"Dr. Armageddon" and the Future of Israel

American Vision ^ | 7/31/2007 | Gary DeMar

[topcat54]

John Hagee’s “Christians United for Israel” held its annual meeting in Washington, D.C., last month (July 2007). Supporters of CUFI are looking forward to Armageddon. Of course, they believe they won’t be around to experience it. God will finally fulfill his covenant promises to Israel, but not until He wipes out millions of Jews and billions of others around the world in one final judgment. No wonder an increasing number of people fear “Dr. Armageddon” and his millions of followers. Could their political clout push us toward an all-out Mideast war? There are Jews who support Hagee and CUFI, but I bet they don’t know the whole story.
           
John Walvoord writes that these supposed future judgments will be “without parallel in the history of the world. According to Revelation 6:7 the judgments attending the opening of the fourth seal involve the death with sword, famine, and wild beasts of one fourth of the world’s population. If this were applied to the present world population now approaching three billion, it would mean that 750,000,000 people would perish, more than the total population of North America, Central America, and South America combined.”¹
           
Hal Lindsey supports Walvoord’s position, affirming that during the “great tribulation” there will be “death on a massive scale. It staggers the imagination to realize that one-fourth of the world’s population will be destroyed within a matter of days. According to projected census figures this will amount to nearly one billion people!”² Of course, with the latest census figures (6.6 billion), with the dispensational view in mind, about 1.65 billion people will die. Not only does the world come in for a beating under the dispensational hermeneutic, but Israel is specifically hit hard. Walvoord, with his view of a future post-rapture “great tribulation,” must claim that a large number of Jews living in Israel will be slaughtered. He 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.³

Israel’s present population is around 7 million. If two-thirds of the Jews living in Israel at the time of the “great tribulation” are to die, this will mean the death of more than 4.5 million! In addition, there is continued immigration from the former Soviet Union supported by Christian organizations like “On Wings of Eagles.” Financial support is raised by Christians to fund Jewish settlements in the occupied territories. “‘This is a biblical issue,’ says Theodore T. Beckett, a Colorado developer who founded the Christian-sponsored, adopt-a-settlement program. ‘The Bible says in the last days the Jews will be restored to the nation of Israel.’“⁴ For every three people who enter, two of them will be killed during the dispensational version of the “great tribulation.” Why aren’t today’s dispensationalists warning Jews about this coming holocaust by encouraging them to leave Israel until the conflagration is over? Instead, we find dispensationalists supporting and encouraging the relocation of Jews to the land of Israel. For what? A future holocaust?
           
Israel was warned by Jesus to “flee to the mountains” (Matt. 24:16). The New Testament is filled with warnings about the coming A.D. 70 holocaust with no encouragement to take up residence in Jerusalem. In fact, there was a mass exodus from the city by those who understood the world-wide implications of the gospel message and the approaching destruction of what was the center of Jewish worship at the time (John 4:21–24).
           
Preterists believe that the events described in Matthew 24:1–34 were fulfilled in the events leading up to and including the destruction of Jerusalem in A.D. 70. “The guilt of all the righteous blood shed on earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, whom [they] murdered between the temple and the altar” (Matt. 23:35) fell upon the generation of Jews who “did not recognize the time of [their] visitation” (Luke 19:44) and crucified “the Lord of glory” (1 Cor. 2:8). How do we know this? Because Jesus told us: “Truly I say to you, all these things shall come upon this generation” (Matt. 23:36 and 24:34). No future generation of Jews is meant here. Hagee and his supporters are wrong and dangerous.

---

1. John F. Walvoord, Israel in Prophecy (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan/Academie, [1962] 1988) 108.

2. Hal Lindsey, There’s a New World Coming (New York: Bantam Books, [1973] 1984), 90. Emphasis in original.

3. Walvoord, Israel in Prophecy, 108. Emphasis added.

4. Ann LoLordo, “Evangelical Christians Come to Jews’ Aid,” Atlanta Constitution (August 8, 1997), A8.

---

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

[Uncle Chip]

According to the testimony of Scripture (some of which I quoted to you), the answer is "Yes, the ages in view did end at the coming of Jesus Christ into the world to redeem His people from their sin."

But the Scriptures do not bear this out.

Ephesians 2:7 says "that in the ages [aeons] to come...", and in Matthew 12:32 Jesus says: "Whosoever speaks against the Holy Spirit, it shall not be forgiven him in this age [aeon], neither in the age to come." So there was atleast one age to come and probably more.

does Heb. 9:26 testify that Christ appeared at the end of the ages to put away sin?

Sure but what is meant by the phrase: "the end of the ages"???? Clearly there had been earlier "ages" and there were "ages" to come.

The first half would be called "the beginning of the ages [aeons]" and the last half would be called "the end of the ages [aeons]" ---- much like we call the Sunday-Monday-Tuesday the "beginning of the week" and Thursday-Friday-Saturday the "end of the week".

The "age" in which Jesus appeared was the latter half of those ages, thus called "the end of the ages". So Jesus appeared not only at the end of a particular age [aeon] but also at the end [last half] of the ages [aeons] --- all of which were "framed by the word of God". [Heb 11:3]

[topcat54]

Sure but what is meant by the phrase: "the end of the ages"???? Clearly there had been earlier "ages" and there were "ages" to come.

That is a different issue, and I agree that there were past “ages” (plural) and a future “age to come” (singular). The “ages” are past and we are presently in the “age to come”.

However, you were the one denying that Heb. 9:26 was referring to the "end of the ages" (plural) wrt Christ's coming to put away sin for His redeemed.

I take it now that you have backed away from that position.

The first half would be called "the beginning of the ages [aeons]" and

Where is this language used in Scripture? You seem to be wanting to twist things just enough to some end. Perhaps it futurist presuppositions getting the best of you.

[Uncle Chip]

That is a different issue, and I agree that there were past “ages” (plural) and a future “age to come” (singular). The “ages” are past and we are presently in the “age to come”.

But Paul writes in Ephesians 2:7: "...that in the ages to come ..." --- that's plural, He was writing in the "age to come" about still more "ages" yet to come.

However, you were the one denying that Heb. 9:26 was referring to the "end of the ages" (plural) wrt Christ's coming to put away sin for His redeemed.

No I wasn't. Reread my responses to you. I questioned your implication that the "ages" ended there in the 1st century --- which you now admit they didn't.

Furthermore you have now taken a bold leap toward the dispensational position by finally realizing that there were "ages" [aeons] charted out by the Scriptures, and what the Scripture calls "ages [aeons]", others often refer to as "dispensations". Sshhhhh ---- I won't tell anybody if you don't.

[topcat54]

But Paul writes in Ephesians 2:7: "...that in the ages to come ..." --- that's plural, He was writing in the "age to come" about still more "ages" yet to come.

Let’s read it in context:

4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 5 even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), 6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, 7 that in the ages to come He might show the exceeding riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. 8 For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9 not of works, lest anyone should boast. 10 For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand that we should walk in them.

When has or will God show the “riches of His grace in His kindness toward us in Christ Jesus”? Well, the context makes it pretty clear that Paul is talking about the present condition of God’s people. He has “made us alive together with Christ”. That sounds pretty gracious. He has also “and raised us up together” and “made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus”. Granted, there is a future physical resurrection of God’s people yet to be enjoyed. But Paul does not diminish our present condition of being spiritually alive with Christ and seated in heaven, rather he exalts in it. God continues to work out His salvation program for His people in this age to come.

and what the Scripture calls "ages [aeons]", others often refer to as "dispensations".

Hardly, but it’s a nice diversion tactic.

[Uncle Chip]

So then, putting together all the scriptures that we have quoted, how many ages have there been and will there be??? My estimate is eight. What is yours???

[topcat54]

The Scriptures do not say there are eight. All we know for certain is that there are two; "this age" and "the age to come". The differentiator is the appearing of Messiah. This is also the differentiator between the old covenant and the new.

There is no way to relate what are commonly known as "dispensations" ala Mr. Scofield with the ages spoken of in the Bible.

[Uncle Chip]

The Scriptures do not say there are eight. All we know for certain is that there are two; "this age" and "the age to come".

Oh there are more than that. Logical reading of the scriptures tells us that.

Hebrews 9:26 tells us that "now, once at the end of the ages, He has appeared to put away sin by the sacrifice of Himself.” There had to have been earlier ages for the one in which Jesus was crucified to be called "the end of the ages". And He was crucified in one age, and yet spoke of an "age to come" several times --- that's two of those "end ages".

Then Paul in Ephesians 2:7 writing in that "age to come" of which Jesus spoke, tells us that there are still ages [plural] yet to come ---- that would be ages three and four.

Therefore since there are four of what are called the "end ages", then there must have also been atleast four "earlier or beginning ages". Four plus four makes eight ---- right???

There is no way to relate what are commonly known as "dispensations" ala Mr. Scofield with the ages spoken of in the Bible.

Sure there is. Dispensationalists identify the 5th age as the one in which Jesus was crucified, the Mosaic Law Age, then "age to come" as the 6th age or the Church Age, then the 7th as the Millenial Age, and the 8th age as the Age Without End. Amen.

It comes from a logical reading of the Scriptures that you and I have already quoted. What Scripture calls "ages", dispensationalists call "dispensations".

[topcat54]

Therefore since there are four of what are called the "end ages", then there must have also been atleast four "earlier or beginning ages". Four plus four makes eight ---- right???

Not following that line of reasoning at all.

[Uncle Chip]

Not following that line of reasoning at all.

Where did you get lost?

[topcat54]

Where did you get lost?

When you got to the number four.

[Uncle Chip]

When you got to the number four.

Well then stick with the number three and we'll take up the number four again next semester.

[topcat54]

Well then stick with the number three and we'll take up the number four again next semester.

I'm having trouble with the logic and/or hermeneutics that gets to any specific number greater than one. I think you missed a step in your proof, professor.

[Uncle Chip]

I'm having trouble with the logic and/or hermeneutics that gets to any specific number greater than one. I think you missed a step in your proof, professor.

Paul in Ephesians 2 writes: " 5Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) 6And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: 7That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus."

The word "ages" [aeons] in verse 7 is plural and those "ages" [aeons] were/are yet to come as of Paul's writing. That makes atleast two ages yet future and the one in which Paul is writing a third age, right??? Isn't that atleast three ages right there alone???

[topcat54]

The word "ages" [aeons] in verse 7 is plural and those "ages" [aeons] were/are yet to come as of Paul's writing. That makes atleast two ages yet future and the one in which Paul is writing a third age, right??? Isn't that atleast three ages right there alone???

What sort of "ages" was Paul speaking of? There is nothing in this passage (or anywhere else) to suggest a connection between what Paul refers to as "ages to come" and what some folks have in mind when they say "dispensation". (Of course there is not much to relate what some folks have in mind when they say "dispensation" to anything in the Bible.)

I believe Paul was merely using an idiomatic phrase to describe "the future". (There is no Greek word in the NT for "future". The closest seems to be the word loipo which means "that which remains".)

I think that by applying some hyper-literal interpretation to the phrase misses the point.

[invoman]

There is no Greek word in the NT for "future".

hmmm...I didn't know that. AND, after a quick look at the KJV...it doesn't appear at all in the KJV.

Matt 6:34 Take therefore no thought for the morrow: for the morrow shall take thought for the things of itself. Sufficient unto the day is the evil thereof.

...seems to make this consistent?

[Uncle Chip]

What sort of "ages" was Paul speaking of?

The "ages" that he was speaking of when he chose to use the word "aion" again and again and again rather than another word or words.

There is nothing in this passage (or anywhere else) to suggest a connection between what Paul refers to as "ages to come" and what some folks have in mind when they say "dispensation".

There certainly is as well as in the rest of his writings especially when coupled with those of Luke and John and the others.

(Of course there is not much to relate what some folks have in mind when they say "dispensation" to anything in the Bible.)

And your evidence for that is what???? ---- the clear blue sky overhead.

Remember: "insisting does not good exegesis make" [topcat54]

I believe Paul was merely using an idiomatic phrase to describe "the future". (There is no Greek word in the NT for "future". The closest seems to be the word loipo which means "that which remains".)

Oh please! Certainly he is describing the future. What else would it be. And he is doing it in the way the NT Greek does in so many cases with the use of the word "to come". We do it in English as well and other languages in order to be more specific regarding the time frame of which we are speaking.

Paul could have said: "in the hours to come", "in the days to come", "in the weeks to come", "in the years to come", "in the generations to come", "in the age [aeon] to come", or "forever and ever". But Paul uses the plural: "in the ages [aions] to come".

He used the plural [ages] in some places to convey a more distant future and the singular [age] in other places to convey a nearer future for the "age" in which he was writing. If he didn't mean what he said then why didn't he say what he meant. And if he said what he meant, then why is it so hard to believe what he said???

I think that by applying some hyper-literal interpretation to the phrase misses the point.

Hmmm: "hyper-literal interpretation" --- Did you mean that literally, figuratively, hyper-literally, or hyper-figuratively??? Please identify which of your words that the reader is free to interpret any way they so choose.

[topcat54]

The "ages" that he was speaking of when he chose to use the word "aion" again and again and again rather than another word or words.

Yes, but how he used it is more important than that he used it. That is where your analysis is lacking.

You seem to be trying to make a point by raw assertion. We're still waiting for the exegesis that supports your theory.

And your evidence for that is what???? ---- the clear blue sky overhead.

I don't need to prove anything. The burden is on you to show how Paulk's use of "aeon" is the same as the modern interpretation of "dispensation". All you have done so far is proof by insisting.

[Uncle Chip]

You seem to be trying to make a point by raw assertion. We're still waiting for the exegesis that supports your theory.

Who is "We"???

[kevinw]

I agree with you on this. The Bride of Christ is the Church.