God's Helpers

"Why should we know prophecy? I'll tell you one of the most important reasons is because it will help shape even political policy of our nation, because we must be careful not to be trying to implement things that are against the very predicted plan of God." ('Why Study Prophecy,' video by Hal Lindsey, excerpted in 'The Rapture: Biblical Fact...Or Left Behind Fiction?,' Lighthouse World Ministries).

Prophecy students in the past mostly sat like spectators in the grandstand, observing and commenting on the action below. Those who look to the final judgment and the descent of the new Jerusalem see the futility of supposing any human hand could help or hinder such manifestly supernatural events.

Yet Christian Zionists pursue an active political agenda, which they justify by their system of prophecy. They are a standing lobby for war. Liberals are the "enemy that hides in the shadows, doesn't play by any of the rules, and is determined to use any means to bring about our literal annihilation." (Hal Lindsey, quoted at Biblio.com.) Prophecy teachers adopt the alarmist tone of contemporary grudge politics, warning their listeners they better do something quick. . .

or else. . . or else. . . or else what? This group believes the contemporary state of Israel to be the fulfillment of Bible prophecy. On the one hand they boast that God Himself fights for Israel:

"No nation in the world can match the defensive force guarding the State of Israel. . .The Lord stands watch in the darkest night with an eye trained on the nation of Israel and, more specifically, Jerusalem. Those who fight with Israel fight with Him." (John Hagee, 'Final Dawn Over Jerusalem, pp. 19-20).

Yet somehow they also fear that, should Israel's leaders prove insufficiently intransigent, or American tax-payers balk, it will all fall apart. Their founder, John Nelson Darby, was likewise disposed to see events getting away from God, portraying the Church as a last-minute improvisation after God's 'Plan A' had failed. This way of looking at things is not Biblical.

The Bible emphasizes God's freedom, foresight and sovereignty over human affairs:

"Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." (Acts 15:18).

"But our God is in heaven; He does whatever He pleases." (Psalm 115:3).

"Behold, the nations are as a drop of a bucket, and are counted as the small dust of the balance: behold, he takes up -*the isles as a very little thing." (Isaiah 40:15).

"For they did not gain possession of the land by their own sword, nor did their own arm save them; but it was Your right hand, Your arm, and the light of Your countenance, because You favored them. . .For I will not trust in my bow, nor shall my sword save me. But You have saved us from our enemies, and have put to shame those who hated us. In God we boast all day long, and praise Your name forever. Selah." (Psalm 44:3-8).

"I have made the earth, the man and the beast that are on the ground, by My great power and by My outstretched arm, and have given it to whom it seemed proper to Me." (Jeremiah 27:5).

"Then Job answered the LORD: I know that you can do all things, and that no purpose of yours can be thwarted." (Job 42:1-2).

Does God, before whom the nations are as dust, require the assistance of these eager helpers to perform His wonders? And whose agenda are they advancing when they promote perpetual war? Not God's, and certainly not America's.

Mother Ship

Dispensationalism begins with the premise that nation Israel has in some way been 'cheated.' The dispensationalists posit the millenium as a time for the fulfillment of Bible promises which they claim remain as yet unmet: promises of this-worldly well-being, promises of Israel's national glory.

But if anyone were to ask the 'coloreds' under South Africa's old apartheid regime whether they felt blessed to be, not at the bottom of the social pyramid, but one rung up, they would hardly describe this experience as glorious or blessed. It stings to be a second-class citizen, and it is very small consolation that there are others even lower.

Hovering above the this-worldly Jerusalem in which the Jews are enjoying their national felicity during the millenium, according to some dispensationalists, is a space-ship called the heavenly Jerusalem:

"This view contemplates the heavenly Jerusalem as in existence during the millennium over the earth as the habitation of the resurrected saints, and is in contrast to the city of Jerusalem located on the earth. . .It provides a clear distinction between resurrected saints who inhabit the New Jerusalem and the millennial saints on the earth who will inhabit the millennial earth. . .Though the major difficulty of the relationship of resurrected saints to those who are still in their natural bodies in the millennium is explained by the residence of the resurrected saints in the heavenly Jerusalem, Scriptures afford several instances in which there will be some relation of resurrected saints to those in the millennial earth. . .It is further promised believers who participate in the first resurrection that they 'shall reign with him a thousand years' (Rev 20:6)." (The Millennial Kingdom, John F. Walvoord, pp. 328-329)

So while the Jews are enjoying their earthly felicity down in the lower Jerusalem, living to a ripe old age before dying, the Christians, who never die, enjoy reigning over them. It is far from obvious why the dispensationalists accuse those who do not share their views of 'anti-semitism.'

While it's distressing enough to watch the dispensationalists assign to Israel a second-class national destiny, it also leaves one wondering. Where the Christians are is where Jesus is, because the Bible says, "And thus we shall always be with the Lord." (1 Thessalonians 4:17). After the resurrection, our paths do not diverge from His. So is He on the Mother Ship with His people, or down consoling the mortal sinners below, whose millenial fate it is to watch others of like nature with themselves enjoy greater felicity?

Red Heifer

Radio listeners nowadays hear often about a purported plan to rebuild the temple at Jerusalem. As a practical matter this project, although ostensibly Jewish, is funded by dispensationalist Christians. The New Testament teaches that the temple sacrifices of the Old Testament were ordained to foreshadow Jesus Christ's once and for all sacrifice. These animal sacrifices are not understood by Christians to retain any independent value once the reality to which they pointed has come: "For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins." (Hebrews 10:4). It is difficult to imagine how even nominal Christians could fund a project premised on the notion that the blood of Jesus is insufficient, given that the Bible says,

"Of how much worse punishment, do you suppose, will he be thought worthy who has trampled the Son of God underfoot, counted the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified a common thing, and insulted the Spirit of grace?" (Hebrews 10:29).

Liberation of Iraq

The dispensationalists undeniably facilitated the American invasion of Iraq. They have been demonizing the former head of the Iraqi state for years. Although Saddam Hussein never had any plausible connection to Bible prophecy, these writers had portrayed him as representing more than merely mortal evil for some time:

"It is difficult to explain the bizarre behavior of Saddam Hussein without thinking him quite possibly demon-possessed. . .Religiously, Saddam may give lip service to Muhammad and act like a devoted Muslim, but there is strong indication that he is actually a Satanist. . .Saddam Hussein's abnormal hatred for the Jews, Jesus Christ, His followers, and anyone else who would stand in the way of his goal to conquer the world, might be be understood by demonic possession--a virtual foretaste of the Antichrist to follow, who will be indwelt by Satan himself." (Tim LaHaye and Jerry B. Jenkins, Are We Living in the End Times?, pp. 139-142).

This book is copyrighted 1999. The dispensationalists were banging the drum for this war before Mr. Bush ever came to office.

To my knowledge, Mr. Bush has never stated whether he subscribes to the dispensational viewpoint. In this editorial, Hal Lindsey seems to categorize Mr. Bush as an adherent of 'replacement theology:'

"There is a lot of discussion about George Bush and whether or not he is a 'real' Christian, as if that in some way had a bearing on whether or not they will vote for him. . .That is not to say he isn't a truly born-again Christian, because, as I've argued in the past, I don't know. One can't assume he isn't because he adheres to replacement theology unless one assumes Protestant Christianity doesn't contain any true Christians, since most mainstream Protestant denominations do, too." (Hal Lindsey, 'The difficult question of George W. Bush,' March 11, 2004, WorldNet).

(By 'replacement theology' dispensationalists are referring to the concept of the church as the "Israel of God" (Galatians 6:16). Dispensationalists do not think the church, both Jew and Gentile, 'replaced' unbelieving Israel as God's salvation community; indeed many of them, who apportion the land to Israel and heaven to the Christians, do not think Israel ever was a salvation community.) What, if anything, Mr. Bush thinks on these topics is unknown. Certainly though he must be grateful to the dispensationalists for demonizing his enemy, because otherwise you have to pay people to do that.

As to the Christian Zionists, when reminded that the policy they promoted has led to disaster for their country, they chirp up, 'See? The end times are upon us!' Success is good, failure even better.

Racialism

To the dispensationalists, the key to the question 'Who is a Jew?' is racial purity. According to these authors, not the thousands of believing Jews who established the church in the first century, but the unbelieving synagogue which established itself in opposition to Jesus' claim as Messiah, are the true Jews and heirs of Abraham, because the latter have retained their racial purity whereas the former succumbed to race-mixing:

"America is a good example of what happens when Englishmen, Swedes, Poles, Frenchmen and others live together. Slowly but surely there is a blending of the nationalities and races until a new strain emerges. Many countries, such as Mexico and the South American nations, have such a blending in just three or four hundred years until it is difficult to detect the original ancestry. The Jews provide the one international exception. Although scattered all over the world these last 1,800 years, exposed to practically every genetic strain that exists, they are still a people with ethnic social, and religious similarities which no one can fail to identify." (Tim LaHaye, 'The Beginning of the End,' p. 44).

The first expositors of this system can only have derived their preoccupation with racial purity from old-fashioned, nineteenth-century racism; they cannot have derived it from the Bible. Certainly not from the New Testament, which says,

"There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ’s, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise." (Galatians 3:28-29).

But neither did they derive it from the Old Testament. In the Old Testament, the bottom line on who did and who did not belong to the community was, not biologic descent, but faith. Those who clung to the God of Israel were Israel, even Ruth the Moabitess:

“But Ruth said:
'Entreat me not to leave you,
Or to turn back from following after you;
For wherever you go, I will go;
And wherever you lodge, I will lodge;
Your people shall be my people,
And your God, my God.'” (Ruth 1:16).

The dispensationalist assumption that the true Israel follows racial descent is not even faithful to the Old Testament, much less the New. Neither is it found in pre-Talmudic Judaism. While the temple still stood Judaism was an actively proselytizing religion. Later, after suffering defeat and dispersal at the hands of pagan Rome, Judaism turned inward. At this later period the accusation surfaces in the Talmud that proselytes are not really Jews, nor on a footing of equality with those who are Jews by racial descent. It is unhistorical to project that later belief into the New Testament, and odder still for Christians to believe it. Many thousands of Jews heard the gospel and believed: "And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved." (Acts 2:47). But the dispensationalists insist the true Jews are those who do not believe,-- even atheists and agnostics, who abound in the present day state of Israel. This is an inversion of the Bible.

The apostles throw the gate, which was always open, open even wider: “For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek, for the same Lord over all is rich to all who call upon Him. 'For whoever calls on the name of the LORD shall be saved.'” (Romans 10:12-13). At the present time, reform Judaism does not require circumcision of male converts. Yet the dispensationalists regard these as real Jews, while converts made by the apostles are, in their eyes, illegitimate! The Lord broke down the wall, "For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation. . ." (Ephesians 2:14), which the dispensationalists industriously build back up again. If there is now, as the Bible says, no distinction between Jew and Greek, then where is there room for their system? And if they do not believe the New Testament, then by virtue of what are they Christians rather than Jews, or more precisely Jewish wanna-bes?

So Shall We Ever Be

"A little girl was asked by a scoffer of the Second Coming of Christ, 'How can you enjoy heaven? Christ is supposed to come down to earth!' The scoffer's question bothered her only a moment before she replied, 'It really doesn't matter, because wherever he goes I'll go with him!'" (Tim LaHaye, 'The Beginning of the End,' p. 29).

This clever little girl has placed her finger on the spot where it unravels. Biblically, after the rapture, believers are ever and always with the Lord: "And thus we shall always be with the Lord." (1 Thessalonians 4:17). Yet in this complex and difficult system, that's an awkward spot. The promise is clear; they reiterate it themselves: "The Lord then promises that together with our loved ones we will be with the Lord Jesus wherever He goes--forever." (Hal Lindsey, 'The Terminal Generation,' p. 179). Dispensationalists place Jesus on earth in the millenium, ruling from the throne of David out of Jerusalem. Is that where they place the church also?

Let's go that route: "At the end of the seven years when Jesus Christ returns, Revelation 19 speaks of His coming with clouds of his saints --- and that's us. We will come back with Him and be co-rulers with Him on the earth which He will set up." (Hal Lindsey, The Terminal Generation, p. 177). Thus we have immortal, perfected human beings socializing with mortal sinners -- as their rulers, of course. These mortal sinners are the survivors of the dispensationalists' "holocaust:" "Men who have studied events that were to occur shortly before the great holocaust known as Armageddon are amazed as they see them happening before their eyes." (Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth, p. 34). But this same situation is supposed to represent Israel's national glory: "For God unconditionally promised Abraham's descendants a literal world-wide kingdom over which they would rule through their Messiah who would reign upon King David's throne." (Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth, p. 165). In the racialist perspective of dispensationalism, "Abraham's descendants" are solely those of Jewish ethnicity, Galatians 3:7 to the contrary notwithstanding. So how can the Jews of the millenium simultaneously be second-class citizens in their own homeland, ruled over in an apartheid regime by immortal Christians, and also rulers?

Or we can go the 'mother ship' route. But then how can this little girl be ever with Jesus, as the Bible promises?

Titus 2:13

When challenged to produce a scripture verse which reports more than one of their seven judgment days, or both of their two second comings, the dispensationalists are not silent. Thus Dr. LaHaye offers Titus 2:13 as proof of two separate and distinct second comings:

"Titus 2:13 speaks of Christians at the Second Coming of Christ 'looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ.' The blessed hope is a reference to the Rapture of the Church -- the cause for great rejoicing by the Church. The Glorious Appearing, however, refers to the public coming of Christ in his majesty and power to rule the earth. They both refer to the Second Coming but to different stages of that coming." (Tim LaHaye, 'The Beginning of the the End,' p. 24).

It's interesting that Titus 2:13 comes up in discussions of the deity of Jesus Christ, because of the phrase "the great God and our Savior Jesus Christ." Granville Sharp's rule, which applies to two nouns "of personal description" (Sharp's rule, quoted, p. 271, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics, Daniel B. Wallace), requires the reader, according to some interpreters, to identify rather than distinguish "the great God" and "our Savior Jesus Christ," because the first carries the definite article, but not the second. Since Granville Sharp's rule pertains only to nouns "of personal description," it does not address the earlier case in the same verse, namely "that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing" [την μακαριαν ελπιδα και επιφανειαν της δοξης]. The first element carries the article, not the second; but "hope" and "appearing" are not personal nouns. However, it should be apparent that "and" [kai] in Greek does not always intend to differentiate the two items it joins together; sometimes it can identify them! There is no proof from his phraseology that Paul intends to distinguish two events, rather than identify just one.

As should be evident, the arrival of the Judge is cause for rejoicing to those who may expect to be exonerated, but only despair to those who may expect condemnation.

Second Chance

The most dramatic feature of the dispensational system is the second chance it affords those 'left behind.' According to this theory, those not caught up with the Lord when He returns are not necessarily lost, but get a second chance to decide for Christ, becoming 'tribulation saints:'

"Scripture teaches that a fantastically large number of those 'many' Jesus came to ransom are what we call 'Tribulation saints.' Yes, the Tribulation is a time of fury and wrath and terrifying judgments, but it is also a time of long-suffering grace and mercy." (Tim LaHaye, 'Are We Living in the End Times?,' p. 158)

"Some interpreters have a hard time believing that the Tribulation could usher in such an enormous soul harvest, but we are convinced this text shows that more men and women will be won to Christ in this period than at any time in history. (Tim LaHaye, 'Are We Living in the End Times?,' p. 308)

No doubt this promise attracts those with unsaved friends and family. Fortunately this feature is, not only the basis of a lucrative genre of the publishing industry, but a testable prediction made by this theory.

"'Blessed are those servants whom the master, when he comes, will find watching. Assuredly, I say to you that he will gird himself and have them sit down to eat, and will come and serve them. And if he should come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants. But know this, that if the master of the house had known what hour the thief would come, he would have watched and not allowed his house to be broken into. Therefore you also be ready, for the Son of Man is coming at an hour you do not expect. . .But if that servant says in his heart, "My master is delaying his coming," and begins to beat the male and female servants, and to eat and drink and be drunk, the master of that servant will come on a day when he is not looking for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in two and appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.'" (Luke 12:37-46).

Notice that the disobedient servant does not get a second chance as the theory requires. Thus the theory is disconfirmed.

Apostates

What is the acid test for finding Israel?: race, as the Christian Zionists claim, or faith, as Paul teaches? One good way of determining this question is to ask, what becomes of apostates? Those who renounce their ancestral faith, or are believed to do so, still carry the same genes as when they learned that faith on their mother's knee. Are the 'Jews for Jesus' still Jews, or are they not? To the Jewish racial supremacist it is "blood" which makes a Jew: "With the blood of King David flowing in their veins, these pioneers came back once again to banish the local Goliaths." (John Hagee, 'Final Dawn over Jerusalem, p. 10). Once a Jew has found Jesus, does he still have the "blood of David" coursing in his veins, or not?

Some answer, 'no:'

"At a protest fast at the Wailing Wall, the J.D.L.'s rabble-rousing Rabbi Meir Kahane announced, 'If you lose a Jew in Auschwitz or through conversion, it's still a soul lost.'" (Time Magazine, 'Unwelcome Immigrants,' Monday, March 26, 1973).

The idea that converts to Christianity cannot remain part of God's congregation is deeply rooted in Judaism. The Judaism of the present day defined itself, at Jamnia, with eighteen benedictions. What Christians are accused of is what their founder was accused of:

Notice that even the rabbis testify for Paul's view! It is not "blood," but faith, which makes a Jew, or as Paul said, "For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh. . ." (Philippians 3:3). According to the Biblical view, there can be no division in the Messiah's body:

"Therefore remember that you, once Gentiles in the flesh—who are called Uncircumcision by what is called the Circumcision made in the flesh by hands—that at that time you were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off have been brought near by the blood of Christ. For He Himself is our peace, who has made both one, and has broken down the middle wall of separation, having abolished in His flesh the enmity, that is, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, so as to create in Himself one new man from the two, thus making peace, and that He might reconcile them both to God in one body through the cross, thereby putting to death the enmity." (Ephesians 2:11-16).

Where the Messiah is, there is Israel. Who is the "servant" in Isaiah: Israel? or the Messiah? or both? But this popular new religion of Christian Zionism breaks asunder what Jesus made one at the cross. The logic of the racialist position, to be consistent, is that 'Jews for Jesus,' whether of the present day or the apostles Peter and Paul, are still Jews; after all their DNA has not changed. But if so, then who is Israel after the flesh? All those thousands of Jews whose story is told in Acts, who thronged into the church, the holy remnant, and their descendants? Did they cease to be Jews by joining the church? The rabbis, chanting the eighteen benedictions, including the benediction against Christians: ". . .let all Your enemies be speedily cut off, and the dominion of arrogance uproot and crush, etc.," say they have.

On this point, the Christian Zionists follow, not their own racial logic, but the finding of the rabbis, that only that entity which has continually, down through the ages, purged itself of followers of Jesus of Nazareth is truly Israel. By their reckoning, the Israel of prophecy is exclusively this latter body, and includes none of Peter's descendants, none of Matthew's, Mark's, or John's. They follow this finding out in detail: ask John Hagee, how many Jews were left in Spain after Ferdinand and Isabella's expulsion of Jews and Muslims? Those Jews who were willing to convert to Catholicism were allowed to remain. His anser?: None!: "All Jews who were willing to convert could remain in Spain, all others were forced, upon pain of death, to leave immediately. The Seed of Abraham left Spain at the same time Columbus sailed across the Atlantic. . ." (John Hagee, 'Final Dawn Over Jerusalem,' p. 36). "The Seed of Abraham left Spain"!-- the thousands who remained were not the "Seed of Abraham," because according to this author, not only are Christians not the Seed of Abraham as Paul teaches, but those Jews by ethnicity who he will allow to be the "Seed of Abraham," upon adopting Christianity cease to be such! They defer to the rabbis in defining a Jew, but the rabbis agree with Paul, not with the racists!

Incidentally, 'Pastor' Hagee is wrong to think the only way to avoid such human rights atrocities is for Christians to toss aside everything the New Testament says about Jesus' trial in favor of a face-saving fiction that it was really about divorce. Contrary to 'Pastor' Hagee and Abe Foxman, the New Testament is not the problem. If the Spaniards had lived by the New Testament, they would have loved their enemies, not expelled them. The Spaniards did not ask the Muslims to invade and conquer their nation. Under Muslim occupation, the Jews enjoyed a status much like that the Kurds in American-occupied Iraq, because they welcomed the occupiers. While Muslims and Jews remember Muslim-ruled Spain as a golden age, the Christian populace at the bottom of the social pyramid cannot so recall it, because they were not free to practice their religion. Should the American occupation of Iraq collapse, the Kurds will find themselves in a vulnerable position. The solution was not to adopt Muslim methods as the Spaniards did once they regained the upper hand, but to obey their Lord and do as He taught them. Though these people had for centuries suffered the bitter experience of being second-class citizens in their own country, they should not have paid back evil for evil, but overcome evil with good.

The Christian Zionists are racists, but they are not even consistent in their racism. They wait for the rabbis to define Israel by faith, then plug that faith-based entity into their racial equations. Christian Zionism came about in part because, while this country fought a war to end slavery, the south never underwent a true Reconstruction. The apologists for slavery, who re-interpreted the Bible along racialist lines, never discovered their error, because they never had to sit still and hear a Bible-believing abolitionist explain it to them. The defeated South stealithly disenfranchised the freed slaves while the North averted its eyes. Were the slave-owners right all along about the Bible? No!:

Are Christian Zionists Patriots?

These authors often identify themselves as American patriots and indeed impugn the patriotism of others. Yet what they have to say about this country is not old-fashioned boosterism, to say the very least:

"The United States will not hold its present position of leadership in the western world; financially, the future leader will be Western Europe. Internal political chaos caused by student rebellions and Communist subversion will begin to erode the economy of our nation. Lack of moral principle by citizens and leaders will so weaken law and order that a state of anarchy will finally result. The military capability of the United States, though it is at present the most powerful in the world, has already been neutralized because no one has the courage to use it decisively. When the economy collapses so will the military." (Hal Lindsey, The Late Great Planet Earth, copyright 1970, p. 173).

There is no 'chapter and verse' cited because there is, of course, no such information found in the Bible. These authors' view of their fellow-citizens is quite jaundiced, and their attachment to their country quite equivocal, especially as contrasted with their devotion to the state of Israel. They constitute a 'fifth column:' inhabitants of one nation whose primary loyalty is to another nation.

Neither do these authors do not think much of our form of government, the pride of American patriots:

"The U.S. government, on the other hand, changes from liberal to conservative depending on the mood of the voters, and politicians who want to ensure their election cannot focus on what is best for their country but on what will garner them the most votes. This does not lend itself to a strong, stable government." (Tim LaHaye, Are We Living in the End Times? p. 165).

Nor do they promote civility. Google the question, 'Is Barack Obama the antichrist?,' and see how many thousands of responses you get. Demonizing a popular politician is not the American way; rather it is the way to turn America into Lebanon.

For a chilling glimpse of the Christian Zionists in full-throated war-cry, check out You Tube. The speaker sure enough succeeds in the task he sets himself, of evoking Germany in the 1930's: