[topcat54]

You see, this is what happens when people trust their theology more than the actual words of Scripture.

You also wrote about "this is a statute forever," yet this “forever” temple and sacrifices have been gone for 2000 years. the priesthood has been scattered and is all but unrecoverable. Israel is a nation of secularists. In fact modern Israel bears little resemblance to biblical Israel.

Peter and Paul lived in a time that no longer exists, the transition time between the old covenant and the new. The temple system was a type of Jesus Christ, temporary, decaying, and about to pass away forever (Heb. 8:13).

So how is this all “forever?” Who is twisting the words of the Bible to fit their theology?

[roamer_1]

The temple system was a type of Jesus Christ, temporary, decaying, and about to pass away forever (Heb. 8:13).

But then the King will sit in the eastern (Golden) gate to break His fast every morning... The Golden Gate is reserved for Him, for His coming in and going out. That has not yet occurred.

...And the Eastern Gate has no value without the Temple, hence the Temple will be rebuilt.

[Tzfat]

priesthood has been scattered and is all but unrecoverable. I

Your information is lacking. The descendants of Aaron are the most genetically identified group in the world, Each Sabbath the descendants of Aaron read first from the Torah. Twice a year hundreds of the descendants of Aaron bless throngs that gather at the Western Wall, in accordance with Numbers 6. But all that is immaterial to you. You can read the plain words of the Almighty and explain them away... You would ignore your nose on your face if it denied Supercessionism.

[Tzfat]

the transition time between the old covenant and the new.

Whatever you say. If the Bible says something don't like (such as the whole book of Acts), then you claim it was a "transition" - y'all need to stop reading from the same script. Scripture never speaks of such a time, and only an idiot would think the first disciples LACKED such basic theological insight. No, the THEOLOGY that came after the first disciples is what was wrong. Your "faith" bears no resemblance to the faith of those who first believed. You folks quote luminaries of the antenicean age because you can't cope with the plain words of the Bible.