Who Really Stands with Israel?

American Vision ^ | 6/07/2006 | Gary DeMar

[topcat54]

David Brog has written Standing with Israel: Why Christians Support the Jewish State. The ten reviews I read on Amazon were quite favorable, and it is being advertised on WorldNetDaily. The fact that the Foreword was written by John Hagee, author of Jerusalem Countdown, From Daniel to Doomsday, Beginning of the End, and Final Dawn over Jerusalem, is a clear indication that the book’s thesis fits with the modern-day prophetic system known as dispensational premillennialism. I doubt that the book covers what this article reveals.

In my debate with Tommy Ice at American Vision’s Worldview Super Conference (May 26, 2006), Ice pointed out that one of the unique features of the dispensational system is that near the end of a future, post-rapture, seven-year tribulation period, Israel will be rescued by God. After nearly 2000 years of delayed promises, God will once again come to the rescue of His favored nation. Ice and other dispensationalists imply by this doctrine that they are Israel’s best friend, and anyone who does not adopt their way of interpreting the Bible is either anti-Semitic (Hal Lindsey) or a methodological naturalist (Tommy Ice).

In the debate, I wanted Tommy to explain how a belief in Israel’s glorious future results in the slaughter of two-thirds of the Jews living at the time the Great Tribulation nears the end of its seven-year run. I quoted the following dispensational writers to show that there is no glorious future for “all Jews who are under siege,” to use Tommy’s words, in the dispensational version of the Great Tribulation.

• According to the Tim LaHaye Prophecy Study Bible, of which Tommy is an editor, “Prior to Israel’s conversion, Zechariah [13:8] predicts that two-thirds (‘two parts’) of the Jewish people in the land will perish during the tribulation period. Only one third of the Jewish population will survive until Christ comes to establish His kingdom on earth” (991).
• In his book The Living End, Charles Ryrie writes the following in a chapter he titles “A Bloodbath for Israel”: “Jacob’s trouble [Great Tribulation] is that coming period of distress described by Jesus as He spoke to His disciples on the Mount of Olives. Jeremiah labeled it ‘Jacob’s trouble’ and said it would be unique in all history (Jeremiah 30:7). Jesus called it a period of unprecedented tribulation (Matthew 24:21). This will be the time of Israel’s greatest bloodbath” (81).
• In his Israel in Prophecy, John Walvoord writes: “The purge of Israel in their time of trouble is described by Zechariah in these words: ‘And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith Jehovah, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part into the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried’ (Zechariah 13:8, 9). According to Zechariah’s prophecy, two thirds of the children of Israel in the land will perish, but the one third that are left will be refined and be awaiting the deliverance of God at the second coming of Christ which is described in the next chapter of Zechariah” (108).
• Eugene Merrill, in his Exegetical Commentary: Haggai, Zechariah, Malachi, writes: “The restoration and dominion cannot come until all the forces of evil that seek to subvert it are put down once and for all. Specifically, the redemption of Israel will be accomplished on the ruins of her own suffering and those of the malevolent powers of this world that, in the last day, will consolidate themselves against her and seek to interdict forever any possibility of her success. The nations of the whole earth will come against Jerusalem, and, having defeated her, will divide up their spoils of war in her very midst” (342).

There are geopolitical implications to the dispensational system that some people have picked up on.

Convinced that a nuclear Armageddon is an inevitable event within the divine scheme of things, many evangelical dispensationalists have committed themselves to a course for Israel that, by their own admission, will lead directly to a holocaust indescribably more savage and widespread than any vision of carnage that could have generated in Adolf Hitler’s criminal mind.(1)

Dispensational theology as it relates to Israel is alarming to some Jewish leaders as well. Rabbi David Saperstein, director of the Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, asks, “To what extent will a theological view that calls for Armageddon in the Middle East lead [evangelicals] to support policies that may move in that direction, rather than toward stability and peaceful coexistence?”(2) The most probable scenario is that prophetic futurists will sit back and do nothing as they see Israel go up in smoke since the Bible predicts an inevitable holocaust. It is time to recognize that these so-called end-time biblical prophecies have been fulfilled, and Zechariah 13:7–9 is certainly one of them. Those Jews living in Judea prior to the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and who fled before the assault on the temple were saved (Matt. 24:15–22).

1. Grace Halsell, Prophecy and Politics: Militant Evangelists on the Road to Nuclear War (Westport, CT: Lawrence Hill & Co., 1986), 195.

2. Quoted in Jeffery L. Sheler, “Odd Bedfellows,” U.S. News & World Report (August 12, 2002), 35.

Gary DeMar is president of American Vision and the author of more than 20 books. His latest is Myths, Lies, and Half Truths.

Permission to reprint granted by American Vision P.O. Box 220, Powder Springs, GA 30127, 800-628-9460.

[HarleyD]

I agree with you X, it should be ponder. But there is a difference between pondering the events and fitting scriptures into events to sell books. Hal Lindsey had this big theory worked out that the Soviet Union was going to sweep down on Israel. He had plenty of scripture to support his views. It sounded great. And then the Soviet Union disolved. Now it's the Arabs and this time he's right.

There is always a "bad" guy and a "good" guy. That's what sells.

[xzins]

Since the temple ever was only to be in Jerusalem, and since the nation was always possessed of geographic boundaries so large as to prevent ready access to Jerusalem, and since Jews were always to observe the sabbath in their towns and villages, and since they were to assemble, then there was always an acceptable worship apart from the Temple.

Attendance at the Temple was a special event.

In the meantime,

Luke 4:14-30 14 And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. 15 And he taught in their synagogues, being glorified of all. 16 And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up: and, as his custom was, he went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and stood up for to read. 17

[fortheDeclaration]

God lost someone? Luk 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

Yes, they were lost, but God did not lose them, they lost God. (Isa.53:6)

[xzins]

I disagree. The Holy Spirit told Paul what awaited him in Jerusalem. It was the hearts of his friends that urged him not to go. They must have thought that that's what such a warning should mean.

Paul, on the other hand, was assured of God's presence each step of the way, and was specifically told that he was to testify before Caesar himself. It's obvious (to me, anyway :>) that this is the way God intended to get Paul into Caesar's throneroom.

[Alex Murphy]

The Church was never meant to change the world, but to get people saved and living apart from it (James 4:4).

Always good to see you around, ftD!

Is the church meant to change the world? Those of us approaching this from the POV of Postmillennialism and the Reformation would say yes, the blood of Christ is capable of redeeming everything affected by the Fall, flowing outward from the repentant/obedient soul, compounded by the number of repentant/obedient souls, effecting a progressive change in culture and politics and art and everything produced by man. In fact, we believe that the Bible gives us guidelines in how to behave, as redeemed individuals, in each of these areas. A man cannot repent of his old behavior, unless he has a new set of behaviors to substitute for them!

Many (but not all) approaching this from other POVs, especially Scofield-flavored Dispensational Premillennialism would say no, leave the culture alone. The culture will not (cannot?) be redeemed by anything - including a wholesale repentance and conversion of the population - other than the physical return of Christ. "You don't polish the brass on a sinking ship!" said evangelist Dwight L. Moody. Such thinking would have us believe that the Great Commission commands us to "go ye therefore and make converts of all nations". It commands us to make disciples, not converts. Disciples do more than learn how to make more converts. If your theology teaches that Christians shouldn't "polish the brass on a sinking ship", you will probably discount or avoid altogether other ship-related disciplines as hull & sail repair, mastering sea-sickness, and simple navigation. What good is it to ask people to repent and convert, and not prepare them for how to live afterward?

The problem faced in the Premil position, IMO, is explaining how the Raptured generation (and the ones immediately preceding it) are supposed to be successful in changing lives, while simultaneously (and spectacularly) failing to achieve "majority status" in influencing the culture. To do so, either the church must suffer a substantial net loss in overall numbers over several generations (reducing their numbers to an ever-shrinking minority of the overall population), or else the individual Christians suffer a substantial net loss in victory over sin over several generations (indicating their failure to avoid being assimilated into, i.e. not repenting of the increasingly sinful culture about them). Victory today, but defeat tomorrow? For premillennialism to be true, at some point either the church performs a massive flip-flop historically and the gates of Hell dramatically begin prevailing against it (maybe because of the Rapture), or else the church has been fighting a slow battle of defeat-and-retreat culturally since the first century. If there's a third option here, I'm just not seeing it.

[topcat54]

Do preterists not post what they stand for because (1) they're embarrassed to say, (2) because they don't know, (3) because it's too hard to explain, (4) etc.

This is Free Republic, a site devoted mainly to current events and how there are interpreted politically, socially, and religiously. There are many other site that deal with purely theological issues where various positions are presented and analyzed.

Since dispensationalism today is, by its very nature, a creature of current events, it lends itself to this sort of critique in this type of forum.

That certainly is the main intent of my posts, to see the folly in the logical outworking of the dispensational system as it is commonly found in American evangelical circles.

[xzins]

Yes, it must be pondered. And I do think that some have been using eschatology to sell books, movies, horror shows, etc.

In terms of Lindsay, however, Lindsay was absolutely wrong about timing, but maybe not about such an event taking place some day. That part of the world might just sweep down some day against Israel.

If the identification of locations is correct, that is another prophecy that requires pondering.

[blue-duncan]

"The seven churches are not only types of churches they are the history of the church itself through the last 2,000 years."

That is one theory and I'm very familiar with it. It neatly puts each era in easy to understand categories. However, in every era the spirit of each of the churches can be found and to say that the churches are the defining spirit of the eras, I think, is an unwarranted stretch.

"The final period is the Laodican period which is now, a lukewarm church that thinks it is rich but it is poor."

I don't think the churches in the middle east, China, Russia, Indonesia, Latin America or anyplace other than the USA would agree with that statement. Even in the USA most of the evangelical churches are small to medium size and vibrant, not lukewarm.

I understand apostasy to be heresy, a defection from the truth that salvation is by grace through faith in the finished work of Christ. I don't see that as prevalent today, nor do I think that is the spirit of Laodicia. Their problem is the potential that God warned Israel of in Deut.6:11-12,"And houses full of all good things, which thou filledst not, and wells digged, which thou diggedst not, vineyards and olive trees, which thou plantedst not; when thou shalt have eaten and be full; Then beware lest thou forget the LORD, which brought thee forth out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage." Like each of the seven churches, the potential for apostasy is there just as it is now or a hundred years ago.

[topcat54]

My comment I think you were referring to had to do with annual feast days and the ersatz practices of the Jews today. The annual feast days were inextricably linked to the priesthood and the temple sacrificial system.

The sabbath practices and transition of weekly worship from the seventh day to the first day is another issue that can be debated on other grounds.

But thanks for your comment.

[xzins]

The religion forum on Free Republic is not wedded to current events, although it certainly has its connection.

It is also a place on which one can post theological overviews of lots of things. And that has happened on wide-ranging subjects.

If you have a link to a brief synopsis of preterism, would you mind sharing it? I would gladly post it.

[Uri’el-2012]

Paul was both Jewish and Christian.

50 posted on 08/07/2006 5:51:03 PM MDT by xzins

It could just be that Paul was a Messianic believer.

b'shem Y'shua

[topcat54]

The Church was never meant to change the world, but to get people saved and living apart from it (James 4:4).

"And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, 'All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.' Amen." (Matt. 28:18-20)

How is that passage not about changing the world? Note, Jesus did not say to make "disciples of all souls". He spoke in national, geopolitical terms. The kingdom of God was intended to overcome the fourth kingdom, which was a political entity (cf. Dan. 2:44; 7:14,27).

[P-Marlowe]

That certainly is the main intent of my posts, to see the folly in the logical outworking of the dispensational system as it is commonly found in American evangelical circles.

Maybe so, but your threads all have a common denominator that evangelical support for Israel somehow is motivated by a hope that the Jews will return to the land so that God can wipe out more Jews when he kills off 2/3 of them.

If that point is not made in the article itself it is made within a few posts of the time the article is posted.

This article is particularly eggregious. Within a few sentences we get this blurb: "In the debate, I wanted Tommy to explain how a belief in Israel’s glorious future results in the slaughter of two-thirds of the Jews living at the time the Great Tribulation nears the end of its seven-year run."

It is as if the author is mocking the prophecy of God and attempting to use the words of God in the bible as a tool to make Tommy Ice look cruel, when in fact the author is really attempting to make God look cruel. That is pathetic.

The author of this article and the authors of many of the articles you post believe the worst of those of us who support Israel's right to exist and who believe that God is bringing the Jews back to the land for his own purposes.

The fact of the matter is that regardless of whether the Jews believe in Christ or not, we are told by God that if we curse them we shall be cursed and if we bless them we shall be blessed.

If for no other reason than that we should be supporting Israel whether we are dispensationalists or not. As Bible believers we ought to take the promises of God seriously and in this case those who do not take them seriously are in danger of being cursed by God.

[Uri’el-2012]

Convinced that a nuclear Armageddon is an inevitable event within the divine scheme of things,
many evangelical dispensationalists have committed themselves to a course for Israel that,
by their own admission, will lead directly to a holocaust indescribably more savage and
widespread than any vision of carnage that could have generated in Adolf Hitler’s criminal mind.(1)

by Grace Halsel

Grace and by implication, the author Gary DeMar, do not appear to accept and recognize the sovereignty of YHvH, the creator of the universe.

b'shem Y'shua

[topcat54]

If that point is not made in the article itself it is made within a few posts of the time the article is posted.

This article is particularly eggregious. Within a few sentences we get this blurb: "In the debate, I wanted Tommy to explain how a belief in Israel’s glorious future results in the slaughter of two-thirds of the Jews living at the time the Great Tribulation nears the end of its seven-year run."

It is as if the author is mocking the prophecy of God and attempting to use the words of God in the bible as a tool to make Tommy Ice look cruel, when in fact the author is really attempting to make God look cruel. That is pathetic.

If you are claiming that Tommy Ice has infallibly interpreted God's prophetic word, then your wpoint is well taken.

Otherwise, Tommy is open to criticism, and the odd view of futurist dispensdationalism, that God's chosen, future, earthly people will be "blessed" by having 2/3 of them living in the "promised land" killed before they can find salvation through no fault of their own is fair game.

Don't confuse criticism of Tommy's odd views with criticism of God and His infallible word. Unfortunately, many dispensationalist take it personally. That's why some of them like to use words like "anti-semite" to describe their theological opponents.

The author of this article and the authors of many of the articles you post believe the worst of those of us who support Israel's right to exist and who believe that God is bringing the Jews back to the land for his own purposes.

We don't think the worst, we just think the position is theologically naive for clear reasons outlined in the articles.

As Bible believers we ought to take the promises of God seriously and in this case those who do not take them seriously are in danger of being cursed by God.

Again, this is an example of one of the backhanded attempts to paint your opponents as folks who do not take God's promuises seriously. On the contrary, we take them very seriously and we hate to see them distorted by futurists.

[topcat54]

Grace and by implication, the author Gary DeMar, do not appear to accept and recognize the sovereignty of YHvH, the creator of the universe.

That observation lacks objective support.

[P-Marlowe]

Otherwise, Tommy is open to criticism, and the odd view of futurist dispensdationalism, that God's chosen, future, earthly people will be "blessed" by having 2/3 of them living in the "promised land" killed before they can find salvation through no fault of their own is fair game.

Through no fault of their own? You have just undercut your whole Calvinist theology with that one tc.

The fact of the matter is that God said he would purge the land and he will. As I indicated before the purging is not necessarily believing Jews or Jews at all. The prophecy appears to relate to the inhabitants of the land and the land that is promised and the land that is Israel's by birthright is the land from the Nile to the Euphrates and all the way north to Damscus. If 2/3 of the inhabitants of those lands are killed off, then God could do it without killing off a single Jew. But the fact of the matter is that if God wants to do it, nobody on earth can stop him.

Finally you preterists are stuck with the problem that the prophecy in Zechariah has never been fulfilled. So it is either a false prophecy or it is yet to come. Take your pick.

[Alex Murphy]

As Bible believers we ought to take the promises of God seriously and in this case those who do not take them seriously are in danger of being cursed by God

An odd (or at least inconsistent) statement, coming from a dispensational pretrib premillennialist.

For the dispensational pretrib premillenial vision to prove true, God has to bless the unfaithful, and curse the faithful in time and history, in order for Satan's forces to amass power and authority and responsibility to the extent of controlling the whole world prior to the Second Coming. How would dispensational pretrib premillennialism come to pass otherwise?

A picture is worth a thousand words. See post #102 for a picture of the dispensational pretrib premillennial victory in Christ.

[Uri’el-2012]

Finally you preterists are stuck with the problem that the prophecy in Zechariah has never been fulfilled. So it is either a false prophecy or it is yet to come. Take your pick.

157 posted on 08/08/2006 8:17:38 AM MDT by P-Marlowe

How about the one in Isaiah :

Isaiah 17:1 An oracle concerning Damascus:
“See, Damascus will no longer be a city but will become a heap of ruins.

b'shem Y'shua

[P-Marlowe]

For the dispensational pretrib premillenial vision to prove true, God has to bless the unfaithful, and curse the faithful in time and history, in order for Satan's forces to amass power and authority and responsibility to the extent of controlling the whole world prior to the Second Coming.

The world system is already in the hands of non-believers and the enemies of God. Look around.

Satan wins nothing. The Tribulation is the wrath of God being poured out. It is not Satan's finest hour, it is his last hours. In every battle Satan and his minions will be defeated.