David,
Very compelling post. It has given me a lot to think about, and for that I thank you.
A few brief comments.
on circumcision: The verses surrounding 44:9 are judgments specific to Israel's past. To argue that the "people of Israel" are really the Church imparts (in this instance) Israel's judgment on the Church. 44:7 says "You have broken my covenant with your abominable practices." Can that/will that be said of us?
Alternately this could take the form of "This is what you did (5-
-this is what I have to say about it(9)-this is what I will do about it(10-ff)." Instead of a official statement of millennial law, it is merely the pivotal this-is-why-this-is-wrong part of God's redemption process.
On sacrifices: I agree that the sacrifices lack consistency with New Testament teachings, but I am not ready to throw away the possibility of commemorative sacrifices. I believe it is consistent with God's character to use outward rituals as a symbol for inward processes. Is that not what sacrifices were anyway ('I desire obedience, not sacrifice')?
on geography: The mountain could easily be symbolic, as it appears to be in Isaiah 2:2.
on water: I think water as a symbol of the Holy Spirit is completely consistent with Old and New Testament prophecy. I don't think it negates the possibility of a physical temple.
a random question: If the entire temple picture is representing Christ's ministry today, who are the sons, and who are the servants in 46:16-17?
Sorry, I don't know where that smiley face came from.
Haloscan. It likes them 
Matthew Henry and some of the older commentators suggest a further wrinkle: that Ezekiel's temple is a symbolic depiction of the ideal spiritual reality of Israel after the return from exile, as an anticipation of the new covenant. FWIW
My dad said something once about Ezekiel's temple as being a semi-symbolic description of a temple which the Israelites could have had had they repented and not gone into exile. I may be misremembering him, though.
J.C.
The idea of commemorative sacrifices is shown by the practice of today's Messianic Jews to incorporate Yeshua's death as "our passover" Lamb into their Passover celebrations. The Passover now celebrates the release from salvery in Egypt and release from slavery to sin.
One of the reasons that I do not remove the Jews from such prophecies is that 1. It takes too much imagination to connect all the details to the Church exclusive of the Jews as a chosen race and nation; 2. There is no empirical test by which the imagination can be verified--anybody can say anything and who's to differ; and 3. The problem is that you approach it with the idea that it must theologically represent the Church rather than letting the passage speak for itself.
If Ezekiel's prophesies had been understood by the early church as setting up a 3rd temple, the disciples would have tried to build it.
Symbolic and prophetic language does not require that you find something for every detail. For example, the moon and stars falling just represent a time of great change. Peter applied it to Christ in Acts, but the moon is still up there.
And the good thing is, no crazy preachers are breeding red heifers or starting temple funds.
Commenting by HaloScan
