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.

[topcat54]

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

Of course I was speaking from the dispensationalist standpoint of Israel being God's earthly, chosen people.

There is no theological reason to think that God would "preserve" Israel for over 2000 years only to see 2/3 of them killed of in the "final holocaust" before coming to salvation in Christ. That is the way the "literalist" futurists reads Zechariah 13:8,9.

In 1991, Sid Roth, host of "Messianic Vision," stated that "two-thirds of the Jewish people [living in Israel] will be exterminated."

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 (John Walvoord, Israel in Prophecy (1988), p. 108).

As I indicated before the purging is not necessarily believing Jews or Jews at all.

Note that according to Walvoord only 1/3 of the "children of Israel" (not dwellers in Israel as you wish) are actually looking for Christ after this happens. The implication is that the 2/3 of Israel destroyed were not looking for Christ in the futurist "great tribulation".

Have I misread Walvoord and dispensationalism? Do you take issue with the popular dispensational interpretation of Zechariah 13? After all, it is "literally" speaking about the children of Israel, not merely the inhabitants of the land. Just look at the context; "Strike the Shepherd, And the sheep will be scattered; Then I will turn My hand against the little ones." Who are the "sheep" and "little ones" in this passage?

Clearly, according to the Walvoord theory, the 1/3 represents a more highly favored chosen group of people.

Again, I can understand why you are reluctant to affirm the popular dispensational interpretation of Zechariah 13. It is anti-semitic in that it calls for the killing of people through no fault of their own, merely the fact that they happen to inhabit a location and are genetically/culturally/socially united somehow. Unless you wish to go further and state they are killed for not accepting Christ.

[TomSmedley]

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.

A system is normally a whole composed of interlocking parts. Whenever the weak point of a system (such as dispensationalism's track record of fanciful fortune-telling) gets attacked, the strong points (such as their commitment to God's infallible Word) rush to its defense. To the dispensationalist, someone who sneers at their addiction to fortune telling must also be wobbly on the authority of God's Word.

We are dealing with an entire system, a way of organizing reality in such a way as to ease the pain of present mediocrity by endlessly daydreaming of a deus ex machina reversal that takes place with no connection to their present efforts and experiences.

Since fantasy is a poor substitute for reality, it tends to have an escalating grip on the psyches of those who use it as a substitute for reality. Those who prefer 2-D colored dots to a flesh and blood spouse find that porn escalates its demands. Those who prefer end-times fantasies to present faithfulness continue to return, like dogs to vomit, to lurid speculations and "newspaper eisogesis."

Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for righteousness, for they shall be filled. In The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe, Edmund is seduced by Turkish Delight -- a paltry but addictive substitute for his soul's REAL hunger ("Aslan" is Turkish for Lion). God's elect, with a real hunger for Him and His glory, eventually find trite substitutes nauseating and spew them out of their mouths in disgust. Hence the frantic desperation among dispensationalists -- they are defending a failed system -- and the traffic is only going one way. Many of us once sat where they sat, and thought as they did. Then, we got a taste of God's glory, of His wonderful purposes for our lives. Purposes that extended beyond the realm between our ears, and embraced objective reality.

[P-Marlowe]

Is Zechariah talking about events of the future or events of the past? Clearly this prophecy was not fulfilled in 70AD, so when was it fulfilled and how did it escape all the history books?

According to this prophecy anyone left after the purging would be refined, and therefore if this is true, then every Jew who survived the purging would have become a believer. Since the remnant after AD 70 did not become Christians, but remained Jews, then either this is a false prophecy, it hasn't been fulfilled yet, or Christianity is a false religion.

Take your pick.

[topcat54]

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

If I were a "literalist", and took "ruinous heap" in terms of poor urban planning, then there might be a concern.

However, andexamintion of the context and history of the relationship between Samaria (Ephraim) and "Syria/Damascus" during the time of Hezekiah and following will see the fulfillment in it proper context.

(BTW, the Hebrew word translated "heap of ruin" or "fallen ruin" simply comes from a root word which means "to bend or twist". Don't overwork the English translation with 21st century imaginations.)

The parallel to this prophecy is found in:

Concerning Damascus: "Hamath and Arpad are dismayed, for they have heard bad news. They are disheartened, troubled like the restless sea. Damascus has become feeble, she has turned to flee and panic has gripped her; anguish and pain have seized her, pain like that of a woman in labor. Why has the city of renown not been abandoned, the town in which I delight? Surely, her young men will fall in the streets; all her soldiers will be silenced in that day," declares the Lord Almighty. "I will set fire to the walls of Damascus; it will consume the fortresses of Ben-Hadad." (Jeremiah 49:23-27)

Not quite as dramatic in terms of urban planning.

Remember, these passages do not exist in vacuum, waiting for folks to come along and apply whatever fanciful interpretation they wish. If that is your approach, you can play "here's another one" all day.

Of course in failing to appreciate the spiritual nature of these prophecies, you may conclude that Damasscus is not a "ruinous heap" spiritually speaking. That was the real focus of the prophecy.

I would think that a person signing their posts with "b'shem Y'shua" would understand the true Hebrew nature of these prophecies.

[topcat54]

Clearly this prophecy was not fulfilled in 70AD ...

Please share with us your presuppositions that makes this so "clear" so that we might all benefit from your conclusions.

Since the remnant after AD 70 did not become Christians

According to Paul, the true remnant of Israel was being saved even in his day. So I suspect you have some reason to take the word "remnant" in other than a spiritual context.

Zechariah 13 and the history of the Jewish believers in and around Judea in the time period from Christ up to AD70 validates Paul's confirmation that the remnant was, in fact, being saved.

"But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her." (Luke 21:20,21)

"[L]et those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes." (Matt. 24:16-18)

The futurist interpretation of these passage makes no sense today with our modern methods of warfare. Why tell folks to "flee to the mountains" when it is just as easy to hunt them down and kill them with modern methods? But if you lived at a time when folks would "fall by the edge of the sword", it makes perfect sense, since even the Romans could not easily pursue folks who would flee even a short distance into mountainous regions of Judea.

[topcat54]

then either this is a false prophecy, it hasn't been fulfilled yet, or Christianity is a false religion.

Only if your interpretation of Scripture is taken as infallible by folks.

Do you own up to being infallible in these matters?

[HarleyD]

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.

I don't support Israel because I think God will bring a curse upon me. I support them because, in this instance, they are correct in defending themselves. If Israel did something horrific would you still support them, fearing a curse by God? God demands of Christians that they do and support justice.

Your statement is what happens when you mix politics with religion. Can you imagine how one of our Arab friends might take your comment? A Jew is every bit as lost as a Muslim. There is no difference either inside or outside of Christ.

[blue-duncan]

"There is no theological reason to think that God would "preserve" Israel for over 2000 years only to see 2/3 of them killed of in the "final holocaust" before coming to salvation in Christ. That is the way the "literalist" futurists reads Zechariah 13:8,9."

Why? He preserved them for over 400 years in Egypt and when they refused to believe the promise of the land He killed them over 40 years in the wilderness and brought a believing remnant into the promise. Why then is it so hard to believe that He would not do the same thing to those who refuse the offer of salvation when He is dealing specifically with the nation of Israel again? Ultimately, He will kill all He has preserved that do not trust Christ for salvation and consign them to eternal separation from Him (death).

By the way, the caricature of all pretribs as dispensationalists or date pickers or fortune tellers is getting a bit old and does not move the discussion along.

[Lee N. Field]

Okay, can somebody tell me when exactly slandering and outright lying about one's Christian brothers was considered evidence of the Spirit?. . .

With every article, you more and more prove that DeMar is too busy giving himself an uninstrumented colonoscopy to actually do his research and give reasoned answers to the actual beliefs of Premills instead of his strawmen.

Think you might want to rephrase that, brother?

What I see, from where I sit, is a lot of dispensationalists who don't get the objection that others have to their "separation theology" (you-all want to coin a pejorative, I can too), and get awful touchy when criticized.

We've all (that are Christian) got the same Bible, we're all reading the same texts, we all hold it as authoritative. But we're coming to quite different conclusions.

[topcat54]

Why? He preserved them for over 400 years in Egypt and when they refused to believe the promise of the land He killed them over 40 years in the wilderness and brought a believing remnant into the promise.

OK, I see the problem. God preserved and even caused Israel to flourish from a mere handful of people to millions by the time of the exodus.

However, your logical disconnect is that they were punished for their own, specific sin which they committed in the wilderness of Sinai. God did not preserve them that they might sin. He did not kill them just because they were Jews. And God ceratinly did not fortell via prophecy thousands of years beforehand that they would be killed.

Are you suggesting a parallel in the modern scenario with Israel? What sin have they committed against Almightly God what would cause 2/3 of them to be killed in less than 7 years?

By the way, the caricature of all pretribs as dispensationalists or date pickers or fortune tellers is getting a bit old and does not move the discussion along.

Prove us wrong. E.g., stop speaking of modern Israel in absolute prophectic terms. Admit you do not know if modern Israel today is any fulfillment of prophecy. But without modern Israel you have no scenario that makes a discussion interesting in your scheme.

[ksen]

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

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

As a Dispy myself I find the theory that the seven letters in Revelations are really a plan for the Church age to be flawed for a few reasons.

Reason 1: It takes away from the Immanency of Christ's return.

Reason 2: It's adherents are looking at the "Church" from an American point of view. How do you know someone in Korea or the Philippines or some other country wouldn't argue that we are in the Philedelphian or Smyrnian Age because of the conditions of the Church in their locality?

[topcat54]

Your statement is what happens when you mix politics with religion.

Indeed, they confuse criticism of Israeli politics or criticism of rabbinic Judaism was "cursing Israel". IOW, they have a view of pronouncing a "curse" upon someone that is not biblical.

"I will bless those who bless you [Abraham], And I will curse him who curses you; And in you all the families of the earth shall be blessed." (Gen. 12:3)

How is it that those of us who identify with father Abraham through the Seed, Jesus Christ, can be accused of "cursing" our own spiritual father?

It's a desperate accusation.

"And it shall come to pass That just as you were a curse among the nations, O house of Judah and house of Israel, So I will save you, and you shall be a blessing. Do not fear, Let your hands be strong. " (Zech 8:13)

As Israel is gathered into the household of faith and regrafted into the root of our salvation, they become a blessing to all nations. We pray for the increase of that salvation until the day when "the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord as the waters cover the sea." (Isa. 11:9)

Whether that day is soon or far off is in God's timetable.

[Alex Murphy]

By the way, the caricature of all pretribs as dispensationalists or date pickers or fortune tellers is getting a bit old and does not move the discussion along.

Admonition received, b-d, which is why I'm changing my own language to say dispensational pretrib premil(lennialist) whenever referring to the "date picker/fortune teller" crowd. Yours isn't the popular Walvoord/Lindsey/Hagee view, and we should acknowledge individual beliefs better, rather than try and shoehorn people (postmils included) into pre-determined eschatologocal viewpoints. It's worth repeating that, if I were (still) premil, I would hold to the same eschatological views that blue-duncan does.

If I can, I'll try to dig up a good article on the differences between the historic premil view, the popular dispensational premil view, and any others I might find as I go along.

[ksen]

It was God's intention for Paul to go to Rome, but not in chains!

If God didn't want Paul to go to Rome in chains then Paul would not have gone to Rome in chains.

[topcat54]

"By the way, the caricature of all pretribs as dispensationalists or date pickers or fortune tellers ..."

Admonition received, b-d, which is why I'm changing my own language to say dispensational pretrib premil(lennialist) whenever referring to the "date picker/fortune teller" crowd. Yours isn't the popular Walvoord/Lindsey/Hagee view, ... if I were (still) premil, I would hold to the same eschatological views that blue-duncan does.

If I can, I'll try to dig up a good article on the differences between the historic premil view, the popular dispensational premil view, and any others I might find as I go along.

I'm confused. b-d refers to "pretribs". You speak of "historic premil". I'm not aware of any historic premil that are pretribbers. The pretrib rapture is a decidedly dispensational invention.

Can someone point me to an article by someone who is not dispensational but is decidedly pretrib?

b-d, did you mean pretrib or premil? Which are you?

[Alamo-Girl]

Y'all might find this website interesting for an outline of differences in eschatology, end times and millennialism.

And for anyone interested, the survey of Freeper views on the subject is here

[Alex Murphy]

I'm confused. b-d refers to "pretribs". You speak of "historic premil". I'm not aware of any historic premil that are pretribbers. The pretrib rapture is a decidedly dispensational invention.

Can someone point me to an article by someone who is not dispensational but is decidedly pretrib?

I may be causing some of that confusion, topcat. b-d has never referred to himself as a "historic premil", but he and I have discussed "pre-rapture conditions" at length and he has articulated positions inconsistent with the more popular dispensational premil views. In short, b-d does not believe that history will get "worse and worse" prior to a pretrib rapture of the saints, a position that eliminates a great deal of the sign-watching, date-setting newspaper exegesis activities done by the dispensational premils. If the rapture didn't occur, IMO b-d's system resembles postmillennialism in it's optimistic view of the church's success in history, and for that reason I've associated his with the historic premil view (which may not be an accurate association). b-d, feel free to correct me where I'm wrong here.

FWIW, I have been unable to find a historic vs dispensational premil article that I'm happy with, or even two that agree with each other re the key differences. I'll keep looking.

[Gamecock]

***You have just undercut your whole Calvinist theology with that one tc.***

While I have not been participating in the current series of escaltological threads, mainly because I am still unsure of where I fall out, I must comment on this particular statement. Topcat's statement does no such thing. The Dispys aren't in control, God is. Regardless of what motivates the Dispy efforts in supporting secular Israel, God remains in control. Dispy motives do not negate God's sovereignty.

[Buggman]

*chuckle* You perhaps don't realize that I am the least Dispensational person here, though I am Premill and futurist in my eschatology. There are any number of legitimate criticisms of Dispensationalism--claiming that they're eagerly salivating over the death of the Jews in the land of Israel is not one of them.

So no, I won't rephrase my statement.

[Alex Murphy]

Y'all might find this website interesting for an outline of differences in eschatology, end times and millennialism.

Many thanks for the resources, A-G! Believe it or not, your link was already on my "shortlist" for consideration. I was unhappy with the section on postmillennialism (far too narrow and inaccurate re it's origins and proponents IMO), which knocked it down the list. But I was also unhappy with it's narrow definition of Dispensational Premillennialism:

Dispensational Premillennialism contains an internal conflict. Its advocates generally believe "that the moral conditions of the world and the church are destined get increasingly worse. When they get almost unbearably bad, the Lord Jesus will return in the clouds to 'rapture' the living saints up to heaven."

I know historic premils who believe in the "worse and worse" view, and I now know others (blue-duncan being a good example of an alternate dispensationalist view) who don't. IMHO I'd be fighting too many battles over misinformation in the article, if I used it as the basis of a thread.

Oh, and it's gonna be "y'all" now, is it? Not "youse guys"?