sacrifices of the Old Testament and (b) the fact that they will be continued in some fashion in the Millennial Kingdom that make it impossible for them to properly understand Ezekiel 40–48, and I want to shed some light on both.

1. Many people assume that all the sacrifices in the Old Testament were meant for the purpose of removing sin, as in personal moral guilt.

As a result, they jump to the conclusion that the sacrifices in Ezekiel 40–48 must be meant to do likewise, and so when someone tries to tell them about it (like I'm doing now), jerk goes the knee and out comes the pitchfork.

This is factually untrue, however, and all one has to do is read a bit of the Old Testament to confirm this. Many of the animal sacrifices under the Law of Moses were meant to purge ceremonial or ritual uncleanness, and the reason is quite simple:

A holy God was dwelling among a sinful people.

First and foremost, He had to make His people understand that the God they served was holy beyond their fleshly comprehension—and the blood sacrifice of innocent animals to cleanse from external uncleanness the people and things that approached Him was the way He chose to do it. The blood of innocent animals was required to cleanse from external ritual impurity any person who entered His presence or facility that was used in His service.

For example, as you read the Old Testament, you see numerous references to "sin offerings." Of course, Christians see these and automatically assume the purpose of all such "sin offerings" was the removal of sin. I mean, why else would they call them "sin offerings," right?

But this is not necessarily the case. For example:

These are part of the instructions meant for a woman who had given birth, because after she delivered the baby she was considered ritually unclean. Note that she needed both a burnt offering and a sin offering to be cleansed from her external ritual impurity.

So...it's a sin to have a baby?

Obviously not. This "sin offering" had nothing whatsoever to do with sin, and it's the same with many of the other various sacrifices and offerings prescribed under the Levitical law. Many were meant to purify people and things from external, ceremonial impurity, not internal, spiritual impurity, and some scholars are of the opinion that "purification offering" might have been a more appropriate rendering of the Hebrew than "sin offering," but I won't argue the point.

As I mentioned, the animal sacrifices during the Millennial Kingdom will not be mere ceremony, or done as a memorial—they will be both essential and efficacious, and here's an example of what makes me say that:

Here in Ezekiel 43, instructions are being given concerning the consecration of the altar in the Millennial Temple, and pay careful attention to what the sprinkling of the blood of the sacrificed bull does:

It cleanses and makes atonement for the altar.

It cleanses. It makes atonement. Some translations read "purges," and the Hebrew word used is kaphar, the verb form of the noun kippur, as in Yom Kippur—the Day of Atonement. Understand that this is precisely the same terminology used throughout the book of Leviticus. The verb kaphar, normally translated as "atone," is in fact used in the Old Testament to refer to the removal of sin; but be aware that it is also used to mean to cover over, wipe away, or purge external ritual uncleanness.

That's the nature of the "atonement" being made in Ezekiel 40–48: The blood of bulls and goats is not removing the internal impurity of sin or cleansing the conscience of anyone—it is covering over or purging the ritual uncleanness of sinful people entering His presence and the potential "contamination" of inanimate objects being used in His service.

In other words, are these animal sacrifices during the Millennial Kingdom "efficacious" and "expiatory"?

Some things never change: This is the root of the problem with Christians trying to gain a proper understanding of Ezekiel 40–48: The only kind of "atonement" we know is the perfect atonement for our sin that Christ accomplished on the cross. We have no experience with anything else, and as a result all this "cleansing of ritual impurity" business that was a way of life for Israel is alien to us. We really don't get it, and casually assume that every aspect of the spiritual economy of Israel under the Old Covenant is dead and buried. But that's simply not true. During the Millennial Kingdom, God will be just as holy as He was in the Old Testament, the contagion of sin will still exist in the world just as it did in the Old Testament, and that will necessitate the cleansing of external ritual impurity in order to approach Him, worship Him, and serve him—just as it did in the Old Testament.

Anyway, pardon me for pointing out the obvious, but that's not an empty ceremony or a meaningless memorial—it's efficacious. It does something—and it's something that must be done. And unless and until it's done, individuals will be unfit to approach Him and objects will be unfit for use in serving and worshiping Him. So it's essential.

Ritual impurity had to be cleansed by the blood of innocent animals in the Old Testament, and ritual impurity will have to be cleansed by the blood of innocent animals in the Millennial Kingdom for the exact same reason:

A holy God will again be dwelling among a sinful people.

Although the Millennial Kingdom is not a total reversion to the Old Covenant, this is one of the common denominators that connects the spiritual economy under the Law of Moses with that of the Millennial Kingdom.

2. Many people assume that reinstituting sacrifices would be a wholesale return to the Law of Moses that would denigrate the cross of Christ.

People who haven't read Ezekiel 40–48 carefully, that is, because this is also factually untrue. There are highly significant differences between the spiritual economy described in Ezekiel's vision that will exist during the Millennial Kingdom and that which existed under the Law of Moses. For example, according to Ezekiel 40–48, in the Millennial Kingdom:

• There is no golden lampstand.
• There is no table of shewbread.
• There is no veil.
• There is no ark of the covenant.
• There is no mercy seat.
• There is no high priest.
• There is no Day of Atonement.

All of these are deeply meaningful, and an in-depth discussion of their significance would constitute a topic for a whole new article. For the present discussion, however, suffice to say they have been rendered obsolete in the wake of Christ's perfect work of atonement that He accomplished first at Calvary and subsequently in the temple in heaven. Arguably the most worthy of being singled out for special attention, however, is the last one:

Although Passover and the Feast of Tabernacles are both specifically mandated (Ezek. 45:21, 25), there is no mention of anything resembling the Day of Atonement.

This is huge, because that was the one day of the year when the high priest would enter the Holy of Holies and, after making atonement for himself, sprinkle the blood of the sacrifice on the mercy seat on the ark of the covenant, thus making atonement for the sins of the people. Sins—internal, spiritual impurities, not just external, ritual impurities. And the significance is mighty hard to miss:

Christ's finished work of atonement on the cross
fulfilled the Day of Atonement with thundering finality.

In fact, as you read Hebrews 9–10, it is the Day of Atonement and its attendant priestly duties that figure prominently in the discussion of the eternal perfection of Christ's one-time work of atonement for our sin:

The Day of Atonement obviously foreshadowed what Christ accomplished with His death and resurrection, and nothing can ever detract from that.

So, people who jump to the conclusion that a reinstitution of any sort of animal sacrifices during the Millennial Kingdom represents a full-blown regression to the Law of Moses are simply mistaken—the plain text of Scripture makes it crystal clear that it is no such thing.

The Millennial Kingdom will be neither a mere continuation of the New Covenant, nor a full reversion to the Old. It will involve certain elements of the Old Covenant still necessary under Israel's theocracy, but will also be based on certain realities of the New Covenant—realities emanating from the shed blood of the Lamb of God.

Well, look who crawled out of the woodwork: Notice that not only is there no Day of Atonement in the Millennial Kingdom, but neither is there any mention of the Feast of Pentecost in Ezekiel 40–48. I find this particularly intriguing, because even though it doesn't prove any such thing, in my humble opinion it at least tosses a log on the fire of the argument that the final, complete fulfillment of Pentecost will be none other than Christ catching away the Church to be with Him at the Rapture prior to the Tribulation, and so obviously prior to the Millennial Kingdom. I realize that Pentecost is passed for 2018, and that a good number of people were all fired up about the possibility of Raptecost. But now that it's passed, I'm patiently waiting for the Raptashanah folks to start crawling back out of the woodwork to hold sway...at least for the next six months. =;)

"When I see the blood..."

Let's face it—anybody who knows the Bible from a bag of donuts can tell you that no one has ever been, is now, or ever will be saved by the blood of bulls and goats. But in Old Testament days under the Law of Moses, how were people saved, exactly? If the blood of the sacrifice that the high priest sprinkled on the mercy seat on the Day of Atonement actually made atonement for the sins of the people, and that's exactly what God's Word says it did, then how should we—as born-again believers who are washed in the blood—think of this in the light of clear teaching in the book of Hebrews and other New Testament epistles?

Let's review: How were people saved in the Old Testament?

In a word, faith. Faith in God and a heart response to whatever He had revealed to them up to that point, and obedience to the same. So what had God revealed to people of Israel, say, in the early days of the Law of Moses?

It's not a trivial question, because many Christians casually assume that ever since Moses received the law on Mt. Sinai, the Jews have been looking forward to a Messiah who would come to earth to die to redeem them from their sins.

Wrong answer. All the Israelites knew in the beginning was that they were to have complete faith in God, approach Him with a broken and contrite spirit, and offer the prescribed sacrifices at the prescribed times and in the prescribed ways. If they did these things, they had faith that God would consider them righteous. In other words, they knew that if they did these things, they would receive "forgiveness"—they would receive "atonement."

But the idea of God one day sending them a Messiah to remove their sin completely through His shed blood on the cross was progressively revealed over the centuries by certain Old Testament prophets, but never fully understood or embraced by Israel as a nation. Dr. John Whitcomb explains:

People were saved, i.e. considered righteous in God's eyes, in the Old Testament in precisely the same way any one ever has been, is now, or ever will be: by faith. Faith in God, His revealed will, and His promises. In the Old Testament, His revealed will involved the offering of prescribed animal sacrifices to atone for external, ritual impurity:

In regard to internal, spiritual impurity, God said if they had faith in Him—the kind of faith that produced a broken and contrite spirit before Him and motivated them to obey His laws and offer the prescribed sacrifices in the prescribed manner, He would consider them righteous. He would "pass over" their sin (until He could remove it based on the shed blood of His Son).

We see this fundamental principle in Exodus 12:13, where it is expressed about as eloquently as it can be expressed. Shortly before their release from bondage in Egypt, God is explaining the particulars of the first Passover to Moses and Aaron and says:

"When I see the blood, I will pass over you."

• Now, in God's mind, was this actually pointing forward to what Christ would do at Calvary many centuries in the future? Absolutely.

• Did God view their faith and their humble obedience through the eternal lens of the precious blood of His Son? Absolutely.

• Did God later apply the blood of Jesus to their sins so He could remove them permanently? Absolutely.

That's why Old Testament saints had to wait in the holding tank of Paradise below the earth until Christ's work of atonement was a fait accompli before being taken to heaven with Christ at the Ascension (Eph. 4:8).

But in spite of the scriptural clues, did the Israelites fully understand all this in the centuries before the First Advent? No, and they don't understand it today! All they knew is what God said—and that was good enough for them. Love God, trust God, obey God. And the Messiah? To paraphrase the woman at the well (John 4:25):

"Aah, no worries...He'll explain everything when He gets here."

And that's their attitude to this day. As I said, the idea of a coming Messiah who would permanently atone for their sins was progressively revealed to them over the centuries through the words of the prophets, Isaiah for one:

But did Israel as a nation embrace this idea? Did the Jews as a people ever reach the point where they eagerly anticipated this future Messiah who would step out of eternity to shed His blood to reconcile them to a holy God? You already know the answer to that one:

He came to shed His blood. And they accommodated Him.

In fact, one of the things that God will do during the Millennial Kingdom will be to train and indoctrinate the people of Israel to the realities of the grace God expressed to the world through Christ—realities that the Church has had two thousand years to digest. Who are we to say how God should or should not deal with His Chosen People? God was not finished with Israel in the Old Testament, He's not finished with them now, and He certainly won't be finished with them in the Millennial Kingdom. Dr. John Whitcomb spells this out in a clear, straightforward manner:

Perfected forever

I freely admit that this was not an easy article for me to write, because the topic is deep, complex, not without controversy, and fraught with tantalizing rabbit holes that beckon seductively but aren't always so easy to resolve. And to be perfectly honest, I was so overwhelmed at times that I wanted to throw in the towel and default to something "easier."

What motivated me to keep my nose to this particular grindstone, however, was the simple fact that I genuinely wanted to explore what I was learning about Ezekiel's final vision so I could (a) make sense of it myself, and hopefully (b) effectively communicate it to others. And my sincere and humble prayer is that you might agree it was worth the effort to learn more about the spiritual economy we will play a vital role in soon and very soon.

Don't forget that in just a few years we will be back here in our glorified bodies, and we will have jobs and responsibilities—we will be running things to a large degree. The Millennial Kingdom will be our opportunity to serve the Lord in meaningful, fulfilling ways that we can't even imagine right now.

I don't know about you, but that just puts the pedal to the metal somewhere down deep in my spirit, and makes me want to know all I can about our 1,000-year reign with Christ. That's why I think it's so important that we have the most accurate, biblically based understanding of the Millennial Kingdom that we possibly can, even though God's Word does leave a some gaps to fill in as to the details of what our lives will be like.

There is much we won't know until it's time, but it's much we don't need to know until it's time.

But I sure want to know what God's Word says about it, and I'm not going to let anything stop me from doing my best to get the lay of the land in terms of what life will be like for the 1,000 years that we will rule and reign with Christ right here on earth.

And the blood of bulls and goats? Believe it or not, like it or not, that's going to be part of life in the Millennial Kingdom, and we may as well warm up to that fact. After all, it's up to us to understand God's ways, not up to Him to conform to our sometimes narrow NT-oriented expectations that all too often give short shrift to certain OT realities that may have been interrupted, but have not changed or been discarded.

And above all else, we need to understand that none of this diminishes, demeans, or detracts one iota from what Christ did for us on Calvary's tree:

Perfected forever.

Let's see the blood of bulls and goats do that.

Greg Lauer — JUN '18

Top of the page

If you like this article, share it with someone!

 JUN '18 

Site Search

Powered by:
JavaScript Kit