Israel Sacrificing of The Red Heifer

[CrowCross]

So what?

So what if some Jews raise red heifers?
So what if some Jews sacrifice a red heifer to consecrate some ground?
So what if another temple of stone is built on the red-heifer-consecrated ground?
So what?
What should be thought of the Middle East Eye's article if we come back in two or three years, and nothing has happened?


The following question was asked at the beginning of this thread, and it's been ignored.

Where scripture indicates sacrifices to be reinstated as you suggest?

So what? In itself nothing. But, like the prediction of Israel becoming a nation back in 1948 the red heifers being sacrificed is just one of the events needed to rebuilt the predicted temple.

When in the future some sort of peace doctrine is ratified will you once again say....so what?

When Damascus is destroyed will you once again say ...so what?

 

[CrowCross]

There is no scripture in the New Testament explicitly stating anything about red heifers.

Neither does it speak of temple furniture or garments

I did not ask for a "speaks of" verse. I asked for a verse that explicitly states another temple of stone will be built. I did not ask for any scripture that could be read inferentially to say something it does not actually stated.

When a temple is presented as in the future....it can easily be assumed one has to be built.

There were two temples standing at the time the verses mentioning the abomination of desolation (Mt. 24:15), the antichrist (John's epistles) and someone declaring himself God (2 Thes. 2:4). 2 Thes. 2:4 states the lawless man will display himself as God, not the AoD or the antichrist. NONE of those verse explicitly state another temple of stone will be built.

This is still future. The anti-christ hasn't shown himself yet.

 

[Mr GLee]

So what? In itself nothing. But, like the prediction of Israel becoming a nation back in 1948 the red heifers being sacrificed is just one of the events needed to rebuilt the predicted temple.

When in the future some sort of peace doctrine is ratified will you once again say....so what?

When Damascus is destroyed will you once again say ...so what?

I would offer we must be careful how we hear who we hear or say we do.

Remember no signs were given to wonder after, which would include 1948.(the year I was born) We have prophecy the perfect sealed with 7 seals till the end of time.

Satan the king of lying signs to wonder after is still deceiving many with false prophecy adding to the perfect. Denying the warning (do not add or subtract.) . God is still sending a strong delusion so that they might continue to wonder rather than believe prophecy .

Matthew 16:4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

It was fulfilled with the Son of man, Jesus. Again no sign was given to wonder after.

Mark 8:12And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation.

Mark 8:12And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation.

Luke 11:29And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.

John 4:48Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.

2 Corinthians 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight

 

[CrowCross]

I would offer we must be careful how we hear who we hear or say we do.

Remember no signs were given to wonder after, which would include 1948.(the year I was born) We have prophecy the perfect sealed with 7 seals till the end of time.

Satan the king of lying signs to wonder after is still deceiving many with false prophecy adding to the perfect. Denying the warning (do not add or subtract.) . God is still sending a strong delusion so that they might continue to wonder rather than believe prophecy .

Matthew 16:4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

It was fulfilled with the Son of man, Jesus. Again no sign was given to wonder after.

Mark 8:12And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation.

Mark 8:12And he sighed deeply in his spirit, and saith, Why doth this generation seek after a sign? verily I say unto you, There shall no sign be given unto this generation.

Luke 11:29And when the people were gathered thick together, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.

John 4:48Then said Jesus unto him, Except ye see signs and wonders, ye will not believe.

2 Corinthians 5:7 (For we walk by faith, not by sight

If you say so.

 

[Josheb]

Neither does it speak of temple furniture or garments

When a temple is presented as in the future....it can easily be assumed one has to be built.

This is still future. The anti-christ hasn't shown himself yet.

Only in the mind of the modern futurist and nothing they ever imagine ever comes true. There is a handful of red cows in the West Bank and some Dispensational Zionist missionary thinks they are "the signal to rebuild the Third Temple," when that may or may not be true. We'll ALL know it's not true in two or three years when those cows either exceed the dedication period or are slain for food. Once that happens, we'll also know that article was sheer speculation that baited the Christians looking for signs of things nowhere stated in scripture.

There is not scripture in the New Testament explicitly stating anything about red heifers.

Yes, but the red heifer is necessary for consecrating the temple grounds prior to it getting built.​

There is no scripture in the entire Bible explicitly stating another temple of stone will be built.

Yes, but a temple must be built if the fest of booths is going to happen, and that feast requires a temple.​

There is no explicit mention of future feast of booths in the New Testament, especially not in the 21st century.

Yes, but who will the antichrist enter the temple and declare himself God if there's no temple?​

Well, for one, that is not an answer to the point previously made. The antichrist is never said to enter the temple; it's the lawless man that does that. It's not the AoD, either and you're getting very sloppy with scripture combining those three as if they are all the same person when scripture never states any such thing. Besides, there were two temples standing when Paul wrote about the lawless man entering the temple and his original audience knew what was holding back that guy.

This is still future. The anti-christ hasn't shown himself yet.​

I thought we were talking about the eschatological significance of five red heifers.


This is what passes for intelligent discourse among modern futurists.


There is no explicit scripture for what they imagine will happen. All the beliefs are created by reading scripture inferentially and ignoring or dismissing what is stated. When asked for scripture and shown scripture the common response is to repeatedly change the subject or attack the other person (both happened here in this thread). It then proves impossible to have a cogent topical conversation with modern futurists.

Within two or three years everyone, regardless of their eschatological orientation, will know whether this article about the eschatological significance of five red heifers has any merit. We'll also then know whether those defending modern futurist based on this article were correct. At that time the veracity of this thread will not be a matter of debate and only the most ideologically idolatrous modern futurist will dissent.

I can wait.



In the interim I exhort all the modern futurists, Dispensational Premillennialists, pre-tribulation rapturists, and Zionists to be more discerning: just because some comrade posts an article on the internet does not mean it has any veracity. There are people within modern futurism that prey on modern futurists for attention and financial support. They prey upon an already-existing vulnerability in the heart and mind of the commoner, the desire for signs.

James 1:14
But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.


The desire for a red heifer does not make every article on red heifers eschatological.

 

[CrowCross]

Only in the mind of the modern futurist and nothing they ever imagine ever comes true. There is a handful of red cows in the West Bank and some Dispensational Zionist missionary thinks they are "the signal to rebuild the Third Temple," when that may or may not be true. We'll ALL know it's not true in two or three years when those cows either exceed the dedication period or are slain for food. Once that happens, we'll also know that article was sheer speculation that baited the Christians looking for signs of things nowhere stated in scripture.

There is not scripture in the New Testament explicitly stating anything about red heifers.

Yes, but the red heifer is necessary for consecrating the temple grounds prior to it getting built.​

There is no scripture in the entire Bible explicitly stating another temple of stone will be built.

Yes, but a temple must be built if the fest of booths is going to happen, and that feast requires a temple.​

There is no explicit mention of future feast of booths in the New Testament, especially not in the 21st century.

Yes, but who will the antichrist enter the temple and declare himself God if there's no temple?​

Well, for one, that is not an answer to the point previously made. The antichrist is never said to enter the temple; it's the lawless man that does that. It's not the AoD, either and you're getting very sloppy with scripture combining those three as if they are all the same person when scripture never states any such thing. Besides, there were two temples standing when Paul wrote about the lawless man entering the temple and his original audience knew what was holding back that guy.

This is still future. The anti-christ hasn't shown himself yet.​

I thought we were talking about the eschatological significance of five red heifers.


This is what passes for intelligent discourse among modern futurists.


There is no explicit scripture for what they imagine will happen. All the beliefs are created by reading scripture inferentially and ignoring or dismissing what is stated. When asked for scripture and shown scripture the common response is to repeatedly change the subject or attack the other person (both happened here in this thread). It then proves impossible to have a cogent topical conversation with modern futurists.

Within two or three years everyone, regardless of their eschatological orientation, will know whether this article about the eschatological significance of five red heifers has any merit. We'll also then know whether those defending modern futurist based on this article were correct. At that time the veracity of this thread will not be a matter of debate and only the most ideologically idolatrous modern futurist will dissent.

I can wait.



In the interim I exhort all the modern futurists, Dispensational Premillennialists, pre-tribulation rapturists, and Zionists to be more discerning: just because some comrade posts an article on the internet does not mean it has any veracity. There are people within modern futurism that prey on modern futurists for attention and financial support. They prey upon an already-existing vulnerability in the heart and mind of the commoner, the desire for signs.

James 1:14
But each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire.


The desire for a red heifer does not make every article on red heifers eschatological.

With all due respect, that was a lot of nothing....Sorry.

You keep missing the point as you try to force your point.

IF, IF, IF there is going to be a 3rd temple...a red heifer is required for purification.....but you fight that point.

They have the red heifer and they have even built an alter. FACT. This is one of MANY supporting points that show the "modern futurist" view as you call it....just may be occurring TODAY.

How will it finally play out??? Don't know.

So, tell us, according to your eschatology...what's next?

 

[Josheb]

With all due respect, that was a lot of nothing....Sorry. You keep missing the point as you try to force your point. IF, IF, IF there is going to be a 3rd temple...a red heifer is required for purification.....but you fight that point. They have the red heifer and they have even built an alter. FACT. This is one of MANY supporting points that show the "modern futurist" view as you call it....just may be occurring TODAY.

How will it finally play out??? Don't know.

Ad hominem, rank speculation, no scripture, non sequitur, self-contradiction and..... shifting onus:

So, tell us, according to your eschatology...what's next?

No.

I know how to stay on topic. This op is about whether or not those red heifers are eschatologically relevant, and my answer is, "No," and I have explained how and why the answer is no. There are no New Testament scriptures explicitly reporting anything about red heifers and there is nothing in the entire Bible explicitly stating another temple of stone will ever be built so there's no scriptural reason to think those red heifers have any eschatological import at all. The matter will be decided within a year or three and then everyone will know. Our respective eschatologies won't matter. The cows will either have been sacrificed or not, the land consecrated or not.

If you, or anyone else cares to respond specifically to that then I'll consider the responses but posts like, "Dude, get a grip," and "that was a lot of nothing," are worthless.







Tangential to the specific question asked in the op is the fact it invariably proves impossible to discuss eschatology with modern futurists, and the impossibility exists for several reasons: 1) they don't have any explicit scriptures for what they believe, 2) they are so ideologically loyal to their eschatology objectivity is lost, 3) they are incapable of sticking to any one specific subject, and/or 4) they invariably attack anyone who disagrees. Combine that with the reality not a single modern futurist prediction has ever come true and many of their leaders are profiteers who never acknowledge their mistakes and are never held accountable for them, and the result is greater impossibility, not more likelihood of cogent discourse.

This particular op should have been easy to discuss because there's absolutely nothing proving those particular five cows have any eschatological significance and any ensuing discussion of modern futurism would be much more authentic had the modern futurists simply acknowledged the specific unlikeliness of those five cows. None of you did so. You all undermined your own position!

And that, in turn, goes to evidence my third point: There's a certain vulnerability in the heart and mind of the modern futurist that makes them susceptible to thinking any article speculating end times relevance is true, correct, and/or veracious. They are not all correct. Modern futurists should at least try to be objective, even with their own eschatology. There is a lot of rank, baseless, meaningless speculation out there and discussion board conversation about most of them should be short, sweet, and decisive. You all undermined your own position and considered me an adversary when I was trying to help.


Bet those last few words never occurred to either of you.

 

[CrowCross]

I know how to stay on topic. This op is about whether or not those red heifers are eschatologically relevant, and my answer is, "No,

Well, you're wrong.

It may not be these heifers..but they're important and one box to check off in order to build the temple.

 

[Josheb]

Well, you're wrong.

You have yet to prove that.

It may not be these heifers...

That's the truest thing you've posted in this thread.

....but they're important and one box to check off in order to build the temple.

If it is not these heifers then they are not important, and you've just contradicted yourself.

If what you meant was some red heifer at some time is going to be important than my response is the same: There is absolutely nothing in the NT about red heifers and nothing in the entire Bible explicitly stating another temple will be built, so the modern futurist position is entirely inferential. The particular inferential reading modern futurists impose on the Bible is one invented in the 19th century, which is one not shared with the rest of Christendom. There is a long history of modern futurists doing what this missionary has done (speculating about signs of the end times) fruitlessly. None of them have ever been correct in 200 years (that's a long time).

There is a better way: believe the Bible exactly as written without all the 19th century dispensationalist biases.


This thread is drawing to a close. The question asked in the op has been answered and no one giving and affirmative answer has been able to prove that answer because it's speculative. Others may drop into the thread but in the end, nothing will be proven and the modern futurists will have supported each other without ever proving the heifers are eschatologically significant. In two or three years we'll all know one way or another. My money is on those cows not being ritually sacrificed to consecrate ground for a future temple.

 

[CrowCross]

You have yet to prove that.

That's the truest thing you've posted in this thread.

If it is not these heifers then they are not important, and you've just contradicted yourself.

If what you meant was some red heifer at some time is going to be important than my response is the same: There is absolutely nothing in the NT about red heifers and nothing in the entire Bible explicitly stating another temple will be built, so the modern futurist position is entirely inferential. The particular inferential reading modern futurists impose on the Bible is one invented in the 19th century, which is one not shared with the rest of Christendom. There is a long history of modern futurists doing what this missionary has done (speculating about signs of the end times) fruitlessly. None of them have ever been correct in 200 years (that's a long time).

There is a better way: believe the Bible exactly as written without all the 19th century dispensationalist biases.


This thread is drawing to a close. The question asked in the op has been answered and no one giving and affirmative answer has been able to prove that answer because it's speculative. Others may drop into the thread but in the end, nothing will be proven and the modern futurists will have supported each other without ever proving the heifers are eschatologically significant. In two or three years we'll all know one way or another. My money is on those cows not being ritually sacrificed to consecrate ground for a future temple.

Then you have no worries.

 

[Josheb]

Then you have no worries.

Never did.

 

[CrowCross]

Never did.

Good, then feel free to take the mark....if you make it that far.

 

[Josheb]

Good, then feel free to take the mark....if you make it that far.

I cannot, in the 21st century, take a mark that happened in the first, but I can ask you to stay on topic and not trash someone else's thread with constant attempts to inject non sequiturs.

If you truly believe there is a soon coming rapture, then act like it because if God judges a person by the way they post then you're not leaving the planet .

 

[eclipseEventSigns]

I would offer we must be careful how we hear who we hear or say we do.

Remember no signs were given to wonder after, which would include 1948.(the year I was born) We have prophecy the perfect sealed with 7 seals till the end of time.

Not true at all. The Eclipse Event Signs which happened in 1948 were specifically God's marker that He was working with His chosen people.
However, there is no Eclipse Event Sign which is happening right now with this eclipse. The next Eclipse Event Sign is expected in 2025 - a very significant sign indeed.

 

[CrowCross]

I cannot, in the 21st century, take a mark that happened in the first, but I can ask you to stay on topic and not trash someone else's thread with constant attempts to inject non sequiturs.

The mark happened in the 1st Century????

If you truly believe there is a soon coming rapture, then act like it because if God judges a person by the way they post then you're not leaving the planet .

God doesn't judge a person by the way they post. Maybe your belief is based upon works...

 

[Josheb]

The mark happened in the 1st Century????

Yes. The book of Revelation was written to and about believers in the first century. It was written so they could and would understand what had already occurred and so they could and would anticipate events that were going to happen quickly because the time was at hand. That is what is stated in the book itself. Those who make all the audience affiliations and temporal markers say things they do not state are not reading the text exactly as written.

And that is a problem very similar to what has happened with never-ending speculations about future temples of stone. The New Testament says NOTHING about red heifers. The New Testament never states sacrifices being reinstated, and scripture as a whole never states a third temple of stone will be built. A person has to make scripture say things it does not state in order to speculate anything about red heifers and future stone temples.

God doesn't judge a person by the way they post.

Thankfully.

Maybe your belief is based upon works...

Maybe you should understand that was a joke. Maybe you should get a life outside of internet discussion boards, so jokes are recognized when they occur. Maybe you should remember who it is you are trading posts with because I've argued monergist salvation for years in multiple forums, so you know better than to make snide comments like that. And, last but not least,

Maybe you should learn how to stick to the subject specified in an op. Maybe you should make the effort not to give me fodder for comments like these . I've never worried about any rapture, separated or not, because I know Whose I am and I, therefore, know who I am. I am not a poster who constantly speculates about things that never happen, like red heifers and stone temples, nor someone who does not know how to stick to the subject: red heifers.
.

Scripture indicates the sacrifices will be reinstated before the revealing of the son of perdition

It never states any such thing.

Scripture indicates the sacrifices will be reinstated before the revealing of.... abomination that maketh desolate

It never states any such thing.

Scripture indicates the sacrifices will be reinstated before the revealing of..... the beast and his Antichrist.

It never states any such thing.

Now Israel has five red heifers and apparently without spot or blemish.

So what? There is nothing in the New Testament about red heifers and the Bible as a whole never explicitly states another temple of stone will be built (especially not in the 21st century).

Ready to begin the ritual of Sacrificing and how soon will they rebuild the third Temple.

Let them! Israel could sacrifice all the red cows they desire but that does not mean any of them have to do anything with Christian eschatology. They could build a gazillion temples and every single one of them would be faithless and disobedience works of flesh insulting God. God does not dwell in houses built by human hands. He's already built the temple He always intended. Why is it none of the modern futurists can engage any of these points?

• Where is the scripture in the New Testament stating anything about red heifers?
• Where is the scripture in the New Testament stating Old Testament sacrifices will be reinstituted?
• Where is the verse (anywhere in the Bible) explicitly stating another temple of stone will be built?
• Given the fact the answer to the above three questions is, "There are no such verses," how, then, is it modern futurists believe things not actually explicitly stated in God's word?
• Given modern futurists believe things not actually explicitly stated in scripture, why then do they bend scripture to justify their beliefs?
• Why is it when asked these questions, and when the statements of scripture are noted, and the silence of scripture is noted, the modern futurist can't stay on topic?
• Why is it, in his/her frustration facing the facts of explicit scripture, s/he resorts to ad hominem, shifting onuses, straw men, moving goal posts, appeals to purity, and an assortment of other fallacies?

Replace "red heifers" with "mark of the beast," "man of lawlessness," "the antichrist," or any number of things over which modern futurists speculate (because that is all they do), and the same exact list above gets asked and never answered. It is a horrendous way to live the Christian life.

If God wants to remove me from the planet to escape some bad events, then let Him. I cannot prevent Him from doing so. It would be my hope if I found scripture actually stating such a thing would occur, but it does not. Those who argue otherwise are the same people who have never made an accurate prognostication in two centuries worth of attempts. They are people who have proven their teaching(s) should be followed. Until such a time as God sees fit to remove me from the planet, I am happily busy doing what he's got me doing. I was created in Christ to perform works He had planned for me long before He ever saved me, and I am not leaving the planet one fraction of a nanosecond before He's done accomplishing His will and purpose through little old me. I am a Christian, not a Jew, and my view of end times is informed accordingly. I do not Judaize Christian eschatology the way modern futurists do. Give it a try. It's a much more efficacious life in Christ to live.


No red heifers wanted or needed.

 

[CrowCross]

Yes. The book of Revelation was written to and about believers in the first century. It was written so they could and would understand what had already occurred and so they could and would anticipate events that were going to happen quickly because the time was at hand. That is what is stated in the book itself. Those who make all the audience affiliations and temporal markers say things they do not state are not reading the text exactly as written.

Once again...the mark happened in the 1st century? I did notice all the harmful and painful sores which came upon the people who bore the mark.

 

[Josheb]

Once again...the mark happened in the 1st century?

Question asked and answered. You're familiar with Einstein's definition of insanity, yes?

I did notice all the harmful and painful sores which came upon the people who bore the mark.

Try sticking an emoji in there so folks know you're being rhetorical because if read as written it doesn't reflect well. And remind me, again,


What's the subject of this op?

 

[Mr GLee]

Not true at all. The Eclipse Event Signs which happened in 1948 were specifically God's marker that He was working with His chosen people.
However, there is no Eclipse Event Sign which is happening right now with this eclipse. The next Eclipse Event Sign is expected in 2025 - a very significant sign indeed.

Christianity is not astrology

Isaiah 47:13 Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy counsels. Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee

No signs were given to wonder after. Jesus said it a evil generation natural born unredeemed that do seek signs .

Believer have prophecy till the end of time

Satan the king of lying sign to wonder after is still with all power free to deceive the unredeemed he has a new one every day .His signature work

2 Thessalonians 2:9Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,

 

[Mr GLee]

Once again...the mark happened in the 1st century? I did notice all the harmful and painful sores which came upon the people who bore the mark.

1st. century mark ?