Saturday, August 26, 2017

RETROFIT: "I Will Build My Church" - Dave Hunt (2007)


RETRO NOV 23, 2007

"I Will Build My Church"

By Dave Hunt


Christ was born "King of the Jews" (Mt 2:2), was called "King of Israel" and "King of the Jews" (Mt 27:11Mk 15:2, etc.) and acknowledged both titles (Jn 1:49-5012:12-15). He did not renounce His claim to David's throne even though His own people (as the prophets had foretold) "despised, rejected" (Is 53:3) and crucified Him (Ps 22:12-18;Is 53:58-10Zec 12:10). All four gospels declare that "King of the Jews" was the accusation placed on the cross (Mt 27:37Mk 15:26Lk 23:38Jn 19:19). Here is Mark's account of Israel rejecting her king and demanding His crucifixion:


But Pilate answered them, saying, Will ye that I release unto you the King
of the Jews?...

But the chief priests moved the people, that he should rather
release Barabbas unto them.

And Pilate answered and said again unto them, What will ye then that I shall do unto him whom ye call the King of the Jews?

And they cried out again, Crucify him. (Mk 15:9-13)

The Hebrew prophets had foretold that Christ would rise from the dead and that He would come again to establish a kingdom that would never end (1 Kgs 2:459:5Is 9:753:10-12Jer 17:25Dn 2:34-3544-45;7:14, etc.). Christ has fulfilled only the first part, rising from the dead and ascending to the Father's right hand. If the remainder of those prophecies is to be fulfilled (and they must be, or God has lied) there must be a future restoration of the Kingdom to Israel as the disciples believed (Acts 1:6), as Peter affirmed (Acts 3:19-26) and as Christ acknowledged (Acts 1:6-7). Israel's future repentance, redemption and restoration are foretold often (Ezk 39Zec 121314Acts 5:31, etc.). Paul prayed for Israel's salvation (Rom 10:1) and declared that "all Israel shall be saved" (Rom 11:26).

If the Muslims and other nations in the world would understand these prophecies concerning Israel's right to her land and honor them and the God who gave them, there would be peace in the Middle East and throughout the world. Instead, they will persist in their desire to destroy Israel, resulting in Christ's intervention from heaven to rescue Israel at Armageddon and to destroy Antichrist, his followers and kingdom. Most Israelis themselves do not believe that God gave them their land and are trading it for a fool's "peace" with an enemy which has sworn to exterminate them.


Knowing that Israel would reject and crucify Him, Christ said He would build a new entity, the church. The word "church" or "churches" (ekklesia in Greek, meaning "called out"), occurs about 114 times in the New Testament. No Hebrew word in the Old Testament is translated "church" in the KJV. Pertaining to Israel, the major comparable words in Hebrew are edah, mowed and qahal, translated as "assembly" or "congregation." While Acts 7:38 refers to "the church [congregation of Israel] in the wilderness," the Bible makes a clear distinction between Israel and the New Testament church. The latter consists of both Jews and Gentiles and did not exist before Christ's death and resurrection. He continues to build that church even now. It was established by Him and specifically for Him: "I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it" (Mt 16:18).


Here we have an obvious claim by Christ that He is God. Israel had been chosen by God. Who, then, but God himself, could establish another congregation of believers in addition to and distinct from Israel? Christ's statement regarding the church is similar to what He said to the Jews who "believed on him," and it has the same awesome implications: "If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; and ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free" (Jn 8:31-32).


The Jews must have been stunned. How could this one dare to use such terms as "my word" and "my disciples" and claim to set His followers free? Was it not God's word they were to follow, and were they not Moses' disciples? Was He claiming to be greater than Moses—even equal to God? Whatever it meant to be His disciple, He was obviously starting something new.


Nevertheless, no one imagined that this miracle-worker intended to dispense with Israel and replace her with some other entity. That heresy would come from Roman Catholicism; and many of the Reformers would be unable to extricate themselves from it, in spite of their clear understanding of salvation by grace through faith. The belief that the church replaces Israel remains today among Roman Catholics, among those of Reformed theology such as Presbyterians and Lutherans, and among many charismatics as well.


In its infancy, the church was composed only of Jewish believers. They had difficulty believing that Gentiles, too, could be saved through Christ and be in the church, even though the Old Testament prophets had laid that foundation (Ps 72:11,17Is 11:1042:1-649:6Mal 1:11, etc.). And even when they understood the "mystery" revealed by Paul "that the Gentiles should be fellowheirs, and of the same body, and partakers of his promise in Christ by the gospel" (Eph 3:3-6), some of them tried to subject the Gentiles to the Jewish law. In effect, they were erroneously making the church an extension of Israel (Acts 15:1).


Gentiles are "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise" (Eph 2:12). When a Gentile is saved and is added by Christ as a "living stone" to the church under construction (1 Pt 2:5), he doesn't come under the Jewish laws and customs of the old covenant. And when a Jew is saved and added to the church, he is set free from the Jewish law (the "law of sin and death") and its penalties (Rom 8:1). Both the Gentile and the Jew who enter the church through faith in Christ are thereafter under a higher law, "the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (Rom 8:2). Indeed, Christ has become their life, living out through them this new standard of holy conduct—something that was unknown in Israel even to her greatest prophets (1 Pt 1:10-12).


No one can establish himself in that sacred temple; he must be placed there by Christ alone. The living stones which He is building together to form the eternal temple do not fall in and out of the structure. We are in Christ and eternally secure.


The church is Christ's body, nourished by Him. Believers are spoken of as branches in the true vine, depicting a continual flow of life and nourishment from Him to them. Christ is the head of the body, which is therefore directed by Him and not by a priesthood or hierarchy of men in some earthly headquarters. The headquarters of the church is in heaven. Yet today's denominations (like the cults) all have their earthly headquarters and their traditions. They have become organizations instead of being content with being part of the organism, His body.


In the church "There is neither Jew nor Greek [Gentile]...[but all are] one in Christ" (Gal 3:28). Gentiles do not become Jewish, but Jew and Gentile have become "one new man" (Eph 2:15). Through the cross, Christ "abolished" the "ordinances" which had separated Jew and Gentile. Therefore, we can confidently affirm that Gentiles are not to adopt those "ordinances." Would one of Christ's own adopt something which God has abolished?


Paul's epistle to the Galatians was written to correct the error of salvation partly through Christ and partly through works. A works salvation is the error of every cult, and Roman Catholicism has developed her system of religious ritual and works to the ultimate. In all of his epistles Paul comes back to the theme that salvation is all of grace and nothing of works. Herein is a major difference between Israel and the church: for the former, eternal life came through keeping the Law; for the latter, eternal life comes by faith.


The old covenant offered life to the righteous who kept the Law: "this do and thou shalt live" (Dt 8:1Lk 10:28). But no one could keep the Law, for all have sinned (Rom 3:23). Under the new covenant (available from Adam onward), "to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom 4:5). Human pride insists upon becoming righteous on its own—an impossible task. Paul mourned the fact that his people Israel, though they had "a zeal after God," yet "they being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves unto the rightousness of God" (Rom 10:3) through the new covenant. So it is with all the cults. Roman Catholicism, for example, attempts (through the sacraments, suffering and works) to make its members righteous enough for heaven. It is the error of the Pharisee who proclaimed his righteousness to God and was not heard, whereas the publican, who acknowledged his unworthiness, was justified (Lk 18:10-14).


One had to belong to Israel (with some exceptions) to be saved; but one must be saved (with no exceptions) in order to belong to the church. The church is not a vehicle of salvation. Making that claim is a major error of most cults such as Mormonism and Roman Catholicism. Each claims salvation comes through their church. In fact, salvation is for those outside the church and only then can one become a part of it.


Salvation has always been and still is the same for both Jew and Gentile; but God's plans are different for Israel than for the church. Jews (like Gentiles) who believe in Christ prior to His Second Coming (when He makes Himself known to Israel and all Israel is saved) are in the church. Jews who only come to faith in Christ when He appears to rescue them in the midst of Armageddon will continue into the millennial kingdom on earth and Christ will reign over them from the throne of David. Many Gentiles will be saved at that time also, but "all Israel shall be saved" (Rom 11:26).


The Galatian problem remains (in varying degrees) within some so-called Hebrew-Christian or Messianic congregations today. There is often a tendency to imagine that a return to Jewish customs (even by Gentiles) makes for greater sanctity. Extrabiblical traditions are honored, for example in the Seder ceremony at Passover, as though inspired of God. Scripture alone must be our guide, to the exclusion of manmade traditions, which Christ condemned (Mt 15:1-9Mk 7:9-13), as did the apostles (Gal 1:13-14Col 2:81 Pt 1:18). Traditions developed over the centuries have led to great error within both Catholicism and Protestantism.


We must ever remember that Christ intended the church to be something new and separate from Israel. It would neither partake of nor interfere with God's promises to His earthly people, promises which will be fulfilled in their time. The church would be separate, too, from Israel's religious ordinances. Here, again, the cults have gone astray.


Mormonism, for example, pretends to have both an Aaronic and Melchisedec priesthood. Roman Catholicism claims to have a sacrificial priesthood that offers Christ continually as a sacrifice upon its altars. On the contrary, in the church every believer is a priest (1 Pt 2:9) and the sacrifices offered are "praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name" and "to do good" (Heb 13:15-16).


In fact, there are no longer any propitiatory sacrifices offered for the forgiveness of sins because the church was made possible by the one sacrifice of Christ upon the cross. That sacrifice is never to be repeated because it paid the full penalty demanded by God's justice and made it possible for God to "be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus" (Rom 3:26). Consequently, "there is no more offering for sin" (Heb 10:18).


Israel broke the covenant God made with her. She demonstrated that "by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin" (Rom 3:20). Her sacrificial system could not take away sin, but looked forward to the unique "Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (Jn 1:29). The establishment of a "new covenant" with Israel (Jer 31:31) is foretold. Animal sacrifices had opened the way for the Jewish high priest into the earthly sanctuary which was patterned after the heavenly reality (Heb 9:1-10). When Christ died on the cross, "the veil of the temple was rent in twain from the top to the bottom" (Mk 15:38), ending the animal sacrifices. Now we have a "great high priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God" (Heb 4:14), who, "by his own blood...obtained eternal redemption for us" (Heb 9:1224).


Israel was given a land on earth (Gn 12:113:1515:18-2117:7-8;26:3-428:13-14Lv 20:2425:23, etc.), her destiny is tied to it, and she will never cease to exist there (Jer 31:35-40). Numerous prophecies promise her restoration to her land, with the Messiah, upon His return, ruling her from the throne of David (2 Sm 7:10-161 Kgs 9:5Is 9:6-7;Ezk 34:23-2437:24-25Lk 1:31-33, etc.). The promise is clear that God will pour out His Spirit upon His chosen people, after which they will never pollute His holy name again and He will never again hide His holy face from Israel (Ezk 39:72227-29Zec 1314).


Israel must endure forever (Jer 31:35-38) or the prophecies of the Bible and Christ's promises to her could not be fulfilled. Christ referred to the cities of Israel in existence at His Second Coming (Mt 10:23), proof enough that the church has not replaced her. As further proof (though not needed), Christ promised His disciples that they would rule over Israel with Him in His millennial kingdom (Mt 19:28Lk 22:30).


The church cannot fulfill the prophecies to Israel, never having belonged to a specific land nor having been cast out of it or returned to it. Rather, the church comes "out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation" (Rv 5:9). The hope of the church is to be raptured to heaven (Jn 14:31 Thes 4:16-17, etc.), where we stand before "the judgment seat of Christ" (Rom 14:102 Cor 5:10) and then are married to our Lord (Rv 19:7-9) and are eternally with Him wherever He is (Jn 14:31 Thes 4:17).


That being the case, in love with our Bridegroom and longing to see Him face to face, let us hold the things of earth lightly and live for eternity. Let us please Him alone, not following men or organizations, by faith allowing our Head to nourish, sustain and direct us and to live His life through us to His glory.

RETROFIT: "The Ethnicity of The Antichrist" - Dr. Thomas Ice (2007) Michael James Stone (2017)


# In the following article: 


Dr Thomas Ice makes a case for a gentile Anti-Christ by using material from Arnold Fruchtenbaum, While he states a logical premise to administer scholastic logic, he fails to apply the same standard to his won ideas.

This being said we can conclude a better summation that Mr Ice's 1) Anti-Christ (gentile) 2) False Prophet (Jew) is wrong.

HE'S GOT IT BACKWARDS.

1) It is obvious in a study of the False World Religion and False Prophet that the False Prophet will be a Gentile not unlike Balaam who served for money.

2) It is and always had been a historical rationale that the False Messiah is a man who is of jewish descent or in fact a Jew. Many of the reasons Dr Ice says he is not is why he is.

BUT MORE THAN THAT.........

The fact is gentiles using gentile perspective often attach gentile motives to the reasoning, but the fact is JOHN WAS WRITING TO JEWS ABOUT A FALSE JEWISH LEADER AND THE END OF THE WORLD AND SALVATION EVENTUALLY OF ISRAEL.

While gentile nations are included.........

THE FOCUS IS JEWISH.

The Coming World Leader to be revealed by God as the Anti-Christ will be of jewish descent or background much like a Hitler. 

-MICHAEL JAMES STONE 
August 26 2017


RETRO NOV 22, 2007


The Ethnicity of The Antichrist

By Dr. Thomas Ice
A widely held belief throughout the history of the church has 
been the notion that Antichrist will be of Jewish origin. This 
view is still somewhat popular in our own day. However, upon 
closer examination we find no real Scriptural basis for such a 
view. In fact, the Bible teaches just the opposite that the 
Antichrist will be of Gentile descent.


Background

A decade ago, when I was doing extensive research into the 
Pseudo-Ephraem sermon that contained a rapture statement from 
early-medieval times,[1] I noticed the almost universally held 
belief of the time that Antichrist was to be a Jew. During the 
late-medieval period, we see a shift from a personal Antichrist 
to a corporate one as some Catholics and most Reformers tended to 
see the successive Popes and the Roman Church as Antichrist. 
However, the early and medieval church always saw an individual 
Antichrist. For the last two hundred years, with the revival of 
the literal and thus futurist interpretation of prophecy, the 
historic protestant notion that Antichrist was the system of the 
Roman Catholic Church has been in decline. Bernard McGinn tells 
us: 

After Vatican II, traditional Lutheran and Reformed claims that 
the pope was Antichrist have been either forgotten or explicitly 
rejected. Even the Evangelical Fundamentalists, for whom 
Antichrist is certainly alive and well, have been uncomfortable 
with a papal Antichrist.[2] 

Some of the earliest expounders of Antichrist, Irenaeus and 
Hippolytus of the second century, taught that Antichrist would be 
a Jew. " It seems clear that the bishop," McGinn says of 
Irenaeus, " depended on earlier traditions, both Jewish and 
Christian, in claiming that Antichrist would be born a Jew, 
specifically from the tribe of Dan." [3] Hippolytus, a disciple 
of Irenaeus, wrote extensively on the Antichrist. Hippolytus 
believed that " Antichrist is a Jewish false messiah whose 
coming is still some time in the future." [4] Origen, 
Chrysostom, Jerome, and likely Augustine all continued the early 
church tradition that the Antichrist was to be of Jewish 
descent.[5] The tradition of a Jewish Antichrist, who would 
likely be of the tribe of Dan, was reinforced throughout the 
middle ages. 

A Jewish Antichrist notion is sometimes taught by our own 
dispensational prophecy teachers of today. A. W. Pink provides 
just such an argument in his well-known work on Antichrist as 
follows: 

It should, however, be pointed out that there is no express 
declaration of Scripture which says in so many words that this 
daring Rebel will be " a Jew" ; nevertheless, the hints given 
are so plain, the conclusions which must be drawn from certain 
statements of Holy Writ are so obvious, and the requirements of 
the case are so inevitable, that we are forced to believe he must 
be a Jew.[6] 

Such a statement not only reveals his viewpoint, but also is also 
telling in that he tacitly admits that his view lacks direct 
biblical support, as I shall seek to demonstrate.


Arguments Against A Jewish Antichrist

Three reasons are often given in support of the argument that 
Antichrist will be Jewish.[7] First, it is argued that he will be 
a Jew since the Jews are responsible for the world' s problems. 
Thus, it follows that the greatest problem of history- 
Antichrist- will also be Jewish. This is the Anti-Semitic reason. 
Since we do not have enough space in this article to give an 
in-depth refutation of Anti-Semitism,[8] it should be clear that 
since Anti-Semitism is unbiblical so is any logic that reasons 
upon such a premise. This is rarely if ever a viewpoint put forth 
by dispensational writers. 

The second major argument is that the Antichrist must be a Jew 
since the Jews would only accept a Jew as their Messiah. An 
advocate of this view is Grant Jeffery who reasons that: 

the Jews would one day accept for a time the false claims of the 
Antichrist as their promised Messiah. . . . Since the prophecies 
tell us that the Antichrist will present himself to Israel as the 
Messiah many scholars have concluded that he must be Jewish. 
Certainly no religious Jew would dream of accepting a Gentile as 
the Messiah of Israel.[9] 

This view is also built upon the logic that since the Antichrist 
is just that, an anti- Messiah, then his career must be a 
counterfeit of Jesus' first coming. While some of this is true, 
such symmetry can be carried too far. The specific descriptions 
of the Antichrist are more like that of a political leader than a 
mere converse of Jesus, as shall be noted below. In other words, 
the mere term " Antichrist" appears in the minds of many to be 
the justification for thinking that since Jesus was a Jew then so 
must be the Antichrist. 

Hebrew Christian scholar, Dr. Arnold Fruchtenbaum offers a 
refutation of this reason which he calls " The Logical Reason." 
He writes: 

Stated in a syllogism, this argument goes as follows:

Major Premise: The Jews will accept the Antichrist as the Messiah

Minor Premise: The Jews will never accept a Gentile as the 
Messiah. 

Conclusion: The Antichrist will be a Jew.[10]

The difficulties of this argument are many, not the least of 
which are the two premises. Neither premise can be supported from 
the Bible. Just because the Jews make a covenant with the 
Antichrist (Isa. 28:15Dan. 9:26), does not mean that they 
accept him as their Messiah. It does not follow from these texts 
either textually or logically that Israel accepts him as Messiah 
(or Antichrist). Secondly, since they are not accepting him as 
Messiah, the fact that he is a Gentile peacemaker is irrelevant. 
Since both premises are faulty, it therefore follows that the 
conclusion is faulty as well. 

Fruchtenbaum notes another variation of this argument, which he 
calls " the Scriptural reason." [11] This line of reasoning is 
put forth by combining a major premise and a minor premise from 
Revelation 7:4- 8

Stated in a syllogism, this argument goes as follows:

Major Premise: The tribe from whom the Antichrist would come 
would not be listed among the 144,000. 

Minor Premise: Dan is not among the 144,000.

Conclusion: The Antichrist is from the tribe of Dan.[12]

The problem with this argument is that it is an argument from 
silence. Only God knows why Dan was left out. Would not it be 
just as important to note that the tribe of Dan will be included 
in millennial Israel (Ezek. 48:2)? What is one to make of that if 
the tribe of Dan has a curse on it? Further, this entire argument 
is based upon circular reasoning. The major premise contains a 
Jewish assumption as a starting point. So is it surprising that 
this line of reasoning concludes that the Antichrist is of Jewish 
descent? Not at all since that what circular reasoning is all 
about: assuming your conclusion as a starting point. Yet, the 
starting point is not stated in Scripture, it is merely 
presupposed.[13] 

Some argue that Daniel 11:37 has to be a reference to a Jew since 
in the King James Version of the Bible it says " And he will 
show no regard for the God of his fathers." It is argued that 
this is a reference to the God of the Bible. However, such is not 
the case. Almost all other English translations render this text, 
as does the New American Standard Version, " And he will show no 
regard for the gods of his fathers." When one studies this 
passage in the original Hebrew it becomes clear that it is a 
reference to Gentile gods. " Any student of Hebrew would see 
from the original Hebrew text that the correct translation should 
be ' the gods of his fathers' and not the ' God of his 
fathers' as the King James has rendered it," declares 
Fruchtenbaum. " The fact the plural form of the word ' god' is 
used makes this a reference to heather deities and not to God of 
Israel. There is much external evidence to show that this is the 
correct rendering of the Hebrew Text." [14] 

The third argument is made by those who attempt to say that 
Scripture teaches that Antichrist will be a descendant from the 
Jewish tribe of Dan. Support for this view is inappropriately 
derived from Genesis 49:17Deuteronomy 33:22Jeremiah 8:16
Daniel 11:37Revelation 7:4-8. Even though many passages are 
cited in support of this argument, none of them actually support 
the notion since they are all taken out of context. In reality, 
only Daniel 11:37 refers to the Antichrist. Even though some 
believe that the phrase in Daniel 11:37 " the God of his 
fathers" (KJV), implies a Jewish apostasy, the phrase is more 
accurately translated " the gods of his fathers" (NASB). Since 
Antichrist will in fact be a Gentile, as will be shown below, the 
argument is unfounded. Since the original Hebrew supports the 
NASB translation and not the KJV, Antichrist' s apostasy will be 
Christian and not Jewish.[15]


Arguments for a Gentile Antichrist

We have seen that the Bible does not teach that Antichrist will 
be Jewish. However, Scripture does teach that he will be of 
Gentile and possibly of Roman descent (at least from the Revived 
Roman Empire). 

This can first be seen from biblical typology. Most commentators 
agree that Daniel 11 speaks of Antiochus Epiphanes, a Gentile, 
who typifies the future Antichrist. " Nowhere is a Gentile ever 
seen as a type of Christ; and for good reason too since Christ 
Himself was to be a Jew." [16] Since Antiochus is a Gentile, 
then so will be Antichrist. 

Secondly, biblical imagery supports a Gentile origin of 
Antichrist. Scripture pictures Antichrist as rising up out of the 
sea (Rev. 13:117:15). In prophetic literature the sea is an 
image of the Gentile nations. Thus, Antichrist is seen as a 
Gentile progeny. 

Thirdly, the nature of the " Times of the Gentiles" (Luke 
21:24) supports a Gentile Antichrist. Fruchtenbaum notes: 

It is agreed by all premillennialists that the period known as 
the Times of the Gentiles does not end until the second coming of 
Christ. It is further agreed that the Antichrist is the final 
ruler of the Times of the Gentiles. . . . 

If this is so, how then can a Jew be the last ruler at a time 
when only Gentiles can have the preeminence? To say the 
Antichrist is to be a Jew would contradict the very nature of the 
Time of the Gentiles.[17] 

Fourthly, the Bible not only teaches that Antichrist will be 
Gentile, but it also tells us he will be of Roman descent. This 
is understood from Daniel 9:27 where the one cutting a covenant 
with Israel is said to represent the revived Roman Empire, since 
it was the Romans who destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple in a.d. 
70. 

Finally, that Antichrist is a Gentile ruler is also the thrust of 
Revelation 17:9- 12. This passage says that the Beast (John' s 
term in Revelation for the Antichrist) is one of " seven kings" 
(17:10), thus, a Gentile (Roman) ruler. G. H. Lang notes: 

This eight would be one of the former seven, and so in 13.3 one 
of his heads had been smitten unto death, and this death-stroke 
was healed, that is, a man formerly slain by violence is brought 
again to life. That he had been a former Gentile monarch seems to 
forbid that he is a Jew. I know not a word of Scripture that 
suggests this last notion.[18]


Conclusion

While I think it may be possible that the False Prophet (Rev. 
13:11- 18; 16:13; 19:20; 20:10) could be a Jew (I am not saying 
that I necessarily think he will be), there does not appear to be 
any Scriptural grounds to think that the Antichrist will be of 
the tribe of Dan nor of Jewish descent. It appears that he will 
be a Gentile and will arise from within the Revived Roman Empire. 
In the middle of the tribulation he will take his seat in 
Israel' s rebuilt Temple and claim to be God Himself (2 Thess. 
2:4). His career will be a short-lived seven-year period for 
which he will spend eternity in the Lake of Fire upon Christ' s 
return to planet earth (Rev. 19:2020:10). Maranatha! 




Endnotes

[1] See Thomas Ice, " The Rapture in Pseudo-Ephraem," on our 
Pre-Trib website at the following: 
www.pre-trib.org/article-view.php?id=52. Our website also 
contains a translation of Pseudo-Ephraem' s sermon. 

[2] Bernard McGinn, Antichrist: Two Thousand Years of The Human 
Fascination With Evil (San Francisco: Harper Collins, 1994), p. 
252. 

[3] McGinn, Antichrist, p. 59.

[4] McGinn, Antichrist, p. 63.

[5] As indicated in Wilhelm Bousset, The Antichrist Legend: A 
Chapter in Christian and Jewish Folklore (London: Hutchinson, 
1896), pp. 133- 147. 

[6] (Italics original) Arthur W. Pink, The Antichrist (Grand 
Rapids: Kregel, (1923), 1988, p. 42. 

[7] These three reasons were gleaned from Arnold Fruchtenbaum, " 
The Nationality of the Anti-Christ" (Englewood, NJ: American 
Board of Missions To The Jews, n.d.). 

[8] For more on the unbiblical nature of anti-Semitism see my 
forthcoming book due out in the Summer of 2005, The New 
Anti-Semitism: Why The World Hates Israel from Balfour Books. 

[9] Grant R. Jeffrey, Prince of Darkness: Antichrist and the New 
World Order (Toronto: Frontier Research Publications, 1994), p. 
39. 

[10] Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," p. 8.

[11] Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," p. 11.

[12] Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," p. 11.

[13] Arguments taken from Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," pp. 
12- 13. 

[14] Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," pp. 17- 18.

[15] Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," pp. 11-22.

[16] Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," p. 23.

[17] Fruchtenbaum., " Nationality," pp. 24, 26.

[18] G. H. Lang, The Revelation of Jesus Christ: Selected Studies 
(Miami Springs, Fl.: Conley & Schoettle Publishing Co., (1945), 
1985), p. 223.

Thursday, August 24, 2017

RETROFIT: "Israel's Future Destiny" -Ed Hindson (2007)


RETRO NOV 14, 2007


Israel's Future Destiny

By Ed Hindson

“I will put my Spirit in you and you will live, and I will settle you in your own land. Then you will know that I the Lord have spoken and I have done it” (Ezekiel 37:14).

The nation and people of Israel are central issues in Bible prophecy. Both the Old Testament prophets and New Testament apostles made specific predictions about Israel’s future destiny. In fact, Jesus’ own disciples asked: “Will you at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6).

Their question reveals an expectation of a future literal kingdom on earth. Their question also clearly indicates that they did not believe the kingdom had already come, despite the fact that both they and Jesus had announced its potential arrival (Matthew 4:1710:1-7).

In response to the disciples’ question, Jesus reminded them: “It is not for you to know the times or the seasons which the Father has placed in his own power” (Acts 1:7). Jesus did not contradict or correct their question; He simply informed them that they were not to know the timing of the coming of the kingdom. Earlier, He had made a similar statement regarding His second coming: “But of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, but my Father only” (Matthew 24:36).


‘Replacement Theology'

Notice the context of the disciples’ question about Israel. Jesus was about to ascend into heaven. If their question was improperly stated, this would have been the obvious time to clarify the whole matter about Israel’s future. If the Church were about to replace Israel in the plan of God (as replacement theologians suggest), one would expect Jesus to have explained that to His disciples at that moment. But He did not.

But that is exactly what Replacement Theology teaches, asserting that the Church is the new “Israel” of God and His promises to the old Israel are fulfilled in the Church. Since there are more than 100 such prophecies in the Bible, it takes some real exegetical maneuvering to accomplish this task. For example, Ezekiel’s predictions of Israel’s ultimate regathering and rebirth (chapters 36-37) are limited to the return of the Jews from the Babylonian Captivity, despite the fact that Ezekiel predicts a return that involves their spiritual rebirth (37:14), the reign of David as King (37:24) and the establishment of God’s sanctuary in Israel (37:28). These predictions were not fulfilled by the return from Babylon or by the building of the second temple.

Replacement Theology necessitates “spiritualizing” virtually all Old Testa-ment prophecies about Israel. Thus, the “land” is not the land of Israel and the “temple” is not a literal temple. The reign of David’s son, the Messiah, is spiritual, not literal. The Battle of Gog and Magog (Ezekiel 38-39) is reinterpreted either to be the invasion of Antiochus Epiphanes (170 BC) or the Roman army (AD 70), despite the fact that Ezekiel predicts the destruction of five-sixth of the invaders (39:2). This did not happen under Antiochus or the Romans.

Prophecies of Israel’s future return are relegated to the past by Replacement Theology. Verses like Amos 9:15 (“And I will plant them in their own land, and they shall never be pulled up out of their land”) are explained away as either being conditional or spiritual, but never literal.
Replacement theologians assert that God is finished with Israel and has no future plans for His once chosen people. However, the New Testament Church is open to all races of people.

This kind of distorted thinking comes from the failure of the Replacement Theology to clearly distinguish the difference between Israel and the Church. Of course, the Church is to proclaim the Gospel to all nations (Matthew 28:19-20), but this does not eliminate Israel’s future destiny. The Apostle Paul, the apostle to the Gentiles, asked: “Has God cast away his people?” He then answered his own question: “God forbid” (Romans 11:1). God’s plan for the Church Age does not eradicate His plan for Israel’s future return, conversion, restoration and earthly kingdom.

Look, for example, at the Prophet Zechariah’s predictions about Israel’s future:
Notice several things about these predictions. First, they all involve the second coming of Christ. Second, they all predict a literal fulfillment in Israel at the time of the second coming. If God is finished with Israel, why would Christ bother to return there?


No Future Second Coming?

Thus, extreme “preterists” (those who hold that most or all biblical prophecies regarding the End Times refer primarily to events that happened in the first century following Christ’s birth) believe there will be no future second coming. Even more moderate preterists believe that these prophecies will only be fulfilled spiritually, not literally. Yet, many of these same interpreters will point to Zechariah’s other prophecies as being literally fulfilled in the first coming of Christ. For example: His riding on a donkey (9:9) or His being betrayed for 30 pieces of silver (11:13). Yet, they will turn right around and claim that these other prophecies are not literally fulfilled because such fulfillment contradicts their preconceived views of the second coming.

Christians who believe in Israel’s future prophetic destiny are not blind Zionists or racially-prejudiced anti-Arabs. First, genuine evangelical Christians believe the Gospel is to be preached to all nations and the Church is open to any and all people who believe that Jesus Christ died for their sins and rose from the dead to secure their eternal salvation (Romans 10:9).

Second, we understand that God also extended grace to non-Jews in the Old Testament era, as well (eg., Rahab the Canaanite, Ruth the Moabite, Zipporah the Midianite, Naaman the Syrian and a host of others).
Third, premillennialists understand that God’s promises to Israel involve a theocratic kingdom of God on earth. We clearly and emphatically believe that the New Testament Church is a fellowship of believers, not a theocracy. Christ rules in our hearts by faith and calls us to be the “light of the world” to all people. We also believe the Church Age will end with the rapture of those believers to heaven (I Thessalonians 4:13-18) to the marriage of the Lamb and His Bride (the Church) and will be followed by our triumphal return with Christ to reign on earth during His literal Millennial Kingdom (Revelation 19-20).

The Imminent Return

Only when Christ returns will the prophecies of Israel’s future destiny be fulfilled. In the meantime, we realize that Israel’s present regathering to her ancient land is not the final fulfillment of these prophecies. It is only a prelude of what is yet to come. The kingdom will only be “restored to Israel,” as the disciples asked, when the King comes back to reign and rule in person (Revelation 19:11-16).

RETROFIT: "Eastern Gate to the Old City" - Dr. David R. Reagan (2007)


RETRO NOV 13, 2007

The Gate to Prophecy: Why is the Eastern Gate to the Old City of Jerusalem Closed, and What Does it Have to do With Bible Prophecy?

By Dr. David R. Reagan


The Eastern Gate in the old walled city of Jerusalem has a very special place in my heart, for it was that gate which God used to open my eyes to His Prophetic Word.

The year was 1967. The occasion was the Six Day War. As the fate of the new state of Israel hung in the balance, I searched the newspapers daily for any information I could find about the war. The turning point came on June 7 when the Israeli army broke through the Lion's Gate and returned control of the ancient city of Jerusalem to the Jewish people for the first time in 1,897 years.



A Mysterious Remark

The next day I read a fascinating news account about one of the Jewish commando groups that had been involved in the assault on the city. The article stated that some members of the group had suggested catching the Jordanian defenders of the city off guard by blowing open the sealed Eastern Gate. But the leader of the group, an Orthodox Jew, had vehemently protested the idea, stating that "the Eastern Gate can be opened only when the Messiah comes."

That statement caught my eye. I wondered what the fellow was talking about. I knew nothing about the Eastern Gate except that it was the only gate of the city that led directly onto the Temple Mount. I was not aware that it was sealed, nor did I know that its opening was in any way biblically linked to the return of the Messiah.



A Remarkable Prophecy

I decided to do some research on the matter, and that decision initiated my study of Bible prophecy. I had been attending church for 30 years, but like most Christians, I knew nothing about Bible prophecy. The topic was generally ignored by the preachers in the church I grew up in.

My concordance quickly directed me to the passage that the Orthodox Jew had alluded to. I found it in Ezekiel 44. The context is a supernatural tour the Lord is giving Ezekiel of the future Millennial Temple (40:1-3).


In chapter 43 the Lord gives Ezekiel a vision of God's glory entering the Millennial Temple from the east, through the Eastern Gate. The Lord then says to Ezekiel: "Son of Man, this is the place of My throne and the place of the soles of my feet where I will dwell among the sons of Israel forever" (43:7).


The Lord then reveals to Ezekiel that the Eastern Gate will be closed and will not be reopened until the Messiah returns in glory (44:1-3).



A Momentous Decision

This prophecy was partially fulfilled more than 400 years ago in 1517 when the Turks conquered Jerusalem under the leadership of Suleiman the Magnificent. He commanded that the city's ancient walls be rebuilt, and in the midst of this rebuilding project, for some unknown reason, he ordered that the Eastern Gate be sealed up with stones.

Legends abound as to why Suleiman closed the Gate. The most believable one is that while the walls were being rebuilt, a rumor swept Jerusalem that the Messiah was coming. Suleiman called together some Jewish rabbis and asked them to tell him about the Messiah. They described the Messiah as a great military leader who would be sent by God from the east. He would enter the Eastern Gate and liberate the city from foreign control.


Suleiman then decided to put an end to Jewish hopes by ordering the Eastern Gate sealed. He also put a Muslim cemetery in front of the Gate, believing that no Jewish holy man would defile himself by walking through a Muslim cemetery.



A Prophetic Symbol

The Gate has remained sealed since that time. The Muslim cemetery still blocks the entrance. The old walled city has eight gates, and the Eastern Gate, and it alone, is sealed — just as prophesied in Ezekiel 44. The world would call that an "amazing coincidence." I call it a "God-incidence."

The Eastern Gate is proof positive that the Bible is the Word of God. Its sealing is clear evidence that we are living in the end times. The Gate awaits the return of the Messiah. Then and only then, will it be opened.



An Exciting Vision

I have a vision of what that glorious day will be like. It is related to the Lord's First Coming. I believe Jesus is going to replay His triumphal entry into Jerusalem when He returns.

When He came the first time, Jesus rode a donkey from the Mount of Olives down into the Kidron Valley and up to the Eastern Gate where He entered the Temple Mount for His last days of teaching. As He made that ride, the Valley of Kidron was filled with thousands of admirers who had heard about the resurrection of Lazarus. They waved palm branches and chanted, "Hosanna to the Son of David!" Within a few days that same fickle crowd was shouting, "Crucify Him!"


We are told in Revelation 19 that when Jesus returns He will come as a victorious military conqueror, riding through the air on a supernatural white horse. In Isaiah 61 we are told that He will come from the east, and in Zechariah 14 we are told that he will touch ground on the Mount of Olives.


Revelation 19:14 says that all the Redeemed will come with the Lord. Think of it! You and I will be there to witness the Lord's return.Zechariah 14 says He will speak a word that will supernaturally destroy the Anti-Christ and his forces.


Then, I believe we will witness a replay of the Lord's triumphant entry into Jerusalem. With angels hovering above and millions of the Redeemed filling the Kidron Valley, Jesus will ride up to the Eastern Gate on His white horse, and as He approaches the Gate, it will blow open. He will then enter the City of David, and to the triumphant shouts of "Hosanna to the Son of David," He will be crowned the Kings of kings and the Lord of lords.


I believe that's what Psalm 24 is all about when it says:

Lift up your heads, O gates, and be lifted up, O ancient doors, that the King of glory may come in! Who is the King of glory? The Lord strong and mighty, The Lord mighty in battle . . . The Lord of hosts, He is the King of glory.