He Shall Have Dominion

“consistent” literal hermeneutic, why should this be difficult? Does not
Walvoord himself open this very book with these words: “Unmistakably,
the evidence is overwhelming that God means exactly what He says as
65
prophecy after prophecy has already been literally fulfilled.” (Despite
such a statement, he can explain Jos 11:11–23 thus: “Though the Lord
was said to have fulfilled all His promises, as the Book of Judges makes
66
clear, much of the territory had not yet been possessed”! )
According to Ezekiel 45, the “millennial” sacrifices actually “make
reconciliation” (Eze 45:15, 17, 20. The prophecy uses the piel of the
67
Hebrew kaphar (as in Lev 6:30; 8:15; 16:6ff ). But Pentecost notes that
68
“the sacrifices will be memorial in character.” Yet this question needs to
be faced by self-professed literalists: what literalist, reading the phrase
“make reconciliation,” would surmise that this is only “memorial”? Where
69
is the consistent literalism here? Some dispensationalists allow that this
passage “is not to be taken literally,” but is merely “using the terms with
70
which the Jews were familiar in Ezekiel’s day.” This is convenient but
illegitimate, for it breaches the claim to “consistent” literalism.
In The New Scofield Reference Bible at Ezekiel 43:19 we read: “The
reference to sacrifices is not to be taken literally, in view of the putting
away of such offering, but is rather to be regarded as a presentation of
the worship of redeemed Israel, in her own land and in the millennial
temple, using the terms with which the Jews were familiar in Ezekiel’s
65. Walvoord, PKH, 7.
66. Walvoord, PKH, 44.
67. Often sacrifices in Scripture speak figuratively of prayer (Ps 141:2), praise
(Ps 44:6; Jer 17:26; 33:11), thanksgiving (Ps 107:22; 116:17), joy (Ps 27:6),
righteousness (Ps 4:5; 51:19), confession (Ps 66:13), contrition (Ps 51:17), and so
forth.
68. Pentecost, Things to Come, 525. See also Ryrie, Ryrie Study Bible, 1299.
69. The whole idea of a re-instituted sacrificial system is repulsive to the biblical
scheme (see Hebrews). The dispensational system presents an unnecessary
confusion here. Consider: By Christ’s appointment, the Lord’s Supper is the sign
of the new covenant (Mt 26:28; Mk 14:24; Lk 22:20; 1Co 11:25). It is to be kept
until he comes (1Co 11:25–26). But in dispensationalism, when Christ comes to
establish the new covenant with Israel for a millennium, he will do away with the
Lord’s Supper (which is the sign of the new covenant), while re-establishing the
bloody sacrificial system (which is an old covenant foreshadowing of Christ’s
redemptive labor, Heb 10:1–3) as a “memorial.” And the millennial priests will
perform this memorial in Christ’s bodily presence! See below (pp. 356–65).
70. NSRB, 888, n. 1 (at Ezek. 43:19).