eschatology

The Red Heifer| #5 — Dispensationalism and the Passing of Torah

Share

red heifer
The claims being made about the Red Heifer are problematic for the very ones making the claims!

The Red Heifer – Dispensationalism and the Passing of Torah
An Inherent Contradiction

Amidst all of the current and on-going excitement over the birth of yet another red heifer, something is being lost– conveniently lost. What is being lost? Well, on the one hand, our Dispensational friends tell us that the birth of this latest red heifer calf is proof of the imminent end of the age, the dedication of a rebuilt temple, etc. They tell us that the temple in Jerusalem cannot be dedicated without the ashes of a verified red heifer. In other words, no red heifer ashes, no restored temple! But then, on the other hand, they tell us that the Law of Moses is not in effect. Do you see the problem? It is huge, and insurmountable!

Hebrews 9:6-10 tells us that the Old Covenant cultus of the temple– based on the Law of Moses– would endure and stand valid “until the time of reformation.” That anticipated time of reformation, foretold in the OT, would be when man could enter the Most Holy Place, the presence of God. So, Torah, which mandated the red heifer sacrifice, would stand valid until the time of reformation. Hang onto that, for it is important. The question is, of course, what is that “time of reformation”?

The Red Heifer Sacrifice and the Time of Reformation

Pentecost, in his tome on Millennialism, ignores Hebrews 9:10 (as do many Dispensationalists) and the time of reformation. (Dwight Pentecost, Things to Come (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1958). This is significant because the current age cannot be the time of reformation, per millennialism. That would be to admit too much, for it would mean that all of the typological significance of that entire Old Covenant Cultus is fulfilled. It would mean that the kingdom has come! If the time of reformation has arrived, then Israel’s hope has been fulfilled, but, if that is true, Dispensationalism is falsified!

Some Dispensationalists insist that the “time of reformation” is the coming millennium. Yet, that cannot be true because that would mean the Old Covenant would of necessity be in force now and not pass until the arrival of the millennium. Hebrews 9 is emphatic: Torah would endure until the time of reformation. Here is how that would be expressed logically:

The Law of Moses, all of it, would remain valid until the time of reformation (Hebrews 9:6-10).

The time of reformation is the millennium, initiated at the Second Coming of Christ (in the future per Dispensationalism).

Therefore, the Law of Moses, all of it, will remain valid until the millennium, initiated at the Second Coming of Christ (in the future).

This is absolutely inescapable! Thus, all claims that there must currently be the birth and sacrifice of a red heifer in order to cleanse and dedicate a temple in Jerusalem of necessity says that the Law of Moses remains valid today!

The Red Heifer and the Re-imposition of the Law of Moses

The fact is that however you define “the time of reformation” Torah would or will endure until that time. This is a huge conundrum for the millennialist. (The time of reformation is likewise a huge problem for anyone saying that the Law of Moses passed at the cross. Kurt Simmons (preterist) argued that Torah passed at the cross, and that the time of reformation arrived at that point. The inherent contradictions in his arguments were glaring, and exposed in our formal written debate. The End of TorahYou can order a copy of that book here.

Let me reiterate that according to the Millennialists, without the ashes of the Red Heifer, there can be no consecration of a restored Temple. In an earlier article, we cited a YouTube video in which some so-called prophecy experts spoke of the absolute necessity of having the ashes of a red heifer in order to dedicate a Temple in Jerusalem.  So, let me say this again: no ashes– no Temple! But, where does that necessity for the ashes of a red heifer come from? Why, once again, it comes from Torah, the Law of Moses!

So, if there is a divine mandate today to have the ashes of a red heifer to dedicate a proposed Temple, then of logical necessity, this demands that the Law of Moses– every single bit of it– remains valid and binding today! This is hugely problematic for the Dispensationalists who tell us that the Law of Moses has been completely fulfilled and removed!

Thomas Ice is on record as saying: “The sacrifices of the millennium will not be a return to the Mosaic Law, since the Law has forever been fulfilled and discontinued through Christ (Romans 6:1, 15; 7:1-6; 1 Corinthians 9:20,21; 2 Corinthians 3:7-11; Galatians 4:1-7; 5:18; Hebrews 8:13; 10:1-14).” So, Ice says the Law of Moses has been removed forever. However, just a few pages earlier in that same book, Ice and Demy (his co-author) wrote: “In the millennial temple, all that was prescribed and initiated in the Old Testament ceremonial and ritual activities will come to completion and their fullest meaning.” (Thomas Ice and Timothy Demy, Prophecy Watch, Eugene, Or. 1998) 256-258). To say this is self-contradictory is a huge understatement.

The point is, to reiterate because it is so important:

The ashes of a red heifer are divinely necessary for the dedication and consecration of a restored Temple (Dispensationalism).

The Divine mandate for the ashes of the Red Heifer is found in the Law of Moses.

Therefore, the Law of Moses remains fully in force, and will remain in force until the consecration of a restored Temple.

However, to turn this argument around, based on the Dispensational view that Torah has passed, take a look at this:

The Divine mandate for the ashes of the Red Heifer is found in the Law of Moses.

But, the Law of Moses has forever been fulfilled and discontinued through Christ (Thomas Ice / Dispensationalists).

Therefore, there is no divine mandate for the ashes of a red heifer for the consecration of a restored temple.

 

In truth, there is no credence to the predictions of a restored temple. If the sacrifices of the temple are null and void, the temple itself is null and void!

To say, as Dispensationalists do, that the Law of Moses is no longer in effect nullifies any and all claims of the modern significance of the birth of a red heifer.

To claim that the ashes of a red heifer remain as a divine necessity for a rebuilt restored Jerusalem temple re-imposes the Law of Moses– every jot and every tittle!

In the first century, some Jewish Christians were forsaking Christ to return to the observance of the Old Covenant law. The Hebrews writer said that to do so was to apostatize and “crucify Christ afresh” (Hebrews 6:4-6). Lamentably, modern believers are seeking to restore that same system.

All attempts to reestablish the red heifer sacrifice are tantamount to a rejection of Christ’s sacrifice, and the New Covenant. It is to become the ultimate Judaizers!

But, there are even more problems for the Dispensational claims about the birth of this red heifer. What is being missed– or overlooked– is that the Dispensational time line / schema, does not, in any way at all, match up with what they are saying about this red heifer being a sign of the end. Nothing matches, as we will show. Be watching for that article!