"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"
-Titus 2:13
Your Roadmap to Eternity
with Gary Stearman & Billy Crone
with Gary Stearman & Billy Crone
"Looking for that blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and our Saviour Jesus Christ"
-Titus 2:13
We have entered into a new phase of disclosure. There are have been several dumps by the White House and Department of War has happened.
What we are learning from the various drops by the government is that there was a massive amount of investigation of UFOs by the government military and agencies since the mid 1940s. However, they lied and told the public that it was all weather balloons or conspiracy. We now know from the public disclosures that this was all a lie. This governemntal investigation, secrecy, and acknowleding the unknown provenance of UFOs (UAPs) are now a FACT. You can read and watch the documents and videos yourself contained in the above link.
Mondo joined LA Marzulli and Tim Alberino to discuss the latest dump of disclosure files, whether church in general is ready, and also give some details to the private meetings with pastors.
The Shroud of Turin- Digging Deeper
by Mondo Gonzales
One of the reasons I love the world of biblical archaeology is the ways in which artifacts which have often been in storage for centuries still have the potential to speak volumes as modern technology advances. This was true with the lead tablet that was reinvestigated over the past couple of years. This lead tablet had been excavated in the 1980s, but sat undiscovered for 40 years as it sat in a rubbish pile. Even if it had been discovered back then, the technology to read it was not available. Now that we have sophisticated imaging techniques, we can actually read what’s inside an unrolled tablet!
The same is true of the Shroud of Turin. This article doesn’t contain enough room to share all the amazing unique attributes of the Shroud. Those can be found at www.whocanhebe.com or shrouduniversity.com or shroudencounter.com. However, in this article I wanted to share some updates that have happened in the recent weeks.
Before we get into these updates, I want to share that I approach the Shroud as I would any other archaeological artifact. Biblical artifacts can never be proven 100% as being connected with any narrative or event in the Bible. Archaeology does not work this way. Archaeologists think in terms of probability like any other scientific discipline. Artifacts are analyzed, tested, measured, and examined in context and in situ if possible. If they are not found in situ (original location), their provenance (origin) is investigated as best as possible to establish a chain of custody. There are dozens of authentic finds that are put on the black antiquities market each year. These often have no provenance, but archaeologists still spend the time to analyze them as best as possible for any contribution to understanding the Bible that they can give. Secondly, biblical artifacts (even if demonstrated to have a higher probability of authenticity) should never be worshipped. We know from church history that some (hopefully well intentioned) people have sought to worship alleged biblical artifacts (relics). This has left a bad taste in some people’s minds for having anything to do with biblical artifacts. The phrase, “throwing the baby out with the bath water” applies here. This shouldn’t be so. We should always investigate any claimed artifact, but never with the intention of worshipping it. At the end of the day, we believe the Bible by faith, but it is exciting when God provides archaeological artifacts to help contribute to the historical reliability of His Word.
Most people today who have had any cursory interactions with the existence of the Shroud often point back to a Carbon-14 test which was done in 1988. The British Museum tested pieces of the Shroud with results asserting that the Shroud was only 700 years old. For many, this ended the discussion and the Shroud, therefore, could not be the actual burial cloth of Jesus. For them, it was fabricated in the 14th century and that was that. However, many people challenged the testing methodology of the British Museum noting that proper and normal procedures were not followed. There are at least six peer-reviewed scientific articles challenging the 14th century AD Carbon 14 date as being flawed in its testing. On a side note, recent tests by Italian scientists using Wide Angle X-ray Scattering (WAXS) on pieces from the Shroud returned a date of approximately 55-74 AD which certainly would be consistent with the general time frame of the resurrection of Jesus. This latest research challenges those who claim that the Shroud was fabricated in the 14th century.
This has led David Rolfe, a film-maker who has a documentary and the website (www.whocanhebe.com), to issue a $1 million challenge to the British Museum to produce a similar type burial cloth that matches several of the characteristics of the Shroud of Turin. He asserts that it is impossible to reproduce the Shroud. This would give evidence to its authenticity.
Here are the requirements that the British Museum must satisfy within a 6-month period if they accept the challenge.
Recently I had the opportunity to film a 2-hour DVD with Russ Breault where we covered, “Objections to the Authenticity of the Shroud.” That DVD should help address those with logical questions and objections to seeing the Shroud as most likely authentic. Scientific investigation shouldn’t turn a blind eye to legitimate concerns that investigators have.
I wanted to address a couple of these objections from a biblical exegetical perspective as it seems that these objections could easily be avoided if we take a closer look at the biblical text. One of the major objections is “that the clearly crucified man on the Shroud could not be Jesus because the person has a beard. Does not the Bible say that Jesus would have His beard torn out because of Isaiah 50:6 which reads in English, ‘I gave my back to those who strike, and my cheeks to those who pull out the beard; I hid not my face from disgrace and spitting’”?
The most general answer to this objection by Shroud proponents is that the text does not say that all of Jesus’s beard would be torn out, but just a reference to part of it. The man on the Shroud definitely has a beard, but the quality of the image could show that portions of the beard were plucked out. This is one solution, but I want to present another answer based on the original languages and textual history. It is semi-technical, but hang in there as I think going through the details is worth it.
There are three main ancient texts that scholars use to assess any of the Old Testament texts. The first is the Hebrew Masoretic text tradition (primarily based off the Leningrad Codex which is dated to 1000 AD). This text could also be called the Jewish Rabbinic Hebrew text. Most English Bible versions use this 1000 AD Hebrew text as their main source in their translation of the Old Testament into English. The other ancient textual tradition is the Dead Sea Scrolls dated before 70 AD, a full 1000 years more ancient than the Rabbinic Hebrew text. The third text is the Greek translation of the Hebrew (the “Septuagint,” often abbreviated as LXX) which began in the 3rd century BC and with the oldest extant texts going back to the 2nd century BC.
Interestingly, neither the word “beard” nor “hair” appears in Isaiah 50:6 in the Hebrew or Greek texts. Here is a literal translation of the Hebrew Masoretic text from 1000 AD in the Hebrew word order, “My back, I gave to (those) smiting, and my cheeks to plucking out, my face not I hid from insults and spitting.” The Hebrew word for “plucking out” (marat) appears in Ezra 9:3 and Nehemiah 13:25 in connection with hair being removed. This is why most English translations translate Isaiah 50:6 as referencing the beard being plucked out even though there is no reference in this passage specifically to hair or beard.
What does the older Dead Sea Scrolls (DSS) text show? There is only one complete scroll of Isaiah found in Cave 1 near Qumran. In this scroll (1QIsaa), the Hebrew reads, “My back, I gave to (those) smiting and my cheeks to those (striking with) a metal rod, my face not I turned away from insults and spitting.” Notice that in this older Hebrew text it says nothing about plucking out of a beard or anything else, but instead that the cheeks would be hit with a weapon.
There are two major English translations of the Greek Septuagint of the OT. The 1851 Brenton translation which reads, “I gave my back to scourges, and my cheeks to blows; and I turned not away my face from the shame of spitting:” The 2007 NETS translation renders it, “I have given my back to scourges and my cheeks to blows, but I did not turn away my face from the shame of spittings.” Here again, the ancient Greek translation says nothing about beards or hair being plucked out, but instead that the Servant’s cheeks would be hit with blows. The Greek word “blows” is parisma and is used specifically in the gospels in reference to Jesus being spit on and being hit in the face as the Isaiah 50:6 passage teaches. Notice, “And some began to spit on him and to cover his face and to strike him, saying to him, “Prophesy!” And the guards received him with blows” (Mark 14:65; the Greek word parisma for “blows” also appears in John 18:22; 19:3). “And he having said these things, one of the officers standing by did give Jesus a fierce punch (parisma), saying, ‘Thus dost thou answer the chief priest?‘ (John 18:22, YLT). “and said, ‘Hail! the king of the Jews;’ and they were giving him fierce punch“. (John 19:3 YLT).
Remember that the DSS text described Jesus being struck with a metal weapon. The Greek word in the NT for “reed” (kalamos) is a word that can also be used as a metal rod as found in Revelation 21:15 (a rod made of gold metal). We are told twice in the NT that Jesus was struck in the head with a “kalamos” (reed; Matt 27:30; Mark 15:19).
Okay. What we do we have? There is strong linguistic agreement that the ancient DSS Hebrew text, the ancient Greek Septuagint and Gospels all agree against the Rabbinic Masoretic Hebrew text. They all make reference to Jesus being struck in in the face with blows of a weapon. Nowhere in the NT does it say that Jesus’s beard was plucked out. The best linguistic evidence would argue against Jesus having His beard ripped out. This is important because there are those that argue against the authenticity of the Shroud saying that the figure on the cloth has a beard and therefore could not be Jesus. Based on the linguistic evidence this is a false objection and should be discarded. This line of argument from Isaiah 50:6 has no bearing on the authenticity of the Shroud.
The second objection I would like to address from a linguistic perspective has to do with Isaiah 52:14 which reads in English, “As many were astonished at you– his appearance (Hebrew mareh) was so marred, beyond human semblance, and his form (Hebrew toar) beyond that of the children of mankind.” This objection goes something like this, “the man on the Shroud cannot be Jesus because the Bible says that Jesus would be unrecognizable as a human and the guy on the Shroud looks recognizable.” The general response by Shroud defenders from a reasonable and logical perspective is that Jesus was not beat up more than any other human that has ever existed. Think of war and other atrocities. The writer is simply describing that the Servant spoken of in this passage would be significantly bruised physically in His faithfulness to God.
Again, I think once we examine the linguistic evidence as well as the context, there is no need to answer this criticism because the objection itself is on a false foundation.
Let me address the contextual contribution which will show the objection as false. We often forget when interpreting the Bible that chapter and verse divisions were not part of the original text. They were added at different times between 1227-1555 AD. Bible teachers recognize that the Servant passage (called a pericope) goes from Isaiah 52:13 all the way to 53:12 (a total of 15 verses). This is one singular and contextual passage referring to the mission of the Servant whom we believe was Jesus of Nazareth. Here is the immediate context of 52:14:
“Behold, my servant shall act wisely; he shall be high and lifted up, and shall be exalted. 14 As many were astonished at you—So, his appearance (Hebrew mareh) was marred, beyond human semblance, and his form (Hebrew toar) beyond that of the children of mankind– 15 so shall he sprinkle many nations. Kings shall shut their mouths because of him, for that which has not been told them they see, and that which they have not heard they understand.” (52:13-15 ESV)
“Who has believed what he has heard from us? And to whom has the arm of the LORD been revealed? 2 For he grew up before him like a young plant, and like a root out of dry ground; he had no form (Hebrew toar) or majesty that we should look at him, and no beauty (Hebrew mareh) that we should desire him. 3 He was despised and rejected by men, a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief; and as one from whom men hide their faces he was despised, and we esteemed him not.” (53:1-3 ESV).
Most critics see the words “was marred” and use this as the basis for saying that Jesus was so marred (disfigured) from being beat up that this shows the Shroud as fake. However, more detailed examination presents a different perspective.
The first six verses (52:13-53:3) make no specific reference to His death nor the crucifixion. The first place any reference is made to a physical description of suffering is in 53:4 using the words “stricken” or “smitten.” Then in 53:5 it says specifically that the Servant would be “pierced” which we know happened in the crucifixion. Unfortunately, some Bible teachers take the later verses (53:4-12) and force them back on the first part of the passage.
The two Hebrew words for “form” and “appearance” only appear together in Isaiah (52:14, 53:2) and Genesis (29:17; 39:6). Notice the Genesis passages:
“Leah’s eyes were weak, but Rachel was beautiful in form and appearance” (Gen 29:17).
“So, he left all that he had in Joseph’s charge, and because of him he had no concern about anything but the food he ate. Now Joseph was handsome in form and appearance” (Gen 39:6).
Just from a lexical connection, these two words when used together always refer to whether someone is deemed beautiful or attractive to the human eye. This clearly is the usage in Genesis 29:17; 39:6 and Isaiah 53:2. In fact, Isaiah 53:2 says that there would be nothing beautiful or attractive about the messianic Servant that humanity would have any desire for Him. Compare this with the way in which mankind determines the value of people as seen in, “But the LORD said to Samuel, “Do not look on his appearance or on the height of his stature, because I have rejected him. For the LORD sees not as man sees: man looks on the outward appearance, but the LORD looks on the heart” (1 Sam 16:7).
When we examine the context of Isaiah 52-53 we learn that the messianic Servant would not be considered beautiful or attractive in form or appearance (53:2). If we look at the DSS, there is one minor difference surrounding the word “he was marred” and scholars are baffled at the variation. In English, when we read, “his appearance was so marred” it is hard not to read into this our own bias from the NT crucifixion scene. The Hebrew noun mishchat only appears here in the entire Bible and it is extremely difficult to understand what this word really means. Most translations simply say “marred” (disfigured). However, some lexicons see this connected to a similar root in Leviticus 22:25, moshchat meaning “ceremonial defect.” This has interesting overtones as no doubt the Servant would take on the Mosaic law curse for God’s people (Gal 3:10).
What does help is looking at the ancient Greek Septuagint text. It reads,
“Just as many shall be astonished at you– so shall your appearance be without glory from men, and your glory be absent from the men” (Isaiah 52:14 NETS version).
Once again, the Septuagint, which was the favorite of the NT writers (over 2/3 of OT quotes are from the LXX), provides a clear understanding of the Isaiah text. This makes great sense especially as it comes to understanding the nature of Jesus. We learn in Philippians 2:3-11 that Jesus came as a lowly servant without glory who died a humiliating death. He wasn’t born in a palace nor was raised wealthy. He came in a very lowly and humbled state. Yet because of His obedience, Jesus was exalted to the highest name just as the previous verse stated (Isaiah 52:13). Jesus had the glory of a servant/slave while doing His earthly ministry, but was exalted to His previous glory that He had shared with the Father after His resurrection (John 17:4; Rev 1). We also got a glimpse of the hiddenness of Jesus’s glory, just as the LXX reads, when He allowed Himself to be transfigured and His true glory was revealed (Matt 17:1-13).
If we take the linguistic and contextual evidence of Isaiah 52:14, we learn that this Servant was not predicted to be “beat up” beyond human comparison, but instead the Servant was predicted to be unattractive, non-glorious, unappealing, and undesirable among humanity. There was nothing appealing about Him physically (or from a human perspective) that He would be desirable (Isa 53:2).
If we understand the true interpretation of Isaiah 52:14, then the objection to the man on the Shroud potentially being Jesus of Nazareth disappears. This is another reason that we should continue to evaluate the Shroud as the possible genuine burial cloth of Jesus.
I will close with this. Researching the Shroud is extremely rewarding. One of the comments that Russ Breault mentioned in our interview was that he thinks the Shroud is God’s receipt for the transaction of Jesus paying for our sins and God accepting the payment. The Bible does use transaction language (redeem, purchase, bought, ransom) and some of Jesus’s last words on the cross were “It is finished” (tetelestai in the Greek). That is certainly transaction language which was well known ancient times to be used as a phrase to show that a person’s debt was “paid in full.”
A recent article on the Shroud writes, “Only in very recent times have scientists found a way to discolor linen strands as they are found in the Shroud of Turin, discolorations penetrating only to a tiny fraction of the width of a human hair. It was done with microbursts from high energy lasers. A burst of high energy! This carries suggestions of its own about the man of the Shroud, because if it is Jesus, he is proclaimed to be raised from the dead. Is the Shroud a “snapshot of the resurrection?”
If the Shroud is genuine, not only is it a receipt of the past in Jesus’s resurrection, but it points to our future resurrection. Paul said that Jesus was the first fruits and that we would follow in His footsteps (1 Cor 15:23)!
I am reminded of the Bible’s description of when the saints are resurrected in that our new bodies will actually shine with luminescence like Jesus’s body (Phil 3:21). Amen!
“Then the righteous will shine like the sun in the kingdom of their Father. He who has ears, let him hear” (Matt. 13:43).
“And many of those who sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt. 3 And those who are wise shall shine like the brightness of the sky above; and those who turn many to righteousness, like the stars forever and ever” (Daniel 12:2).
Mondo presented a series of teachings on the Olivet Discourse not too long ago. The YouTube videos can be found HERE.
In that series, he referenced the notes that went along with his teachings. Those can be found HERE.
If you want to see the paper he wrote which which provided the background for his presentation at the pre-trib.org conference you can find that information HERE.
You can find all the VIDEO presentations at the YouTube channel HERE.
If you are interested in Michael Heiser’s 2nd updated edition of his book you can find it HERE.
The information below was originally sourced at:
https://www.pre-trib.org/dr-robert-thomas/message/left-behind-or-led-astray-exposed-long-version/read
The myth that Darby originated the Pre-tribulation rapture has been refuted over and over and over. In addition, there are some that claim that John Darby was a heretic who got his views of the rapture from a girl named Margaret MacDonald and the Jesuits.
Below you will find the facts which refute all of these errors.
by Thomas Ice & Paul Wilkinson
Duration:2 hrs 50 mins 27 secs
A new DVD documentary has just been released by Good Fight Ministries entitled, “Left Behind or Led Astray? Examining the Origins of the Secret Pre-Tribulation Rapture.” Good Fight Ministries is run by post-tribulationist Joe Schimmel, the senior pastor at Blessed Hope Chapel in Simi Valley, California. Schimmel’s documentary is endorsed by evangelist Ray Comfort and Kirk Cameron, star of the original “Left Behind” movies. The following write-up appears on the back cover: “Take a fascinating journey with us as we examine the shocking origins of the secret, pre-tribulation rapture doctrine…. Featuring expert commentary from David M. Bennett, Dr. Mark Patterson, Jacob Prasch, Joel Richardson, and Dave MacPherson.”
The truth of the matter is that the 4½ hour film seriously distorts the historical evidence and is full of false accusations, unsubstantiated myths, and lies.
Chapter 1 of the DVD begins with Joe Schimmel’s claim that there is not a single verse of Scripture to prove what he calls the “escapist theory” of the pre-tribulation Rapture of the Church, that is, the belief that all true believers will be raptured from the earth before the seven-year Tribulation period begins. Schimmel further contends that “millions of Christians are under the illusion that we are going to escape that time,” and that his documentary uncovers “the elusive origins of the pre-trib Rapture theory”. Schimmel sets out to substantiate his initial claim by quoting, out of context, leading pre-tribulationist scholars and authors, including Dr Tim LaHaye, Dr Thomas Ice, and the late Dr John Walvoord of Dallas Theological Seminary, all of whom have made statements which appear to back up the claim that there is not a single verse which definitively proves that the Rapture will occur before the Tribulation.
The doctrine of the Trinity, so fundamental to biblical Christianity, cannot be proved by quoting a single verse of Scripture! Joe Schimmel is making a non-argument. We are not Jehovah’s Witnesses hanging our theology on proof-texts, but Evangelical Christians seeking to show ourselves approved by studying the whole counsel of God, from Genesis to Revelation. As we do so, we discover that many of the precious truths of the Christian faith, including the doctrine of the Trinity and the Rapture of the Church, are progressively revealed.
Having set his stall out in this way, Schimmel then introduces an interview which he conducted in the UK with Colin Le Noury, General Director of Prophetic Witness Movement International (PWMI), the world’s oldest pre-trib organisation. The clip from the interview shows Schimmel putting to Colin statements from the above-mentioned pre-trib scholars. After Colin is heard concurring with these statements, nothing more of the interview is shown. Although Schimmel, in his subsequent narration, mentions that Colin went on to state that other verses needed to be brought together to prove the pre-trib position, the viewer is not shown the rest of the interview, including the context in which he expressed his initial agreement. Viewers are thus left with the misleading impression that both he and PWMI as a movement do not believe that there is a single verse to support the pre-trib Rapture position.
It is important to note that Colin Le Noury was the only pre-trib leader interviewed by Joe Schimmel on the DVD. When the official trailer was released in October 2014, no one was more shocked and dismayed than Colin himself. When he initially agreed to be interviewed by Schimmel, he was not informed as to the purpose; he was left with the clear impression that Schimmel was coming over to the UK to do some research and was interested in learning about the history of PWMI. Having watched the trailer, Colin endeavoured, over a period of several days, to contact Joe Schimmel and his team to insist that, under no circumstances was any part of his interview to be used in this production. The following is just one of the emails which Colin sent to Joe Schimmel’s church, dated 13 November 2014, which is included here with Colin’s permission:
—– Original Message —–
From: colinlenoury
To: steve@blessedhopechapel.org
Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2014 10:37 PM
Subject: Left Behind DVD
Hi Steve
Greetings – not sure if we have met or if you were in the team that visited PWMI headquarters in UK.
I have now seen the trailer of the above film which includes a clip of an interview I did with Joe Schimmel. The clip is edited in such a way as to distort what I said. This is dishonouring and deceitful.
I have sent two former emails without reply and have endeavoured to phone the church only to get a recorded answer.
I would be grateful if you would inform Joe Schimmel that I DO NOT GIVE PERMISSION FOR ANY OF THE FOOTAGE TO BE USED IN ANY OF YOUR PRODUCTIONS and I would very much appreciate his assurance that all references to myself be removed from the film before the official release.
I look forward to a response on this.
Sincerely in Christ,
Colin Le Noury
Despite eventually receiving an email response from one of Schimmel’s team, and despite restating his position, Colin never received the assurance he demanded; he was clearly misled and set up.
Joe Schimmel states at the beginning of the DVD that believers should not divide over the issue of the Rapture because there are “good brothers” who hold to a pre-trib position. However, he then spends the next 4hrs charting what he calls “the scandalous history” of the pre-trib Rapture “theory,” accusing and maligning those who hold to the belief in the Lord’s any-moment return, including Dr Thomas Ice, Executive Director of the Pre-Trib Research Center in Dallas, who he twice denigrates as “Tim LaHaye’s bulldog”.
While I was giving a brief rebuttal of “Left Behind or Led Astray?” during the August 2015 Berean Call conference in Bend, Oregon, post-tribulationist author Joel Richardson, one of the ‘expert’ contributors to the DVD, made the following astonishing statement in a comment he posted on the conference livestream page:
“The film is in no way an attack on pre-tribbers. It is a careful exploration of the origins of the pre-trib rapture doctrine.”
The basic premise of the entire documentary is that the origins of the pre-trib Rapture “theory,” as it is referred to throughout, are not biblical, but “demonic” and “occultic,” and that pre-tribulationism has “a sordid history.” Joel Richardson brings the following indictment against pastors who are preparing the Church to meet the Lord Jesus Christ:
“If you are a pastor who’s not preparing your people to face potentially the Antichrist and the Great Tribulation in this hour… personally I think you’re failing in your role as a shepherd and a pastor.”
As clearly stated in the official trailer, the DVD claims that all such pastors, and by extension all Christian ministries that are heralding the Lord’s any-moment return, are leading millions of believers into apostasy:
“What if millions who have been led astray by the pre-trib teaching become part of the great falling away that Jesus warned would take place at that time?… Brace yourself to see how the Church is being set up [by pre-tribulationists] for a mass deception of cosmic proportions.”
Such sensational claims and wild accusations reveal the true nature of this DVD, and are not worthy of comment.
The documentary devotes considerable attention to John Nelson Darby (1800-1882), the principal founder of the Plymouth Brethren movement, who undoubtedly played a crucial role in restoring and popularising the doctrine of the pre-tribulational Rapture of the Church. The DVD claims that Darby opportunistically stole the notion of a ‘secret’ catching away of the Church, and immediately developed the doctrine of the pre-trib Rapture, after listening to a fifteen-year old Scottish girl named Margaret MacDonald, who gave an alleged prophetic utterance in 1830. According to Schimmel, MacDonald “engaged in occult activity”.
This accusation, or myth, has been propagated for decades by men such as the late Walter Martin, founder of the Christian Research Institute (CRI) in the United States and original host of the ‘Bible Answer Man’ radio broadcast before Hank Hanegraaff succeeded him, and by Dave MacPherson, author of The Incredible Cover-up, The Rapture Plot, The Late Great Pre-Trib Rapture, The Unbelievable Pre-Trib Origin, and The Great Rapture Hoax. MacPherson features prominently on the DVD as one of Schimmel’s experts, and repeats the accusation that Darby ‘stole’ from MacDonald. However, another of Schimmel’s experts who addresses this issue on the DVD is author David Bennett, who (correctly) asserts that Darby “didn’t accept… didn’t like… wasn’t enthusiastic about” the so-called prophetic utterances of MacDonald, and yet Schimmel continually makes the connection between Darby and this girl throughout the film.
The DVD re-enacts the time when John Nelson Darby and his Plymouth Brethren colleague, Benjamin Wills Newton (1807-1899), allegedly visited Margaret MacDonald and heard her utterance in person. Darby and Newton are depicted on screen standing in a small log cabin watching and listening to MacDonald while she rocks back and forth in her chair, giving her alleged utterance. Schimmel claims that Darby spent several days listening to MacDonald prophesying about a secret coming of Jesus Christ. Schimmel admits that these utterances were denounced by Darby and Newton as being demonic in origin, and yet still entertains the claim, vehemently made by MacPherson, that MacDonald’s utterances were a primary source of Darby’s Rapture doctrine.
In 2006, I completed my doctorate at Manchester University. My thesis, entitled John Nelson Darby and the Origins of Christian Zionism, was published in 2007 by Paternoster Press under the title For Zion’s Sake: Christian Zionism and the Role of John Nelson Darby. It was republished in 2013 by The Berean Call entitled, Understanding Christian Zionism: Israel’s Place in the Purposes of God. My research makes it abundantly clear that Benjamin Wills Newton did not visit Scotland with Darby in 1830, as Schimmel claims! This fact alone seriously undermines the credibility of Schimmel’s research.
In 1830, Newton commissioned Darby, on behalf of the newly-formed Brethren movement, to travel to Scotland to investigate claims that the Holy Spirit was being ‘poured out’ in Scotland, and that people were prophesying, being healed, and speaking in tongues. According to Margaret Oliphant, whom Dave MacPherson cites in the DVD against Darby, “Almost every notable Christian man of the time took the matter into devout and anxious consideration”.[1] In other words, it was to be fully expected that men like J.N. Darby would visit Scotland to investigate these claims, which he did, attending several meetings and hearing some of the utterances which were given. However, there is no evidence that Darby ever heard the utterance of Margaret MacDonald which is so foundational to the DVD; he certainly did not have a private audience with her, as depicted in the film. What we do know is this: based on what he heard and witnessed first-hand, Darby concluded that the utterances were not to be attributed to the Holy Spirit. As Benjamin Newton himself recalled,
“Darby had been most cautious, not giving us an opinion. But what decided him when on the spot was that when those who were inspired were expounding prophetic Scriptures, such as those in Isaiah, respecting Israel [and] Jerusalem they explained them as being prophetic of Christian Churches of this dispensation.– That determined me too.”
Darby further informed Newton in his report “…that there wasn’t a meeting or an interview in which the spirits did not dwell on the notion that the Israelitish blessings are all ours now.” As Newton recalled, “That decided me at once, Darby too.”[2] Francis William Newman, brother of the future Cardinal John Henry Newman, initially believed that the alleged utterances were of God, but his opinion changed after Darby sent him
“…a full account of what he heard with his own ears; which was to the effect – that none of the sounds, vowels or consonants, were foreign;- that the strange words were moulded after the Latin grammar… so as to denote poverty of invention rather than spiritual agency;- and that there was no interpretation. The last point decided me, that any belief which I had in it must be for the present unpractical.”[3]
In his essay, The Irrationalism of Infidelity (1853), Darby included a full account of his visit to Scotland, which completely exonerates him from any charge that he opportunistically formulated his doctrine of the pretribulation Rapture based on the utterance of Margaret MacDonald. In his account, written in the third person and using one of his nicknames, “the Irish clergyman,” Darby writes:
“Two brothers (respectable shipbuilders at Port Glasgow, of the name M’D-), and their sister, were the chief persons who spoke, with a Gaelic maid-servant, in the tongues, and a Mrs. J-, in English. J. M’D- spoke, on the occasion alluded to, for about a quarter of an hour, with great energy and fluency, in a semi-latin sounding speech – then sung a hymn in the same. Having finished, he knelt down and prayed there might be an interpretation…. His sister got up at the opposite side of the room, and professed to give the interpretation; but it was a string of texts on overcoming, and no hymn, and one, if not more, of the texts was quoted wrongly…. The sense he [Darby] had of the want of the power of the Holy Ghost in the Church made him willing to hear and see. Yet he went rather as deputed for others [Newton wasn’t there!] than for himself. The excitement was great, so that, though not particularly an excitable person, he felt its effects very strongly. It did not certainly approve itself to his judgment; other things contributed to form it. It was too much of a scene. Previous to the time of exercising the gifts, they read, sung psalms, and prayed, under certain persons’ presidence…. This being finished, the ‘Irish Clergyman’ was going away, when another said to him, ‘Don’t go: the best part is probably to come yet.’ So he stayed, and heard what has just been related. He was courteously admitted, as one not believing, who came to see what was the real truth of the case. The parties are mostly dead, or dispersed, and many freed from the delusion, and the thing itself public; so that he does not feel he is guilty of any indiscretion in giving a correct account of what passed. It may be added, without of course saying anything that could point out the persons, that female vanity, and very distinct worldliness, did not confirm, to his mind, the thought that it could be the Spirit’s power.”[4]
Leading nineteenth-century Brethren scholar William Kelly asked, “…can any fair mind in God’s presence, if he knew no other facts, conceive a greater improbability than J.N.D. adopting the utterance of what he believed a demon as a truth of God?”[5]
It should be noted that in Chapter 9 of the DVD, Joe Schimmel admits that pre-trib leaders since the days of John Nelson Darby have distanced themselves from Margaret MacDonald’s utterance by “claiming… that her secret rapture is not clearly pre-trib”. Schimmel admits that this “is true”. However, he continues to make the claim that “whatever she [Margaret MacDonald] meant with regard to her secret coming, it is undeniable that those who were influenced by her and [Edward] Irving became early catalysts for pre-trib”. Schimmel fails to appreciate the importance of his own admissions. Despite insisting that Darby must have been influenced by MacDonald, Schimmel contradicts himself by making the following statement at the beginning of Chapter 10:
“How many people Margaret MacDonald actually influenced with the idea of a pre-trib Rapture, besides her own husband Robert Norton… and perhaps Edward Irving and some of the Irvingites, is still unclear….”
Joe Schimmel makes much of Darby biographer Max Weremchuk, a disillusioned and somewhat jaundiced ex-member of the Exclusive Brethren, yet a man whom Schimmel hails as “an unbiased Brethren historian”. Schimmel quotes the following statement by Weremchuk:
“I would not be surprised if Darby at some time thought of a partial rapture – as appears in [the utterance of] Margaret MacDonald.”
This is mere conjecture, and not objective research.
Let us consider Margaret MacDonald’s actual utterance, that lies at the heart of this DVD and the accusations made throughout. Her own personal account is quoted in Robert Norton’s Memoirs of James & George MacDonald of Port-Glasgow (1840), and warrants closer scrutiny. From a careful reading of MacDonald’s account, we may categorically conclude that her utterance bears no resemblance whatsoever to a pre-trib Rapture. On the contrary, we may reasonably conclude that this fifteen-year-old girl was, in fact, advocating a post-tribulation Rapture, the Tribulation being “the fiery trial which is to try us” and which will be “for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus”. She also described this period as being “from Antichrist,” when Satan “will try to shake in every thing we have believed,” when “the awful sight of a false Christ [will] be seen on this earth,” and when “nothing but the living Christ in us can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive” (italics mine). MacDonald included herself among the faithful who would be tried after the Antichrist has been revealed and during the Tribulation period. This is completely inconsistent with Darby’s teaching, and with pre-tribulationism in general.
Here are the relevant extracts from MacDonald’s utterance – let the reader make up his/her own mind:
“I repeated the words, Now there is distress of nations, with perplexity, the seas and the waves roaring, men’s hearts failing them for fear – now look out for the sign of the Son of man. Here I was made to stop and cry out, O it is not known what the sign of the Son of man is; the people of God think they are waiting, but they know not what it is. I felt this needed to be revealed, and that there was great darkness and error about it; but suddenly what it was burst upon me with a glorious light. I saw it was just the Lord himself descending from Heaven with a shout, just the glorified man, even Jesus; but that all must, as Stephen was, be filled with the Holy Ghost, that they might look up, and see the brightness of the Father’s glory…. Only those who have the light of God within them will see the sign of his appearance…. ‘Tis Christ in us that will lift us up – he is the light – ‘tis only those that are alive in him that will be caught up to meet him in the air. I saw that we must be in the Spirit, that we might see spiritual things…. But I saw that the glory of the ministration of the Spirit had not been known. I repeated frequently, but the spiritual temple must and shall be reared, and the fullness of Christ be poured into his body, and then shall we be caught up to meet him. Oh none will be counted worthy of this calling but his body, which is the church, and which must be a candlestick all of gold. I often said, Oh the glorious inbreaking of God which is now about to burst on this earth; Oh the glorious temple which is now about to be reared, the bride adorned for her husband; and Oh what a holy, holy bride she must be, to be prepared for such a glorious bridegroom….
I saw the people of God in an awfully dangerous situation, surrounded by nets and entanglements, about to be tried, and many about to be deceived and fall. Now will THE WICKED be revealed, with all power and signs and lying wonders, so that if it were possible the very elect will be deceived.– This is the fiery trial which is to try us.– It will be for the purging and purifying of the real members of the body of Jesus; but Oh it will be a fiery trial. Every soul will be shaken to the very centre. The enemy will try to shake in every thing we have believed…. I frequently said that night, and often since, now shall the awful sight of a false Christ be seen on this earth, and nothing but the living Christ in us can detect this awful attempt of the enemy to deceive – for it is with all deceivableness of unrighteousness he will work – he will have a counterpart for every part of God’s truth, and an imitation for every work of the Spirit. The Spirit must and will be poured out on the church, that she may be purified and filled with God – and just in proportion as the Spirit of God works, so will he – when our Lord anoints men with power, so will he. This is particularly the nature of the trial, through which those are to pass who will be counted worthy to stand before the Son of man…. The trial of the Church is from Antichrist…. I frequently said, Oh be filled with the Spirit – have the light of God in you, that you may detect satan – be full of eyes within – be clay in the hands of the potter – submit to be filled, filled with God…. This will fit us to enter into the marriage supper of the Lamb…. I saw that night, and often since, that there will be an outpouring of the Spirit on the body, such as has not been, a baptism of fire, that all the dross may be put away. Oh there must and will be such an indwelling of the living God as has not been – the servants of God sealed in their foreheads – great conformity to Jesus – his holy holy image seen in his people…. This is what we are at present made to pray much for, that speedily we may all be made ready to meet our Lord in the air – and it will be. Jesus wants his bride. His desire is toward us. He that shall come, will come, and will not tarry. Amen and Amen. Even so come Lord Jesus.”[6]
Even Joe Schimmel admits that “our personal position at Good Fight Ministries is that Margaret MacDonald’s end-time Rapture vision is convoluted, and we can’t say for sure that Margaret MacDonald had a partial pre-trib Rapture in mind. What we can say with absoluteness, is that Margaret MacDonald did introduce what she claimed to be a new revelation about the Rapture”. Schimmel adds that “many others have also pointed out that Margaret MacDonald’s vision is a bit convoluted and can be interpreted in different ways,” and yet asserts that Margaret MacDonald and her husband, Robert Norton, later claimed that “this was the first time that pre-tribulationism was taught publicly” – and this is what Schimmel is wanting viewers to believe.
Joe Schimmel claims that J.N. Darby was directly influenced by the man he believes (but no pre-trib historian or author believes!) was the real founder of the pre-trib Rapture doctrine, namely the controversial, charismatic, de-frocked Scottish Presbyterian minister Edward Irving (1792-1834). Dave MacPherson claims on the DVD that Irving’s followers, known as Irvingites, “were prone to dabble a little bit with the occult”. In Chapter 7, Schimmel states that Darby was not only an advocate of Irving’s teaching, but was also “waiting in the wings as an opportunist to see if the new theory will catch on beyond the Irvingites and the Plymouth Brethren.” Schimmel claims that “the evidence is quite clear that Darby and his followers were late-comers to pre-tribulationism and that Darby was quite familiar with pre-trib teaching among the Irvingites before he accepted and then proliferated the doctrine…. It is to ignore the clear facts of history to pretend that Edward Irving and the Irvingites in no way influenced Darby’s prophetic views.”
Contrary to Joe Schimmel’s claim, the evidence is not clear; in fact, it is non-existent!
Mark Patterson categorically states on the DVD that Darby learned the pre-trib Rapture from Irving, because Darby and the Plymouth Brethren were familiar with Irving’s writings. Patterson’s case is flimsy to say the least. However, in the same section, he even admits that “it [the Rapture] was swirling about the air at that time”.
With conferences being convened in the UK and Ireland (Albury Park Conference, Powerscourt Conference, The Society for the Investigation of Prophecy, etc.) and all manner of books and articles being published on prophetic themes, especially in relation to the Second Coming, an entire generation of Evangelicals at that time was exercised by Bible prophecy and the study of the end-times (‘eschatology’). Patterson admits that Darby “reminisces many years later that he first thought of the Rapture around 1827” – long before MacDonald’s utterances and before Edward Irving achieved notoriety – and yet insists that “there’s not a single piece of evidence that that’s the case”. This is a telling statement; Patterson is counselling viewers of the DVD not to believe Darby’s own testimony, and therefore to question his Christian integrity!
It should be noted that millions of believers who have believed in, and continue to believe in, the doctrine of the Lord’s any-moment return as the blessed hope of the Church, have never heard of Margaret MacDonald, Edward Irving, or even John Nelson Darby, and yet claim, as Darby himself did, to have arrived at their understanding of the Rapture based on the study of God’s Word.
This is what I wrote in Chapter 6 of Understanding Christian Zionism, which collapses Schimmel’s entire thesis and the connection he makes between Darby and Irving:
“…Darby believed that ‘the positive work of the enemy’ was ‘most manifest’ in Irving’s church. In 1844, he recalled how, ‘at least fourteen years ago’, he had disputed with Irving on the matter of spiritual gifts, and later recollected being drawn into conflict with him ‘some four-and-thirty years ago’, because of his ‘meddling metaphysically with the Lord’s Person’. Darby described Irving’s doctrine of the Incarnation as ‘plainly wicked and evil, and contrary to God’s word and Spirit’. He claimed that the Irvingite gifts had been ‘founded on this doctrine’, and lamented ‘all poor Irving’s heresies and wanderings’. Darby also described elements of Irving’s Preliminary Discourse [to Manuel Lacunza’s work – see below] as ‘evidence, and accumulated evidence, of great carelessness’, and drew attention to passages ‘highly injurious to the work and honour of Christ, and in it, the just, holy, and influencing comfort of believing saints’. He also criticised Irving’s sermons on Daniel’s vision of the four beasts, and his interpretation of Isaiah, which he believed demonstrated ‘the extreme neglect of Scripture and even prophecy itself, the hurried pursuit of an object in the mind’. These are hardly the comments one would expect from a man allegedly impressed by, and indebted to, Edward Irving…. According to William Kelly, ‘no one was farther from lending an ear to the impious and profane voices of the quasi-inspired Irvingites than Mr. T. [Tweedy], unless indeed it were J.N.D. [Darby] himself who had closely investigated their pretensions and judged their peculiar heterodoxy on Christ’s humanity as anti-christian and blasphemous.’ Kelly also noted how the Brethren had admired Irving as a preacher, but that ‘no serious brother in fellowship’ regarded the utterances in his church ‘with less than horror, as emanating not from human excitement merely but from a demon accredited with the power of the Holy Spirit.’”[7]
Both Joe Schimmel and Jacob Prasch hail Samuel P. Tregelles as the most eminent and educated member of the Brethren who did not believe in a pre-tribulational Rapture. They cite a statement Tregelles made in his book, The Hope of Christ’s Second Coming (1864), which connects the origin of a secret rapture to an utterance given in Edward Irving’s church in 1832, even though Schimmel then corrects Tregelles by suggesting that the teaching of the pre-trib Rapture originated earlier! What is not mentioned on the DVD, however, is that Tregelles was the cousin of Benjamin Wills Newton, the man at the centre of the heresy controversy within the Brethren movement. As I wrote in Chapter 6 of Understanding Christian Zionism, Tregelles was accused by fellow Brethren leader William Kelly of conducting a vendetta against Darby. In addition, a number of academics, most of whom were/are not sympathetic to a pre-trib position, have dismissed Tregelles as “a prejudiced witness” on the basis of the support he gave to Newton:
“Flegg and Weber are among those who have expressed dissatisfaction with Tregelles and the ‘hardly convincing’ claims of [Dave] MacPherson, concluding that ‘their arguments do not stand up to serious criticism’. Sandeen accuses those who have cited Tregelles against Darby of bringing ‘a groundless and pernicious charge’, while MacPherson’s book has been dismissed as an ‘anti pre-Trib vendetta’ that is ‘patently ridiculous’ and full of ‘tiresome polemics’. Benware and Nebeker assert that ‘no clear evidence exists that Darby got his views from Margaret MacDonald or Edward Irving,’ and that any suggestion of a ‘directly derivative link’ between Darby and Irving is ‘unduly reductionist’. Brethren scholar F.F. Bruce also distanced Darby from Irving and MacDonald, and acknowledged that the doctrine of the pretribulation Rapture was ‘in the air in the 1820s and 1830s among eager students of unfulfilled prophecy’. As Weber concedes, those who have criticised Darby ‘may have to settle for Darby’s own explanation.’”[8]
Chapter 2 of the DVD is devoted to the teachings of the ‘Church Fathers’ – theologians, apologists and bishops within the Church who rose to prominence after the time of the Apostles, and who are venerated as saints by the Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, Anglican and Lutheran churches. Joe Schimmel asserts that the ‘Church Fathers’ never taught a pre-tribulation Rapture. Despite admitting that the ‘Church Fathers’ are not authoritative, one of his experts, Joel Richardson, makes the following claim:
“If this [a pre-tribulational Rapture] is what was taught by the Apostles, we would see it in the writings of the early Church writers; it doesn’t exist.”
Following the same line of argument, Jacob Prasch hails Irenaeus (c.130-202), Bishop of Lyons, as a “pivotal figure” due to the fact that he was a disciple of Polycarp, who in turn was a disciple of the Apostle John. Prasch hails Irenaeus as “probably the single most important of the Church Fathers in understanding what the Apostles taught and believed”.
Irenaeus declared in his most famous work, Against Heresies, that the Jews “are disinherited from the grace of God” – something the Apostles, including John, did not believe or teach!
The same ‘Church Fathers,’ quoted at length in the DVD to support post-tribulationism, adopted a predominantly allegorical, as opposed to literal, hermeneutic, or method of interpreting the Scriptures. Here is a sample of statements they made concerning the future of the Jewish nation:
Thus, using Joel Richardson’s argument, if Israel’s future restoration/salvation was believed and taught by the Apostles, which it was, then we should see it in the writings of the early ‘Church Fathers,’ which we don’t!
In Chapter 4, Joe Schimmel states that the Protestant Reformers were “a mixed bag in regard to biblical prophecy and had deviated somewhat from the teaching of the early Church fathers because of the influences of Augustine”. Despite such an admission, Schimmel still champions the Reformers as advocates of post-tribulationism, quoting Luther and Calvin to support his claim.
The Reformers were largely Augustinian in their theology, and Augustine (354-430) is acknowledged by the Pope to be the most important theological ‘father’ of the Roman Catholic Church! The Reformers were often allegorical in their interpretation of the Bible; they were amillennial in their eschatology, not believing that the Lord Jesus would return to this earth and reign for a thousand years; they were proponents of Replacement Theology, in keeping with the teaching of the ‘Church Fathers,’ believing that the Church was the new, true, or spiritual Israel; and they were often anti-Semitic in their sermons and writings, notably Luther. We should add, in agreement with William Trotter, that “…a doctrine cannot be proved true by the number of its adherents, or by the length of time during which it has been generally received. Much less is a doctrine true because it is soothing to ourselves, or palatable to men in general. The one, only, infallible test of the truth of any doctrine is, What saith the word of God?”[9]
Joe Schimmel claims that Roman Catholic Jesuit priest and theologian, Francisco Ribera (1537-1591), developed a theology of the end-times strikingly similar to that of John Nelson Darby. Schimmel nevertheless concedes that Ribera was an amillennialist, and that “a direct line” cannot be drawn to the nineteenth century – quite a contradiction. Why, then, has Schimmel introduced the viewer to the Jesuits?
As I wrote in Chapter 6 of Understanding Christian Zionism,
“…any claim that Protestant futurists in general, and Darby in particular, adopted and adapted Ribera’s futurism is absolutely groundless. Ribera’s amillennial and Augustinian theology of replacement, and the absence of a pretribulation Rapture position in his eschatology, completely separates him from Darby on a theological level. This, coupled with the ‘ample and varied arsenal of anti-Catholic polemic’ which Darby employed in his liberation of Irish peasants from the Church of Rome, is evidence enough to destroy the artificial link critics have forged between Darby and the Jesuits.”[10]
Undeterred, Schimmel devotes an entire chapter of his DVD to another Jesuit priest, Manuel Lacunza (1731-1801), this time drawing a direct line to the nineteenth century and to Edward Irving and John Nelson Darby, despite asserting that Lacunza’s eschatology “appears to have been influenced by… Francisco Ribera”. Schimmel seeks to discredit Lacunza from the outset owing to the fact that Lacunza wrote under the Jewish pseudonym, Rabbi Juan Josafat Ben-Ezra. Schimmel refers to “the deceptive pen name” and “bogus rabbinical title,” failing to acknowledge the fact that Lacunza was on the run in exile after being expelled from his native Chile by King Charles III of Spain, and that Lacunza’s opponents denounced him and his book (which, among other things, addressed the corruption within the Roman Catholic priesthood) before the Spanish Inquisition, his book being placed by Pope Leo XII on his Index of Prohibited Books. The fact that Lacunza speaks throughout the book with great compassion about the Jewish people may also explain his choice of pseudonym. Schimmel states that “there’s no doubt that Irving was quite influenced by Lacunza,” even though one of his experts, Mark Patterson, who wrote his doctoral thesis on Irving, contradicts Schimmel by stating that Lacunza’s influence on Irving is “uncertain”.
There is much to commend Lacunza for in his book, The Coming of Messiah in Glory and Majesty, which I have on my shelf, and it is surely no surprise at all that Bible prophecy scholars of that day were reading and discussing it. Joe Schimmel makes a quantum leap by asserting a Jesuit link to the doctrine of the pre-trib Rapture. As I wrote in Chapter 6 of Understanding Christian Zionism,
John Nelson Darby “…made no reference to Lacunza in his writings. Undeterred, Darby’s amillennial, postmillennial, and premillennial critics have sought to discredit him by tracing his eschatology back to this Jesuit priest. There are indeed similarities between them, particularly in relation to the restoration of Israel, the apostasy of the Church, the times of the Gentiles, and the physical return of the Lord Jesus to the earth, but we should not be surprised when Biblical scholars, from diverse ecclesiastical traditions, arrive at similar conclusions. Having said that, it is important to point out that there are significant disparities in the theology of Darby and Lacunza, not least Lacunza’s advocacy of Roman Catholic dogma, his belief in Antichrist as ‘a moral body, composed of innumerable individuals… all morally united and animated with one common spirit’, and his contention that Paul’s letters to the Thessalonians were written to correct their ‘error… of expecting every moment the coming of the Lord.’”[11]
This last statement is key. Lacunza did not believe in an imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ to catch away the Church; John Nelson Darby did, and this belief was foundational to both his Christian walk and his private and public ministry, both here in the UK and in North America, which he toured seven times.
Schimmel goes on to address the Albury Park Conferences in Surrey, England (1826-1830), claiming that Edward Irving was dominant at Albury, and that because Irving was allegedly influenced by Lacunza, then it inevitably follows that Albury was the real birthplace of the doctrine of the pre-trib Rapture.
Not only is this faulty logic, but having established in the previous rebuttal that Lacunza did not believe in the Lord’s imminent return, we can see that Schimmel’s claim is simply false.
The Albury conferences were convened at a time when “the majority of what was called the Religious World disbelieved that the Jews were to be restored to their own land, and that the Lord Jesus Christ was to return and reign in person on this earth.”[12] Most of those who assembled at Albury Park in Surrey were respected Evangelical clergymen and theologians within the Church of England, who nobly helped to revive premillennial truth at the beginning of the nineteenth century by proclaiming the restoration of the Jews and the Second Coming of Jesus. They were historicist premillennialists, and not futurists – in other words, they were not pre-trib, at least not in the way Darby was then and pre-tribulationists are today.
Schimmel’s chief historical witness, in seeking to discredit the teaching and malign the Christian character of John Nelson Darby, is Darby’s former colleague and friend within the Brethren movement, Benjamin Wills Newton. It is interesting to note that Schimmel repeatedly informs viewers that Edward Irving, who he wants to claim as the real founder of pre-tribulationism, was charged with heresy by the Presbyterian Church for his teaching on the Incarnation, and yet he conveniently understates the fact that this was also the reason why Newton eventually withdrew from the Brethren assembly in Plymouth, having been charged by his fellow Brethren leaders with teaching heresy concerning the Lord’s humanity! Schimmel accuses Darby and his colleagues of embarking on a merciless witch-hunt against Newton by searching Newton’s writings “for the thinnest thread on which to hang him”.
As I wrote in Chapter 3 of Understanding Christian Zionism, Darby did not embark on a witch-hunt against Newton:
“In an article written for the magazine Perilous Times (April 1917), Robert Cameron, one of the leading figures in the American Bible and prophecy conference movement who met Darby towards the end of his life, provides further insight into the mind of this ‘dictator’: ‘Over forty years ago, at my own table in New York City, Mr Darby called Mr Newton ‘dear brother Newton’. I expressed my deep surprise at the use of such an endearing term concerning the one who had been freely called ‘that dangerous man’, ‘the arch enemy’, ‘the fearful blasphemer’, and other equally harsh terms. At once Mr Darby replied: ‘Mr Newton is the most godly man I ever knew.’ I said, ‘Well, then, what was all this trouble and condemnation about, if Mr Newton is such a godly man?’ He answered promptly, ‘Oh, but Mr Newton had taught blasphemous doctrines about the person of our blessed Lord, and these had to be dealt with.’” Though ‘relentless’ in his pursuit of Newton’s error, Darby believed he had acted in the best interests not only of the Church, but of Newton himself. After Newton had publicly acknowledged his error, Darby wrote: ‘If Mr.N. were restored, it would be the joy of my heart.’”[13]
As well as accusing Darby of date-setting the Rapture (without providing any evidence), and claiming that Darby grew disillusioned with the pre-trib Rapture at one point (again without any evidence), Joe Schimmel accuses Darby of “…introducing another Gospel and two ways of salvation, one for the Gentiles during this dispensation and a law-based Gospel and works salvation for the Jews in a future dispensation, namely the Tribulation.”
In Chapter 4 of my book, I quote the following statement made by Darby in a private letter:
“…if anyone doubts, after twenty years that I have been preaching, whether I teach the necessity of redemption through the blood [of Christ] for all and every redeemed soul, I could hardly expect to disabuse him by telling him the contrary twenty times over.”[14]
Jacob Prasch asserts on the DVD that “John Nelson Darby was an extremist, but more than that, he was a confused extremist,” and that his critics denounced him as “a despot, a cult leader… a dangerous despot… a crazy man who hurt people”. Jacob makes the same accusation himself against Darby on the official DVD trailer, portraying him as “a cult leader, a cult founder, a confused man.” Joe Schimmel claims that Darby was of a more disreputable character than Edward Irving and the Irvingites, a claim he makes after denouncing Irving and his followers as dabblers in the occult who were demonically driven.
Only those who have never read Darby’s collected writings, letters, biblical synopses, notes, jottings, and hymns, along with the testimonies of close friends and associates, could make such accusations. Although a number of Darby’s critics, mostly former Brethren colleagues of his, are quoted in the documentary, not a single mention is made of his numerous advocates. In Chapter 3 of Understanding Christian Zionism, I wrote the following:
“In 1867, John Jewell Penstone published a response to ‘the course of animosity against Mr. Darby’ which he felt was being ‘so unrelentingly pursued’ by some, and which had led ‘some otherwise excellent and honourable men into a path of misrepresentation which has been coolly persevered in even after such evidence as any candid enquirer would require at their hands had entirely broken down.’ In spite of all the accusations made against him, Darby holds a place of affection in the hearts of many. Darby has been described as ‘a great and good man, an uncompromising champion for Christ’s glory and God’s truth’, ‘one of the most remarkable servants of Christ that this country has produced’, ‘a great man and ever greater servant of God’ whose ‘greatness… gave prominence to his weaknesses’, ‘a really good man’ whose ‘largeness of heart… showed itself in many ways’, ‘a man of commanding intellect’ who was ‘tireless in his missionary zeal to teach the Bible’, ‘the Tertullian of these last days’, a man of ‘simple and unaffected piety; combined with the ripest scholarship and unequalled ability in expounding the Word of God’, ‘a man of one aim – the glory of God’ who was ‘always maintaining that close communion with the Lord that gave lustre to his testimony and fragrance to his life’, ‘a man of overwhelming devotion, whose charismatic personality galvanised disciples throughout his long life’, one who was ‘generous to the wasting of his substance, and possessed of more than martyr courage’, a man capable of ‘remarkable humility’ who demonstrated ‘an especial sympathy’ with children, a man used by God ‘to bring cosmos out of chaos for the church of God’, the founder of a movement which ‘attempted a more thoroughgoing revival of primitive Christianity than either the Puritan or Wesleyan movements’, and ‘a leader of matchless sagacity’ whose life resembled ‘a landscape with its towering rocks and solitudes; its verdant meads and meandering streams; its rushing torrents and calm lakes; each of which stand upon the canvas as the arresting feature of the picture.’”
Even Darby critic Max Weremchuk, who is quoted by Schimmel on the DVD, writes in an article that he remains impressed by Darby’s “devotion to Christ and his high level of personal holiness.”[15] The actor who plays Darby throughout the DVD portrays him as an enraged, feverish, tyrannical leader – a far cry from the man we meet in his own writings, and in the numerous testimonies of friends and acquaintances who esteemed him as a faithful servant of God.
Throughout the DVD, Joe Schimmel places great store on the alleged secrecy of the pre-tribulation Rapture, whereby the Church is said to be raptured without the world knowing. The word “secret” or “secrecy” is emphasized over and over again by Joe Schimmel, and overlaid with demonic and occultic overtones. Schimmel triumphantly claims to have a clinching piece of evidence from the pen of Darby himself, but in so doing completely misunderstands what Darby was writing on this subject in his article, ‘The Rapture of the Saints and the Character of the Jewish Remnant’.
Here is what Darby stated when he himself was confronted with the charge of endorsing a ‘secret’ rapture:
“A point connected with this [the Rapture and the Second Coming] has been insisted on by the adversaries of the truth, to which I advert here only to leave it aside, as not touching the main point, even if true, and used by them to obscure the great and vital truth of the rapture of the church – I mean the secrecy of the rapture. The two points on which it is important to have the clear testimony of Scripture are – first, that there will be a Jewish remnant at the end… secondly, the true character of the church of God…. The great object of the enemy in denying the rapture of the saints before the appearing of the Lord [i.e. a pre-tribulation Rapture]… is to deny and destroy the proper faith of the church of God, and to set the church itself aside…. They are deceived by the enemy, though far from intending to deceive with him.”[16]
As the preceding paragraph of Darby’s article makes clear, Darby was dealing with those “who deny the rapture of the saints before Christ’s appearing” i.e. with post-tribulationists. He was not claiming, as Schimmel triumphantly asserts, that “the great and vital truth of the rapture” was “the secrecy of the rapture,” but that it was the issue of the rapture’s “secrecy” which was being used against him by “the adversaries of the truth”. Thus Darby was stating that the secrecy issue was “not touching the main point,” which was simply “the great and vital truth of the rapture” and the distinction between an end-time Jewish remnant and the character and hope of the Church.
It should be added that all the accusations made concerning the “secrecy” of the Rapture are a smokescreen; this is a non-issue. In all the Rapture passages of the New Testament, there is no indication that the unbelieving world will witness an event which the Apostle Paul clearly states is confined to the Church, and which will take place “in a moment, in the twinkling of an eye” (1 Corinthians 15:52). To assert, then, that the pre-trib Rapture will be “secret,” in this sense, is perfectly in keeping with Scripture.
Joe Schimmel makes the following claim:
“While much of Darby’s doctrine fell within the pale of orthodoxy, he espoused a socially cultic mentality that was similar to that of Charles Taze Russell, who founded the Jehovah’s Witnesses, and Joseph Smith, the prophet of Mormonism in the same century.”
Not only does Joe Schimmel claim that demonic, lying spirits were at work among the Irvingites, who he credits with formulating the pre-trib Rapture, but he also sets a photograph of John Nelson Darby in between those of Charles Taze Russell and Joseph Smith to connect pre-tribulationism with The Watchtower Society (Jehovah’s Witnesses) and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons). Schimmel ultimately credits “the spirit of Antichrist” with the formulation of the pre-trib Rapture doctrine. In the concluding chapter he states that “the pre-trib Rapture was first taught in the nineteenth century in 1830, the same year that Joseph Smith founded Mormonism.”
Chapter 11 of the DVD is entitled “Pre-Trib, the Occult, and the 20th–21st Centuries,” in which Schimmel asserts that ideas similar to that of the pre-trib Rapture, with its “occultic origins,” were “promoted among the cults” during the late nineteenth century. He turns his attention at one point to The Berean Call ministry, founded by the late Dave Hunt, stating that “Dave Hunt has done a great job exposing cults and aberrations within the church through the years, [but] he missed the occult history of the secret Rapture that he himself vigorously promoted.” Schimmel continues:
“The parallels between the occult influences of the Irvingites in the early nineteenth century, and pre-trib in the late nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and some of the occult influences on pre-trib leaders in the late nineteenth or early twentieth centuries, is chilling.”
Such reckless statements are not worthy of comment.
Joe Schimmel quotes from a letter Darby wrote in 1834 in which he speaks of the doctrine of the Lord’s return working “like leaven” through the churches. In so doing, he rips Darby’s statement completely out of context by claiming this as evidence of Darby’s malevolent intentions. In a letter which any believer would be blessed to receive, expressing as it does Darby’s love for the brother to whom he is writing, and for all his brethren in Plymouth, Darby addresses the need to “wholly depend upon God’s Spirit” and “lean upon the Lord, and look for grace,” and the need for the message of “the Lord’s coming” to spread like leaven, a statement he immediately qualifies by saying: “I do not mean leaven as ill” i.e. as something negative. To give the reader a sense of the kind of person Darby was, here is how the letter, which Schimmel uses against Darby, concludes:
“My kindest love to all my dear brethren and sisters… may the Lord keep and bless them abundantly…. The Lord bless you and keep you, dear brother, and make you to abound more and more in the only true riches. Your very affectionate brother in Him.”[17]
Darby’s life and ministry was characterised by a joyful expectation and personal longing to meet his Saviour. This longing had characterised the early Thessalonian believers, who had “turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead – Jesus, who rescues us from the coming wrath” (1 Thess. 1:9-10). In The Freshness of Faith, Darby offered the following insights into these verses:
“A most extraordinary thing to do! Waiting for God’s Son! that is, all our hopes are clean out of this world. Do not expect anything from earth, but look for something from heaven, and this God’s Son Himself, ‘even Jesus which delivered us from the wrath to come’…. Those who were looking for Christ were entirely delivered ‘from the wrath to come’…. At Christ’s first coming He had taken up the whole question of wrath…. All the question is totally and finally settled: sin is borne once, and He who bore it is raised from the dead…. This sets me in perfect freedom; and it does more, because it links me up with Christ in heaven. I know He is coming. Why? Because I know Him there. This divine Person before my soul – this Christ – the Man who, infinitely interested about my sins, died for me, He is waiting in heaven…. We are waiting, our bodies to be raised, when we are to see Him and be like Him…. We are really waiting for something: for what? For the Person who has so loved us…. Government under Christ is going to be set up. All things are to be put under His feet…. I shall be happy long before that…. We love His appearing, but we love Himself better. Therefore we wait for Him to take us to Himself…. I cannot be waiting for God’s Son from heaven if I am expecting wrath…. Suppose God said, ‘Tonight,’ etc., would you say, This is what I want? If not, there is something between your affections and Christ.”[18]
Dr Paul Wilkinson
Associate Minister
Hazel Grove Full Gospel Church
Stockport, U.K.
____________________________________
The above rebuttal is based solely on the DVD Left Behind or Led Astray? In August 2015, Paul gave a brief exposŽ of the DVD at The Berean Call Conference in Bend, Oregon, following which he has been the subject of a “roundtable discussion” between two of the major contributors to the documentary. I want to make it clear that we have no intention of being drawn into a debate on this subject. The Lord always vindicates His Word, and those who faithfully preach the truth have nothing to fear. I am grateful to those who have voiced their support for Paul publically, but I would urge readers to avoid the temptation of taking issue with those who are contending with him. My prayer is that the flock of God, His beautiful flock (cf. Jeremiah 13:20), will be protected from confusion, fear and doubt, and be at peace in the knowledge that the Lord has not destined us to endure any part of the Tribulation. We have a glorious future, and as one senior pastor shared with me recently, it is sad that these
“…bombastic words, rough actions and incessant attacks upon the body produce nothing good only grief. It is evil to suggest that waiting with expectancy for Jesus’ appearing is sourced in a demonic doctrine. It is evil (my opinion) to tell anyone that Jesus could not come back today. Is there any verse or chapter or doctrine in the scriptures that tell us to not be eagerly waiting? Not one.”
We are grateful for the support of our brothers and sisters in the wider Church, and for the encouragement of many godly ministers, including Jewish pastor, theologian, and author Dr David Hocking, founder of Hope for Today ministry based in California, who has sent us this encouraging endorsement:
“None of the attacks and accusations against Dr. Paul Wilkinson, and his classic documentation and support of John Nelson Darby, ever had anything to do with my support and belief in the pre-tribulation rapture of the church. I came to my conviction by studying God’s Word and especially the Greek manuscripts. I have believed, preached and taught the pre-tribulation rapture of the church long before my connection with the Pre-Trib Research Center in Dallas, Texas.
The supreme issue of all (in my opinion) is the ‘new song’ of Revelation 5:9-10. The usage of the second person plural pronoun (‘us’) forces any Bible scholar to support pre-tribulationalism (the Greek manuscript evidence reveals that out of the 24 manuscript readings available today, 23 read ‘us’ and the only manuscript reading otherwise is Codex Alexandrinus.) In addition to the usage of ‘us’ in the phrase of verse 9 (‘redeemed us’), the reading of verse 10 is identical to Revelation 1:6.
The anger and hostility evidenced in the writings and messages of these men is not only revealing, but exposing them. The truth of I Thessalonians 4:13-18, along with I Thessalonians 5:1-9 is overwhelming in its support of pre-tribulationalism. It is time to stop the bitterness and to learn the grace and love of our Lord in speaking of Biblical truth. Our viewpoints do NOT authenticate Biblical truth – It is the BIBLE, the whole BIBLE, and nothing but the BIBLE – it is God’s infallible and inspired word!”
Paul’s doctoral research resulted in a 200,000 word thesis on John Nelson Darby and the Origins of Christian Zionism, which his supervisor, a world authority on Second Temple Judaism, told me was an outstanding, state-of-the-art piece of work. One of Paul’s PhD examiners, although not a proponent of pre-millennial pre-tribulationalism, stated that Paul had produced “a fine work of historical and theological reflection.” I share these things not to boast, nor to justify or defend our position, but to show that those who are bent on robbing the saints of their pre-tribulational hope are doing so by vilifying Darby, and disregarding the clear historical evidence which proves them wrong. Those so inclined need to take account of the fact that Paul’s doctoral research won a coveted university award for exceptional scholarship, and that his work has attracted the support of leading Bible prophecy teachers and Christian film makers. In the light of the present hostile climate, I think we need to be reminded of what some of these highly-respected men have said about Understanding Christian Zionism (see below).
Andrew D. Robinson
Senior Pastor
Hazel Grove Full Gospel Church
68 London Road, Hazel Grove, Stockport, Cheshire (U.K.), SK7 4AF
Tel. (+01144) 0161-456-8393
Email: hazelgroveministries@virginmedia.com
Registered Charity No. 1051785
________________________________________
“Dr Paul Wilkinson has done a thorough and masterful job of mining the depths of Darby’s extensive theology. [He] clearly demonstrates… that there is no historical basis to link Darby’s development of the pre-Trib Rapture with spurious influences like the Scottish lassie, Margaret MacDonald, or Edward Irving and the Irvingites. Instead, he demonstrates that the best explanations of the historical evidence is that Darby was an extremely capable and well-trained student of Scripture, and derived the doctrine of the Rapture from his personal study of the Bible.”
~Dr Thomas Ice, Executive Director, Pre-Trib Research Center, Dallas, Texas
“Wilkinson’s impeccable documentation and reasoning from Scripture thoroughly refute the myth that Darby got his doctrine of the Pre-tribulation Rapture from a Scottish girl and two Jesuit priests. Primary historical sources cited herein clearly demonstrate the contrary truth. I highly recommend this excellent treatment of a controversial subject that has confused many.”
~Dave Hunt, Founder of The Berean Call, Bend, Oregon
“Due to the personal attacks on John Nelson Darby, many believers are confused on whether they should support Israel…. This work by Dr. Wilkinson is a work greatly needed to clarify these issues for many believers and it should be read by all to understand Darby, Zionism, and Israel.”
~Dr Arnold G. Fruchtenbaum, Director of Ariel Ministries, San Antonio, Texas
“Few dedicated Christian scholars with an evangelistic ministry have been attacked more unfairly than John Nelson Darby, who did more to promote the doctrine of the pre-tribulation Rapture of the Church than any other person. Darby did not invent it, of course, for it is both Biblical and ancient, but he popularised it during the nineteenth century. This well researched and readable book carefully sets the record straight and makes a valuable contribution to prophetic studies.
~Dr Tim LaHaye, Chairman of the Pre-Trib Research Center, Dallas, Texas
“In the final analysis, Dr. Wilkinson has restored Darby’s reputation as having been a pious visionary used by God at a crucial time in history to formulate for His Church a comprehensive and coherent theological system that provided the Biblical foundation for Christian Zionism. For any student of ecclesiastical and political history, as well as systematic and historical theology, this book is essential reading.”
~Dr Randall Price, Distinguished Professor of Jewish Studies, Liberty University, Lynchburg, Virginia
“With so much confusion and misinformation today concerning dispensationalism, Christian Zionism, and the role of J.N. Darby, Wilkinson’s work is a breath of theological and historical fresh air. I am deeply grateful for his fine scholarship and the balanced way in which he makes his case. This work should quickly become a standard on Christian Zionism and Darby’s influence on this important movement.”
~Dr. Mark Hitchcock, Senior Pastor of Faith Bible Church, Edmond, Oklahoma
“This groundbreaking book debunks decades of misrepresentation and scholarship, exploding the myth that Darby stole the doctrine of the pre-tribulation Rapture from his contemporaries. By revealing the man and his message, Paul Wilkinson vindicates Darby and spotlights the imminent return of the Lord Jesus Christ as the centerpiece of his theology.”
Cover of the book, Understanding Christian Zionism
______________________________________________
UK Orders
Copies of the book are available either in paperback (£10 incl. p&p) or audiobook format (CD box set – £10, MP3 disc – £5; incl. p&p) from:
Hazel Grove Full Gospel Church, 68 London Road, Hazel Grove, Stockport, Cheshire, SK7 4AF
Tel. 0161-456-8393. Email: hazelgroveministries@virginmedia.com
Overseas Orders
Copies are also available from:
The Berean Call, PO Box 7019, Bend, OR 97708 (USA)
Tel. 541-382-6210; Toll-free: 800-937-6638
http://thebereancall.com/products/understanding-christian-pb
http://thebereancall.com/products/understanding-christian-zionism-1
http://thebereancall.com/products/understanding-christian-zionism
[1] Margaret Oliphant, The Life of Edward Irving, Vol. II (London: Hurst and Blackett, 1862), p.134.
[2] Alfred C. Fry, The Fry Manuscript (Manchester: Christian Brethren Archive, John Rylands University Library), pp.236-237, 208.
[3] Francis William Newman, Phases of Faith (London: Trübner & Co., 1881), p.119.
[4] J.N. Darby, ‘The Irrationalism of Infidelity,’ in The Collected Writings of J.N. Darby, ed. by William Kelly (Kingston-on-Thames: Stow Hill Bible & Tract Depot, n.d.), 6:284-285.
[5] William Kelly, The Rapture of the Saints: Who Suggested it, or rather on what Scripture? (London: T. Weston, 1903), p.12.
[6] Quoted in Dave MacPherson, The Incredible Cover-Up: Exposing the Origins of Rapture Theories (Medford, OR: Omega Publications, 2001), pp.151-154. MacPherson combines MacDonald’s account in Norton’s Memoirs (1840; pp.171-176) and The Restoration of Apostles and Prophets (1861; pp.15-18). The portions in italics are from the latter.
[7] Paul Richard Wilkinson, Understanding Christian Zionism: Israel’s Place in the Purposes of God, ed. by Andrew D. Robinson (Bend, OR: The Berean Call, 2013), pp.176-177.
[8] Wilkinson, Understanding Christian Zionism, p.181.
[9] William Trotter, Plain Papers on Prophetic and Other Subjects, Revised edn (London: G. Morrish, n.d.), p.195.
[10] Wilkinson, Understanding Christian Zionism, p.172.
[11] Wilkinson, Understanding Christian Zionism, pp.171-172.
[12] Henry Drummond, Narrative of the Circumstances which led to the setting up of the Church of Christ at Albury (1834), p.7.
[13] Wilkinson, Understanding Christian Zionism, pp.76-77.
[14] Darby, ‘Answer to “A Second Letter to the Brethren”,’ in The Collected Writings, 8:369.
[15] Wilkinson, Understanding Christian Zionism, pp.78-79.
[16] J.N. Darby, ‘The Rapture of the Saints and the Character of the Jewish Remnant,’ in The Collected Writings, 11:120-122.
[17] J.N. Darby, ‘Letter (Dublin, 1834),’ in Letters of J.N.D. (Kingston-on-Thames: Stow Hill Bible & Tract Depot, n.d.), 1:24-26.
[18] J.N. Darby, ‘The Freshness of Faith,’ in The Collected Writings, 21:359-363.
Copyright (c) 2025 Pre-Trib Research Center
Mondo’s full message on Revelation 3:10 which is one of the most powerful verses demonstrating a pre-tribulation rapture.
Is a Psalm 83 Being Fulfilled? Is Psalm 83 a Prophecy?
By Mondo Gonzales
The date of October 7, 2023, will certainly be a day to remember for those that are prophecy watchers. It was the day that the terrorists of Hamas (among other international collaborators) coordinated a planned attack which breached the Gaza/Israel border fence. They used rockets, paragliders, bombs, motorcycles, tractors, etc. to launch their aggression against mostly Israeli civilians. It was pure evil as they murdered, raped, beheaded and burned men, women, and babies. Over 1,400 people were dead with over 200 taken as hostages back into the tunnels of the Gaza strip.
As we woke up on that Saturday morning, we were at our Norman, Oklahoma prophecy conference with 1100 other people. The news quickly spread about the terrorist incursion into the various cities and villages of Israel adjacent to the Gaza strip. Israel proper has 9.7 million people with Jews making up 7.1 million (around 73%). To murder 1,400 people for the population of Israel is the equivalent of slaughtering over 65,000 Americans by proportion. Can you even imagine such a scenario inside the USA? In the September 11, 2001, terrorist attack, there were just under 3,000 people killed. This is one of the reasons why Israel is describing this as their September 11, but obviously it is even worse.
Immediately after this initial event, there were rockets, threats, or attempted incursions from the Lebanese in the north and Syria in the Northeast Golan Heights area. This prompted us to invite Bill Salus and Bill Koenig to have an impromptu “questions and answers” session on Israel with myself as the moderator that morning at the conference. Much was discussed and especially the potential prophetic connections to a Psalm 83 or Ezekiel 38/39 war. Not only were these passages addressed, but also whether this would contribute to a Jeremiah 49 (Elam) or Isaiah 17 (Damascus destruction) fulfillment.
At the same time, it is realized by those in the prophecy world that there are various viewpoints even among the 24 speakers we had in Norman. Not everyone agrees on every fine point of eschatology. Thankfully, all the teachers remain friendly and cordial in their disagreements which is a testimony to their love for Jesus and being His disciples (John 13:35). There is room for disagreement among these finer points and I hope this continues. Just because someone believes and teaches a mid-trib, pre-wrath, post-trib, Psalm 83 prophecy or No Psalm 83 prophecy does not make any of them a “false teacher.” I think this phrase gets thrown around too casually and in 2 Peter and Jude, these are people who KNOWINGLY teach error. None of us have perfect theology and so if someone knowingly teaches error, then they certainly could be designated a false teacher. Yet we should remember that we are all in 100% agreement that Jesus died for our sins and that salvation can only be found in Him.
I say this all as an introduction, because the recent events have brought a renewed interest and focus upon the concept that Psalm 83 is prophetic about an upcoming Arab led war against the nation of Israel. Not everyone agrees that Psalm 83 is a prophecy about a war that would most likely precede the Ezekiel 38/39 Russia-led war. With the increased hostilities and outright war that is happening right now, I would like to address briefly whether Psalm 83 could be a prophecy of an upcoming war. Bill Salus has written much on this for about 15 years and has been interviewed by countless people on this topic. I have had many conversations with him on this topic and so I will try to represent everyone fairly.
One of the biggest criticisms of Bill Salus’s book on Psalm 83 has come from Dr. Tommy Ice of the pre-trib.org center. He has written a few articles on that website which represent some of the major objections he sees for Psalm 83 being a prophecy. If he is correct in his criticisms, then clearly Psalm 83 is not a prophecy, but simply a psalm of lament written by Asaph around 950 B.C.
It is worth mentioning that I agree with Dr. Ice on 99% of theology and his website pre-trib.org is a site that I support, recommend, and endorse more than any other website supporting the pre-tribulation position. I respect him highly and so any difference of opinions I might have with him are written with warmth and love between brothers. He has shown himself to be quite gracious to others who differ with him as he has invited many of these brothers to come speak at the annual pre-trib.org conference, me included. I spoke on the concept of a rescue in the Olivet Discourse in December, 2022. A belief that he does not hold. It is great when brothers can agree to disagree on these non-essential points in a peaceful way. Let us now turn and address a few of his criticisms of a Psalm 83 prophecy.
Dr. Ice wrote a series of articles on Bible prophecy containing within it a four-part section dealing with Psalm 83. The title of the series is “Consistent Biblical Futurism” (Parts 10, 11, 12, 13 deal with Psalm 83). In part 10, he writes, “Further evidence of a futurist retreat toward historicism within some otherwise futurist circles, can be seen by those who insist that Psalm 83 is a war that will take place before the rapture, during the current church age and not in association with the tribulation. Historicists believe that Old Testament prophetic passages can be fulfilled during the current church age. Consistent futurists believe that future Old Testament prophecy will start to be fulfilled after the rapture of the Church, except the prophecy of the rapture itself” (emphasis mine).
What Dr. Ice says here is very true in a general sense, but we need to be careful not to make nuances for those times when there are exceptions to the general truths. The first correction is that Bill Salus makes no direct connections that Psalm 83 must happen before the rapture. Therefore, Bill and those that believe Psalm 83 is a prophecy are not historicists.
So, let’s remove that criticism from the table. Bill and others would all agree that the rapture is an imminent event and there is nothing that must precede or is even prophetically written to precede the rapture. If Psalm 83 is a prophecy, it has no direct connection to the timing of the rapture.
Dr. Ice continues, “Consistent futurists believe that future Old Testament prophecy will start to be fulfilled after the rapture of the Church, except the prophecy of the rapture itself” (emphasis mine). I am a little surprised he would write this and it is possible I am misunderstanding exactly what he is saying. We understand from many passages that the restoration of Israel would happen at some point after their expulsion in AD 70 – 135 (Ezekiel 37:21; 11:17; 34:13; 28:25; 36:24; Jeremiah 23:3) and possibly before the rapture. This is OT prophecy and did occur during the church age in 1948 before the rapture.
In addition, we have the prophecy of Gog/Magog war to happen in the latter years (Ezekiel 38:8, 16) and many consistent futurist prophecy teachers believe this could happen before the rapture in the church age. In this case, I would object to saying that to be a consistent futurist is to believe that future OT prophecy must be fulfilled after the rapture. Most of the OT prophecies certainly will be fulfilled after the church age, but as I mentioned above, Israel for sure and possibly the Gog/Magog war could happen prior to the rapture. In this case, one could still be a consistent futurist and believe that a Psalm 83 war could happen prior to the rapture.
In the same article (#10), he asks, “A question I have is would God reveal a major prophecy event, like Salus says the so-called Psalm 83 war would be, first in the Psalms and no where else clearly? If we move from the clear passages that we know concerning future prophetic events, is there another example of an entire prophetic event being revealed in a Psalm without being revealed in the Prophets? If the Lord revealed a prophecy first in the Psalms, then like Psalm 2, which has statements in it that likely refers to tribulation events, it would have been clarified through a clearer and systematic statement of that event in the Prophets.”
This line of thinking commits the fallacy of the single cause. Dr. Ice asks, “would God reveal a major prophecy event….?” and then moves on to assume that God always reveals prophecy in the same way. There is no doubt that God reveals His truths in consistent ways, but to say that something is not true because it doesn’t follow a certain pattern is erroneous thinking. God certainly can reveal His truth in various methods as we see in Hebrews 1:1-2. If a prophecy is found in the psalms, it does not absolutely need to be found in the prophetic literature to be deemed as accurate.
Others have objected to Psalm 83 being a prophecy by demanding that for it to be prophetic, it must say contain complete details of a beginning and ending. For many, it also must mention the “latter days” or have thorough results of a war. These are all assumptions and many passages have full accounts, but this is not a requirement for prophetic material and the lack of these items does not negate prophetic material outright.
Dr. Ice continues in his article to list the various accepted categories of psalms, “1) the lament or petition psalms, either individual (Ps. 3) or communal (Ps. 44); (2) thanksgiving or praise psalms, either individual (Ps. 30) or communal (Ps. 65); (3) psalms of trust in God (Ps. 4); (4) hymns that include psalms on the enthronement of Yahweh (see Gen. 2:4, note; Ps. 47, note), psalms concerning Jerusalem (Ps. 48), and royal psalms (some of which are messianic; Pss. 2, 110); and (5) didactic and wisdom psalms (Pss. 1, 37, 119).”
It seems the intention of including this list is to minimize the probability of Psalm 83 being a psalm of prophecy as it would not fall into any of these categories. Dr. Ice is quite clear that he sees this psalm as a lament psalm and no doubt this psalm is a lament, but is it only a lament or could it possibly include something more? In part 13, he makes the comment, “There is absolutely no doubt that Psalm 83 is 100% inspired by God, just like all the rest of Scripture. However, there is no prophecy in this Psalm, simply a petition to God by Asaph to judge those enemies that are against Israel. I challenge anyone to show me a prophetic portion or statement in Psalm 83!” (emphasis mine).
It seems that Dr. Ice is stating that the only standard for a psalm to include genuine prophecy is for it to contain a specific prophetic label or statement. This is clearly not the standard when it comes to Messianic prophecy or other fulfillments found in later writers.
In preparing this article, I thought it would be interesting to interact with various psalms as quoted by the New Testament apostles. It is impossible to be exhaustive, but let us examine several examples. The first is poignant because Peter specifically uses the word “fulfilled” (Greek pleroo) which is used consistently in the NT to be in reference to fulfilled prophecy from the OT. Notice how Peter discusses the replacing of Judas, “Brothers, the Scripture had to be fulfilled, which the Holy Spirit spoke beforehand by the mouth of David concerning Judas, who became a guide to those who arrested Jesus. For he was numbered among us and was allotted his share in this ministry.” (Now this man acquired a field with the reward of his wickedness, and falling headlong he burst open in the middle and all his bowels gushed out. And it became known to all the inhabitants of Jerusalem, so that the field was called in their own language Akeldama, that is, Field of Blood.) “For it is written in the Book of Psalms, “‘May his camp become desolate, and let there be no one to dwell in it’; and “‘Let another take his office.’ (Acts 1:16-20).
Peter quotes two places in the Psalms (69:25 and 109:8). Both of these psalms are also lament psalms written by David. Yet nowhere in these lament psalms will you find any prophetic portions or statements that Dr. Ice requires for Psalm 83. We know through Peter that the Holy Spirit certainly intended these two passages by David to be prophetic without any direct prophetic indicators.
Another interesting one is found a few verses earlier in the Davidic lament psalm. David writes, “They put bitter poison into my food, and to quench my thirst they give me vinegar to drink” (Psalm 69:21). Later in the gospel of John, he writes, “After this, Jesus, knowing that all was now finished, said (to fulfill the Scripture), “I thirst.” A jar full of sour wine stood there, so they put a sponge full of the sour wine on a hyssop branch and held it to His mouth. When Jesus had received the sour wine, He said, “It is finished,” and He bowed His head and gave up His spirit” (John 19:28-30). Again, we have the use of the word “fulfilled” which is in reference to prophetic material in the OT. Just like verse 25 from Acts 1, Psalm 69:21 contains no prophetic portion or statement showing it to be prophetic, but it clearly is.
One final example will be quite telling. We know that Asaph who wrote Psalm 83 was a seer (Hebrew chozeh) as is mentioned twice (2 Chronicles 29:30; 35:15). A seer was someone who was most often equated with a prophet and spoke authoritatively and frequently in prophetic utterances or through a vision. We learn this about a seer, “Formerly in Israel, when a man went to inquire of God, he said, “Come, let us go to the seer,” for today’s “prophet” was formerly called a seer” (1 Sam. 9:9). This does not mean that everything that a seer said was a predictive prophecy, but it certainly opens up their words to having a prophetic element.
Let’s circle back to Asaph the seer. In the later ministry of Jesus, He began to speak to the crowds in parables. The disciples questioned Him as to why He would do this. Matthew reveals that He spoke in riddles to hide the truth from those whose heart was hardened, but it would be revealed to His disciples (Matthew 13:10-17). Matthew summarizes this section by writing, “Jesus spoke all these things in parables to the crowds; He did not speak to them without a parable. This fulfilled what was spoken by the prophet: ‘I will open my mouth in parables, I will announce what has been hidden from the foundation of the world’” (Matt. 13:34-35). This is a direct quote from Psalm 78:2 which was written by Asaph also. It is classified as a wisdom psalm, but it also contains no prophetic portion or statement showing that it was to be later understood as a prophecy by Matthew.
Notice clearly that Matthew calls Asaph a prophet, so there can be no misunderstanding about God using Asaph’s words in a prophetic way when applicable. Dr. Ice wrote in his article, “I challenge anyone to show me a prophetic portion or statement in Psalm 83!” I have just demonstrated a small sample of where prophecy has occurred in various psalms where no prophetic portion or statement was overtly included. Even more, there are prophetic elements in the psalm of the prophet Asaph which was confirmed in the New Testament.
Those that would use this line of reasoning to dispute a possible prophetic element as found in the Asaph Psalm (83) must concede that their reasoning is tenuous at best. Does this prove that Psalm 83 is a prophecy? No, it does not, but it certainly removes a major stumbling block for those that make a strong assertion against the idea.
There is only enough space to address one other criticism by Dr. Ice against the idea that Psalm 83 could be a prophecy which would find possible fulfillment in the church age.
He writes also in part 10, “Since Asaph wrote the Psalm around 950 B.C. the only Assyria that existed at that time was the one north of Babylon. This appears to be a problem for Salas’ contention that it refers to the modern state of Syria with Damascus as its capitol.[8] Modern Syria cannot be ancient Assyria. It is true that modern Syria developed out of ancient Assyria, but they are not the same. In Psalm 83, the text says “Assyria,” not Syria. Yet, Assyria has been gone from history since Nineveh, its capital was destroyed by the Babylonians in 612 B.C. Nor was Syria in existence when Asaph wrote Psalm 83.
The same would go for Philistia, which Salus takes as one of the strands that make up the modern Palestinians. The first problem with this view is that “Early Palestine was dominated by white Caucasians from the eastern Mediterranean area.” By the time of the intertestamental period, the Philistines disappear from history. Why is this important? This is important since it is legitimate to trace a modern people group from their ancient ancestors mentioned in the Bible if that people group remains the same over the years. The fact that the Philistines have totally vanished from history, while the Palestinians, who take the name from the ancient Philistines are ethnically unrelated to them. Since there is no ethnic relationship, this disqualifies one from identifying them as the same people group today. Modern Palestinians are generally made up of Arabs from all of the surrounding counties that have immigrated to Israel over the years. Salus argues that modern Palestinians descend from the Edomites, which may be the case, but what modern people group are represented by the Philistines?”
His main criticism here is how he feels Bill Salus handles the players that are listed in Psalm 83:6-7. Let me list them out which is helpful to see and also my comments:
Now, let me say up front that Bill Salus and I would probably approach answering Dr. Ice’s criticisms differently in this case. You can read Bill’s book on Psalm 83 to get his perspective, but I think the main criticisms against Bill’s understanding of Psalm 83 can be blunted if we simply see that there is a distinction being made between the peoples and the geographical areas. This is common in the Old Testament when discussing nations or peoples.
There are helpful grammatical indicators in Hebrew when discussing a people group and a geographical area. For example, sometimes you see Ammonites (people) versus simply Ammon (location). Other times you see Amalek versus Amalekites. This also comes into play with Edom and Edomites. The Anchor Bible Dictionary article on Asshur (Assyria) says, “In the Bible the references to Asshur are always to the land, people, and king of Assyria as well as to their patronymic Asshur” (Page 500). Therefore, Dr. Ice’s criticism of Bill including Asshur (Assyria) can be unfounded if we understand Psalm 83 to be speaking of the geographic location instead of the Assyrian people groups. If you look today at the geographic location of Asshur (Assyria) it is based dead center in the area of Iraq where the terrorist group Isis has been operating. If Psalm 83 is a prophecy, could it be referring to whatever people group is based in the ancient geographical location of Assyria (modern Iraq)? It could include territory that certainly is westward towards modern Syria.
Also, this response could be the same for Dr. Ice’s criticism of seeing the Philistines involved in a Psalm 83 war. He asks, “but what modern people group are represented by the Philistines?” I think he misses the point because the text does not say Philistine, but instead Philistia which is a geographic location. This clearly refers to the Gaza strip area which is currently populated by Hamas terrorists and its subjects. Before 2005, there were Jews living there also, but that is no longer the case. In fact, since 2005, the potential prophecy of Philistia in Psalm 83 has become even more accurate.
After reading Dr. Ice’s criticisms of the concept of Psalm 83 being a prophecy of a coming Arab led war, I find his criticisms unpersuasive. Where does this leave us?
My goal in this article was not to prove that Psalm 83 was 100% a future prophecy. My goal was to show that those that say it is 100% not a prophecy are in error. The New Testament writings are 100% inspired and so if they interpret by the guiding of the Holy Spirit that certain psalms are indeed prophecies, they have the freedom to make these determinations with authority. We do not have the luxury to say that Psalm 83 is 100% a prophecy, but what we do know is that there is precedent for seeing a lament Psalm written by Asaph the prophet as a prophecy.
There are certainly other considerations written by Bill Salus and others that give even more credence to understanding Psalm 83 as a genuine prophecy that will be fulfilled in the future. Do I think they could ever be 100% confident? I do not, but I do think based on those other considerations that they could have a high degree of probability in saying that Psalm 83 is prophetic. This is far greater than the critics maintain when they say that seeing Psalm 83 as a prophecy is pure speculation. I disagree with that assessment.
I consulted over 50 commentaries on Psalm 83 and the overwhelming consensus was that there is nothing in history that fulfills all the elements as found in the psalm. Does this prove that it is a future prophecy? No, it does not, but what it does show is that it is left open ended as never before having any historical correlation. That gives me pause to consider the psalm ever more diligently.
My approach is that I am going to watch the geopolitical developments carefully and have a wait and see attitude at whether the events line up with the outline as found in Psalm 83. This requires a humble and cautious approach, but the more and more that events transpire, it is looking more certain than ever that Psalm 83 contains within it a future prophecy.
Amazingly, as we observe current events in Israel, the future of this Psalm’s potential fulfillment is looking to be sooner rather than later.
Maranatha!
Here is the PDF for the 10 Kings presentation that Mondo gave at the Orlando 2024 Prophecy Summit.
Below is an article that was 100% created from ChatGPT4. I gave it this query:
“Create an article on How Technocratic Oligarchs Are Gaining Wealth, Influence and Control.”
The following is what it spit out. Pretty amazing that the A.I. also added a section I didn’t ask for on the risks and implications of the technocratic oligarchs.
The 21st century has witnessed the emergence of a new class of powerful actors in the global arena: the technocratic oligarchs. These are the billionaires who have built and dominated digital platforms, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and other cutting-edge sectors, and who have amassed enormous fortunes as a result. They are not only the richest people in the world, but also the most influential, as they shape the policies, norms, and values of the societies they operate in. They are often portrayed as visionary innovators, philanthropists, and benefactors of humanity, but they also pose serious challenges to democracy, equality, and human rights. This document analyzes how technocratic oligarchs are gaining wealth, influence and control, and what are the implications and risks of their rise for the future of humanity.
The technocratic oligarchs are the main beneficiaries of the digital revolution, which has created unprecedented opportunities for wealth creation and accumulation. They have leveraged their expertise, networks, and resources to create and control the platforms and services that are essential for the functioning of the modern economy and society. These platforms and services include social media, e-commerce, cloud computing, online advertising, search engines, streaming, gaming, and more. They have also invested heavily in emerging and disruptive technologies, such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, nanotechnology, robotics, and space exploration, which have the potential to transform various industries and sectors. By doing so, they have established monopolies or oligopolies in their respective domains, and have captured a large share of the value and profits generated by these technologies. They have also exploited the loopholes and gaps in the regulation and taxation of the digital economy, and have avoided or minimized their social and environmental responsibilities. As a result, they have accumulated enormous wealth, which far exceeds that of the traditional elites, such as industrialists, bankers, and politicians.
The technocratic oligarchs are not only wealthy, but also influential and powerful. They have used their wealth to shape public opinion, the political agenda, and the policy outcomes in their favor. They have done so by funding and supporting various media outlets, think tanks, research institutions, advocacy groups, and political candidates and parties, which promote their interests and values. They have also leveraged their platforms and services to influence the behavior, preferences, and beliefs of billions of users, who depend on them for information, communication, entertainment, and education. They have used their data and algorithms to manipulate, persuade, and nudge the users, and to create echo chambers, filter bubbles, and polarized communities. They have also deployed their technologies to monitor, track, and surveil the users, and to collect and analyze their personal and behavioral data, which they use for commercial and political purposes. They have also exerted their influence and control over the innovation and regulation of the technologies they develop and deploy, and have resisted or undermined the attempts to limit or challenge their power and accountability. They have also expanded their influence and control beyond their national borders, and have become global actors, who shape international relations, the global governance, and the global development.
The rise of the technocratic oligarchs has profound implications and risks for the future of humanity. On the one hand, they have contributed to the advancement of science, technology, and innovation, and have created new opportunities and benefits for many people and sectors. They have also supported and funded various social and environmental causes, such as education, health, poverty, climate change, and human rights. They have also advocated for the values of openness, diversity, and inclusion, and have challenged the status quo and the established authorities. On the other hand, they have also created and exacerbated various social and environmental problems, such as inequality, polarization, disinformation, surveillance, exploitation, and manipulation. They have also threatened and undermined the values and principles of democracy, human rights, and the rule of law, and have challenged the sovereignty and legitimacy of the states and the international organizations. They have also posed existential and ethical risks to humanity, as they develop and deploy technologies that could alter the nature and destiny of the human species, such as artificial intelligence, biotechnology, and geoengineering. They have also created a new form of techno-authoritarianism, which could lead to the concentration and centralization of power and wealth in the hands of a few, and the marginalization and exclusion of the many.
The technocratic oligarchs are the new elite of the 21st century, who have gained wealth, influence and control through the development and domination of digital and emerging technologies. They have become the key actors and shapers of the global economy, society, and politics, and have created both opportunities and challenges for humanity. They have also raised fundamental questions and dilemmas about the role and responsibility of technology and the technologists in the world, and the need and possibility of the regulation and governance of the technology and the technologists. The future of humanity depends on how we address these questions and dilemmas, and how we balance the benefits and risks of technology and the technocracy.
There is much confusion and antisemitism rising to the surface. One of the most enduring erroneous views revolves around the theory that modern Jews are descendants of the Khazars. Genetic studies have proven this false.
Please see this short video refuting the myth that all Israeli Jews are descendants of the Khazars. Also, make sure to read the article below the video by Dr. Tommy Ice also refuting this error.
Chapter 6 excerpt from the book, Zionism by Dr. Tommy Ice.
https://prophecywatchers.com/product/case-zionism-christians-support-israel-dr-thomas-ice/
Are Modern Jews Descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob?
“Modern Jews are a separate nation of people with a self-identity, spread out among many other nations. The closest analogy to them are the Gypsies. The only difference between Modern Jews and Gypsies is that the Modern Jews claim to have a relation to the Bible Jews, a claim I maintain is false. . . . Modern Jews think of themselves as Jews, but they are not Jews. They are counterfeits of Biblical Jews. I say this not to disparage them, but to be accurate.”[1] — James Jordan, Replacement Theology Theologian
“In summary . . . the largest, and most influential, proportion of Eastern European Jews came from Central Europe. By this analysis we can show that the dominate ethnic element among Eastern European Jews is Judean — the ancient Jewish people of Judea in the Middle East.”[2] — Kevin Alan Brook, Jewish Researcher
Some people contend that modern Jews do not have the blood of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in their veins. They contend that modern Jews, whether in or out of the land of Israel, have no genetic basis from which to claim that they are Jews, let alone the chosen descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Some say that since they are not true Jews then they are not descendants of those who were scattered across the globe in a.d. 70, and they cannot return to what they never really left, which is the land of Israel. Is this true or just another effort to disinherit God’s ancient chosen people?
The conviction that modern Jews are fraudulent has been clearly expressed by Presbyterian replacement theologian James B. Jordan.[3] “With the passing away of the Old Covenant, there is no longer any such a thing as a Jew in the Biblical sense,” declares Jordan. I wonder, “Is there any other sense in which one could be a Jew except for the biblical sense?” “Unless by ‘True Jews’ we mean Christians. There is no covenant, and therefore there is no nation, no ‘race.’ ”[4] Nowhere does the New Testament call Gentile Christians “True Jews,” “Jews,” “Israel,” or any such term. New Testament believers are called the seed of Abraham because he was the father of those who believe. Abraham was the only Gentile in the history of the world who became a Jew or Israelite, since the Jewish race descended from him, Isaac, and Jacob. Thus, all Christian believers in the current Church Age, whether Jew or Gentile, are offspring of the spiritual seed of Abraham (Rom. 4:1–5; Gal. 3:6–7, 14, 16–18). Abraham is both the father of physical Israel, known as the Jews, and father of spiritual descendants, that is, everyone who believes in Jesus as the Messiah, whether Jew or Gentile (Gen. 15:6).
Jordan makes one of the most outlandish statements possible on this topic when he declares: “It is entirely possible that there is not one drop of Abraham’s blood in any modern Jew.”[5] One might think that only a radical Islamic terrorist would publicly write such things, but Jordan is an Evangelical Christian. He does not stop with the preceding comment, he continues with the following pontification:
Modern Jews are a separate nation of people with a self-identity, spread out among many other nations. The closest analogy to them are the Gypsies. The only difference between Modern Jews and Gypsies is that the Modern Jews claim to have a relation to the Bible Jews, a claim I maintain is false. . . . Modern Jews think of themselves as Jews, but they are not Jews. They are counterfeits of Biblical Jews. I say this not to disparage them, but to be accurate.[6]
Jordan’s “scholarship” leads him to believe that today’s Jews (he even coins a special term for the Jews of today — “modern Jews”) are fraudulent, merely posing as Jews. History would be totally different if Hitler had thought this way, or if the Muslims of today would come to learn of Jordan’s discovery. “Modern Jews are people who choose to think of themselves as descendants of Israel,” insists Jordan. “Most modern Jews are not semites, but are descended from Eastern European tribes converted to Judaism in the middle ages.”[7] So Jordan believes that the true Jews of the Bible and history lost their identity in the Middle Ages in relation to a nation called Khazaria.
One of the tactics used by some anti-Zionists is to say that most modern Jews are not true descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. This errant theory is based upon wrong conclusions they have drawn from the history of a medieval nation named Khazaria in which some of the Gentiles converted to Judaism. This is alleged to have diluted the stock of Jewish progeny through a great influx of Gentiles into Judaism. Through racial inflation, the Jews are said to have lost their genetic descent from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, resulting in the loss of genuine Jewish DNA in those who call themselves Jews today.
The Khazar theory was introduced to the broader public in 1976 by Arthur Koestler, a Jewish communist and novelist in his book entitled The Thirteenth Tribe.[8] The theory had been floating around various Arab and anti-Semitic groups for a number of years before Koestler’s book.[9] It is not surprising to learn that his theory has been very attractive to Arabs, Muslims, Holocaust deniers, skinheads, Nazis, Christian Identity, some within Evangelical Christian circles who hold to replacement theology, and even a number of leftist Jews. The Khazar theory is a convenient way for some to simply dismiss the modern state of Israel, since according to this view the Jewish people in the land are not really descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Therefore, the so-called “Jews” do not have legitimate claim to the land of Israel. Robert B. Thieme Jr. outlines the implications of the Khazar theory:
If the Khazars, not the biblical Israelites, are indeed the ancestors of European Jews, then European Jews have no connection with God’s people of the Old Testament, and do not fall under the protective auspices of Genesis 12:1–3. Since European Jews constitute the largest group of immigrants in present day Israel and in the United States, how much easier for anti-Semites to discredit and persecute those whom they consider to be impostors, disconnected with the elect, Old Testament race of people. Anti-Semites sometimes cite this “loophole” to justify their hatred and persecution of Jews. Also, Middle Eastern Arabs can reject the Semitic background of Jewish immigrants to Palestine and thereby preserve the concocted view that gives sanction for conquest of the Land.[10]
Since Khazar theory teaches that the Jews are largely a people who are now extinct as an ethic people, therefore, it renders mute, in their minds, the issue of the land of Israel as a future promise that will be fulfilled by God to the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. When people, especially those within Christendom, start thinking this way, it usually does not take long for anti-Semitic pogroms to arise. Today, with the re-established state of Israel, the Jew-hatred will increasingly be directed toward the national collective — the nation of Israel, which constitutes the new anti-Semitism.
Many who traffic in Jew-hatred or anti-Zionism have taken Koestler’s thesis and run with it. They have developed a whole school of thought revolving around the notion that “Jews are such imposters to begin with and I can prove that they are not even really Jews at all.” Thus, many influenced by the Khazar theory expand its horizons far beyond Koestler’s intentions, as misguided as they were to begin with. In fact, Koestler concludes, “The problem of the Khazar infusion a thousand years ago, however fascinating, is irrelevant to modern Israel.” Again he declares, “I am aware of the danger that it may be maliciously misinterpreted as a denial of the State of Israel’s right to exist.”[11] This is exactly what is now taking place! Israel’s opponents use these claims in an attempt to justify their enmity to individual Jews and especially against the modern state of Israel, especially in the Muslim world. Princeton scholar Bernard Lewis tells us, “This theory, first put forward by an Austrian anthropologist in the early years of this century [20th], is supported by no evidence whatsoever. It has long since been abandoned by all serious scholars in the field, including those in Arab countries, where the Khazar theory is little used except in occasional political polemics.”[12]
Just as Hitler’s Mein Kampf and The Protocols of The Learned Elders of Zion have become popular reading in much of the radical Muslim world, so too has the Khazar theory made significant inroads onto the radical Muslim must-read list. One Muslim writer in an article on Aljazeera.com said,
The irony of “the law of return” is that many of today’s jews have no direct ancestral link to the jews of the Old Testament. Many, perhaps even most jewish people are descended from the Khazars, a people whose rulers converted to Judaism sometime during the 800’s a.d. The Khazars never even set foot in Palestine![13]
James Jordan spews forth an invective when he speaks of “the heresy of Christian Zionism.”[14] He then concludes “that most modern Jews are not Jews at all: They are Khazars.”[15] Jordan continues as follows:
The Khazari race seems to lie behind the Ashkenazik Jews of Eastern Europe. This kind of assertion can, of course, be debated. The real problem in the discussion is the notion that Jewishness is a blood or racial phenomenon. It is not.
Biblically speaking, a Jew is someone who is covenanted into the people of Jews by circumcision. . . .
All these people were Jew, but only a small fraction actually had any of Abraham’s blood in them. . . . What this demonstrates is that covenant, not race, has always been the defining mark of a Jew.[16]
Following Jordan’s lead, another replacement theologian, Southern Baptist John L. Bray, asserts that “the pure fact is that many of the Jews of the world are not only not pure Jews, but not even Jews at all.”[17] “In addition to findings about the Khazar Jewish beginnings, we need to consider also that because of intermarriage, cross-breeding, etc.,” declares Bray, “there is very little that can be called ‘Jewish race’ today.”[18]
Evangelical Theodore Winston Pike, another militant anti-Zionist, also is attracted to the Khazar theory in his polemics against the legitimacy of the modern state of Israel. Pike tells us:
The truth is, the majority of Jews living in Palestine highhandedly expelling Arabs from their homes are no more the descendants of Abraham than such Jewish converts as Sammy Davis Jr., Marilyn Monroe, or for that matter, the rest of us.
The Jewish encyclopedias admit, of course, that the kingdom of Khazaria was converted to Judaism, but they do not pursue the implications of that fact as does the Jewish author, Koestler. It was Nesta Webster in the 1920s who first perceived the Khazar origins of most Eastern European Jews. Her deduction, however, was dismissed as “anti-Semitic” until Koestler, a liberal Jew of equal scholarship, has made the same claim with even greater insistence.[19]
Application of the Khazar theory can lead to a significant distortion of a Christian understanding of God’s Word. Jordon wonders: “Are Bible-believing Christians supposed to support a Jewish State, for theological reasons? Such is the assertion of Jerry Falwell, and of the heresy of Christian Zionism.”[20] I will now examine the veracity of such claims.
No informed person on these issues questions the existence of a country in the Middle Ages composed largely of Turkish stock, between the Black and Caspian Seas during the seventh to tenth centuries named Khazaria, where the royal family only converted to Judaism. Khazaria was an actual nation in history.[21] However, it is still an unproved theory, as attractive as it may appear to some, lacking any scientific evidence that Ashkenazi Jews (about 85 percent of world Jewry) are primarily descended from the Khazars.
In 1976, when Koestler, a non-specialist in this field, put forth this theory it was never taken seriously by linguists and most other scientists. This explains why the most vigorous promotion of his views are usually found within the circles of propagandists who have an ideological axe to grind and not by the scientific community. Like the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion, the forged document supporting a supposed Jewish world conspiracy, they so much want their theories to be real history, when they are not. Thieme provides an overview of the Khazars as follows:
Who were the Khazars? They were semi-nomadic, Tataric in origin, a Turkic-speaking people who first appeared north of the Caucuses in the late second century a.d. In the fifth century they were subjugated by the Huns but rose to power two centuries later. Charging across the Russian steppes, these legendary warriors conquered the Crimea and extended their empire from the western shores of the Caspian Sea to the River Don, from the southern Ukraine to the region north of the Black Sea and as far as Kiev. They fought the Persians and Armenians; they battled Arab expansion, which was inspired by the advent of Islam after the death of Mohammed in 632. In addition, they fought the Byzantine Empire, which forcibly tried to make them Christian.
The “khakan” or ruler was also the religious head of state of the Khazars. Tolerant of other religions, the khakan welcomed thousands of Jews from Asia Minor and the Byzantine Empire as well as Mohammedans and Christians. These three religious groups vied to convert the Khazars who practiced a primitive idolatrous religion.
In a.d. 740 after considering the various religious viewpoints among these groups, the khakan embraced Judaism for himself and his people. His conversion was a compromise between Christianity and the religion of Islam. While Judaism was accepted as the official religion of the empire, the Khazar state still maintained tolerance toward other religious groups. The empire continued until a.d. 965 when it was overthrown by a coalition of Christian Russians and the Byzantines.[22]
Why did the khakan convert to Judaism and not Christianity or Islam? It is commonly thought that had the Khazars converted to Islam then they would have been swallowed up into the growing Islamic empire and lost their national identity and their autonomous authority as rulers. The same would have been true had they converted to Christianity. Khazaria would have been likely become part of the Byzantine Empire as well. By converting to Judaism, the khakan was able to maintain complete independence for the territory that he ruled. “But it could only maintain its independence by accepting neither Christianity nor Islam,” notes Koestler of the Khazarian rulers, “for either choice would have automatically subordinated it to the authority of the Roman Emperor or the Caliph of Baghdad.”[23]
Some scholars in this field of study think that it was primarily the elite of the Khazars that converted to Judaism[24] since “Khazar Judaism was never very strong.”[25] Some think a primary reason for the national conversion is because some of the advisors were already Jewish, having immigrated there years earlier and worked their way up into governmental positions. Steven Collins, quoting from The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia tells us, “It was chiefly due to the cultural superiority of the Daghestan Jews that the ‘Kahan’ (king) of the mighty state of Khazars was converted to Judaism together with his court and part of the Khazar population between the 8th and 9th centuries.”[26] Besides the rulers, only a part of the Gentile Khazar population adopted Judaism over the next century, which means the Khazars were a majority Jewish state. Other than the Jewish leadership, only a sizeable minority of Jews resided within Khazaria. “A total of only 4,000 new conversions to Judaism in a large nation was actually a small number of converts. The requirement of circumcision was likely a disincentive for most Khazar men to convert to Judaism.”[27]
It is clear that there were already a great number of Jews who lived in Khazaria in the 8th century. “Large numbers of Jewish refugees had settled in what became Khazaria long before the Khazars were even a recognizable people,” notes Collins. “The Jews had seen the Caucasus region as a hospitable refuge for centuries, and they went there in large numbers.”[28]
When word began to circulate that the nation of Khazaria had converted to Judaism we learn that many Jews, especially from the Byzantine Empire and the Muslim world immigrated to Khazaria since Jews were commonly persecuted in those Empires. They migrated to Khazaria for sanctuary and religious freedom. “Khazaria itself was full of Jewish immigrants from Constantinople . . . and these immigrants actually outnumbered the converts according to some sources,”[29] says Cameron Sawyer. This immigration greatly increased the number of Jews in the nation and it was known to have a very large population of Jews migrating in from many other counties in those days. Sawyer makes the following point:
Also, if the Ashkenazis are supposed to be Khazars, what happened to all the “real” Jews of Europe? The Khazars were only converted to Judaism in the 8th century. Jews — descendants of Jews from biblical Israel — have been living on the Black Sea coast, Southern Russia, and the Caucasus since before the birth of Christ . . . not to mention Germany, France, Italy, and Spain. So all these people just disappeared one day, to be suddenly replaced by Khazar converts?[30]
Since Khazaria was one of the few nations on earth at that time practicing religious freedom, this explains why the nation also had large populations of Christians, Muslims, and pagans who never converted to Judaism. The notion that multitudes of Gentiles simply overwhelmed Jewish bloodlines is simply not the case. The Jews of Khazaria appear to have had Jewish bloodlines just as strong as other Jews of their day.
When the nation was conquered, the Jews fled to other countries, and most of the population of Khazaria which were not Jewish were killed in these battles, immigrated elsewhere, or joined up with the Muslims and Christians. We are told, “The Jews of Khazaria migrated to Kiev and parts of Russia, while the remaining Khazars joined the Magyars and migrated to modern Hungary, becoming Christians.”[31] Those converting to Christianity would not come into play when analyzing the modern Jewish gene pool. Here is a summary of what happened after the breakup of Khazaria:
Most of the East European Jews migrated from the west to the east of the continent, and were not descended from the inhabitants of the Khazar Empire. They are actually a fusion of Balkan-Greek Jews from the Byzantine Empire, Babylonian Jews from the Abbasid Caliphate, Yiddish-speaking Jews from Germany, Sephardic Jews fleeing the Spanish inquisition, and Khazars. All these groups intermarried over the centuries, so that the Khazar converts disappeared as a distinguishable ethnical entity and their descendants became fully Jewish with Israelite ancestry. . . .
If Khazarian ethnicity may be considered in any way of relevant influence among Russian Jews, the same is not valid for those of Poland; which is confirmed also by the following facts:
Polish life is completely extraneous to the Khazars.
The majority of Polish Jews came from the west, not the east.
There are no places in Poland that may recall Khazar origin.
Most Ashkenazi Jews have Germanic, not Khazar, surnames and customs.
There’s not any relevant trace of the Khazarian language among Jews; on the contrary, the Ashkenazim’s tongue, Yiddisch, is evidently of German origin.[32]
It seems clear, based upon the historical records of the matter that the Khazar aspect of Ashkenazi Jewish history provided a very small contribution to the makeup of their gene pool. Based upon the historical records alone, there is precious little support to actually think that about 85 percent of Jews in the world today are not descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. The Khazar theory falls to the ground due to lack of evidence to support its conclusions based upon sifting the historical evidence.
The opinion previously reached by historians and ethnologists concerning the Khazars is now confirmed with the development of the modern science of DNA analysis as a reliable way to discover one’s genealogical heritage. Kevin Alan Brook[33] is a leading researcher on the Khazars and tells us the following:
We no longer need to rely on speculation. It is now a known FACT that German Jews mingled with other Jews when they came east. It is also clear that the ancient Israelites possessed those Y-DNA patterns that are found in common among Sephardic Jews, Ashkenazic Jews, Kurdish Jews, and Indian Jews, despite the fact that ultimately those patters may have earlier stemmed, in part, from somewhere in Kurdistan or Armenia or Iraq. The Middle Eastern Y-DNA patterns in the J and E haplogroups cannot be explained by Khazars.[34]
Brook’s overall conclusion of Khazar origins is as follows:
In summary, Eastern European Jews are descended from a mixture of German and Austrian Jews, Czech Jews, and East Slavic Jews. The East Slavic Jews may have roots in both the Khazar and Byzantine empires, hence necessitating our further study of Jewish life in those lands. But the largest and most influential proportion of Eastern European Jews came from Central Europe. By this analysis we can show that the dominant ethnic element among Eastern European Jews is Judean — the ancient Jewish people of Judea in the Middle East.[35]
Cameron Sawyer, based upon examination of DNA analysis, comes to a similar conclusion about the authenticity of the ethnic descent of the Jewish group under investigation.
In any case, modern genetic analysis now gives us very precise information about bloodlines, migrations, and the genetic relationships between peoples, and has settled the matter once and for all. Ashkenazi Jews are, in fact, close relatives of Sephardic and other Jews (except, apparently, the Ethiopian Jews), somewhat less close but still very close relatives of the Arabs and other Eastern Mediterranean peoples, and are predominantly descended from the Hebrews who lived in Israel 2,000 years ago, with a notably small admixture of European, Slavic, and other blood. Tracing direct paternal lines of descent (based on analysis of the “Y” chromosome), researchers found that the most common direct paternal ancestors of modern Ashkenazi Jews are the Judeans of ancient Israel, with more than 50% of modern Ashkenazi Jews being so descended. 12.7% of modern Ashkenazi Jews have direct paternal lines of descent from either Eastern Europeans (including Slavs) or Khazars.[36]
DNA analysis is able to establish with certainty what history has already demonstrated: the Jews of modern Israel really are descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob as concluded by Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman:
The genetic studies of Jewish men from all of the major communities of the Jewish Diaspora confirm that the original Jewish population originated in the Middle East, and from there, spread throughout the world. As the Bible predicted, the Hebrews who lived in the Land of Israel for over one thousand years were dispersed and scattered literally to the four corners of the earth. . . .
Also predicted and prophesized was that, despite worldwide dispersal, the Jewish nation would not become lost among the nations. Scriptures prophesized and promised that the Jewish People would retain their unique identity, and eventually be restored to their ancient homeland. The genetics studies have shown that this most unlikely scenario has in fact come true as well.[37]
The Khazar theory has been completely refuted by both scholarly research into the history of the Khazars and, more recently, by ethnologist evidence showing that Jews from all parts of the world are genetically closely related to Middle Eastern Jews and not so closely related to non-Jewish Russians, Eastern Europeans, or others from that region. “Dr. Michael Hammer showed that based exclusively on the Y-chromosome (parental) shows that Ashkenazi Jews are more closely related to Yemenite Jews, Iraqi Jews, Sephardic Jews, Kurdish Jews, and Arabs than they are to European Christian populations,”[38] notes Joel Bainerman. True research on the matter reveals that only a small percentage of Jews have any descent through the Khazars. So it appears that the Khazar theory is just that, a theory, and not a very good one.
The Khazar theory canard was developed last century by individuals and groups that were already predisposed toward anti-Semitism. When the self-hating Jew, Arthur Koestler, penned his book in the 1970s, these groups were attracted to his work like a bee to honey. Driven by anti-Zionist impulses, many of these biased “researchers” exaggerated Koestler’s claims. Even Koestler did not claim that Ashkenazi or Khazar Jews have no Middle Easter ancestry. Koestler did not want his research, flawed as it may have been, taken to extreme conclusions.
In the first place, I am aware of the danger that it may be maliciously misinterpreted as a denial of the State of Israel’s right to exist. But that right is not based on the hypothetical origins of the Jewish people, nor on the mythological covenant of Abraham with God; it is based on international law — i.e., on the United Nations’ decision in 1947 to partition Palestine, once Turkish province, then a British Mandated Territory, into an Arab and a Jewish State. Whatever the Israeli citizens’ racial origins, and whatever illusions they entertain about them, their State exists de jure and de facto, and cannot be undone, except by genocide. Without entering into controversial issues, one may add, as a matter of historical fact, that the partition of Palestine was the result of a century of peaceful Jewish immigration and pioneering effort, which provide the ethical justification for the State’s legal existence. Whether the chromosomes of its people contain genes of Khazar or Semitic, Roman or Spanish origin, is irrelevant, and cannot affect Israel’s right to exist — nor the moral obligation of any civilized person, Gentile or Jew, to defend that right. Even the geographical origin of the native Israeli’s parents or grandparents tends to be forgotten in the bubbling racial melting pot. The problem of the Khazar infusion a thousand years ago, however fascinating, is irrelevant to modern Israel.[39]
“The results support the hypothesis that the paternal gene pools of Jewish communities from Europe, North Africa, and the Middle East descended from a common Middle Eastern ancestral population,” concludes Sawyer, “and suggests that most Jewish communities have remained relatively isolated from neighboring non-Jewish communities during and after the Diaspora.”[40] It is safe to conclude that most of the Jews living today in Israel and still in the Diaspora are clear descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
In addition to advocating the Khazar theory, James Jordan tells us: “The real problem in the discussion is the notion that Jewishness is a blood or racial phenomenon. It is not.” Jordan continues, “Biblically speaking, a Jew is someone who is covenanted into the people of the Jews by circumcision. . . . What this demonstrates is that covenant, not race, has always been the defining mark of a Jew.”[41] Jordan does not stop with these remarks; he was just warming up. He states further, “Modern apostate Jews have absolutely no theological, and therefore no historical and legal right to the land of Palestine.”[42] “Christian Zionism is blasphemy. It is heresy. Christians have no theological stake whatsoever in the modern State of Israel. It is an anti-God, anti-Christ nation.”[43] So those who think like Jordan believe that Israel either never had a Jewish racial identity or lost it over time.
It is the Bible that divides mankind into Jew and Gentile, denoting one’s descent by birth. One may repudiate the religious aspects of Judaism, but they cannot escape the genealogical fact that they were born within the Jewish race. The same is true of a Gentile. One may be born of Chinese descent but there is nothing they can say or do to change the fact that they are Chinese. The Nazis during the Holocaust made little distinction between deeply religious Jews and secular Jews. They killed them all when they had the opportunity. The same is true today. The Muslims kill Jews today whether they are religious or secular. It does not matter to them.
Since the Bible is God’s inerrant revelation, it is the supreme authority on which to settle any matter to which it speaks. God’s viewpoint on any issue is how we know ultimately what is true or false. The Bible speaks clearly and loudly concerning the issue of Jewishness. Scripture teaches that those who are descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob make up the people or nation we call Israel (Gen. 12:1–3, 13:15–16, 15:4–5, 26:2–5, 24, 28:13–15). Jewishness is a nationality based upon descent, whether one obeys God or not. Hebrew Christian Arnold Fruchtenbaum correctly summaries Israel as “all descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, also known as the Jews, the Jewish people, Israelites, Hebrews, etc. The term is not limited to the present political and national state in the Middle East, which is merely a part of the whole; nor is it limited to those who adhere to the religion of Judaism only.”[44] British postmillennialist Erroll Hulse provides an excellent overview of the biblical use of the word Jew.
Most references to the Jews (Yehudiim) made in the Old Testament are to be found in the book of Esther, but frequently also in Jeremiah, Nehemiah, and Ezra. In Babylon, the word Jew in the strict sense signified someone of Judah. Almost every reference (and there are about two hundred) in the New Testament refer to the Jews in a general sense whether they lived in the South, the North or abroad. The terms “children of Israel” and “sons of Jacob” are often used in the Old Testament to describe the Jews.[45]
The broader term Israel “appears over two thousand times in the Old Testament and seventy times in the New Testament. This term refers to a specific ethnic group. . . . The name Yisra’el was conferred on Jacob (Ge 32:28), Abraham’s grandson, and means ‘solider of God’ or ‘God persists.’ ”[46] Israel began as a patriarchal clan when Abraham came out of Babylon, went to Egypt, and 400 years later returned to the Promised Land as a true nation of two or three million. Yet Jordan imagines a problem in that Israel did indeed incorporate into the nation many non-Jews down through her history.
When Abraham was commanded to circumcise, he was told to circumcise his entire household, including his 318 fighting men and his other domestic servants (Gen. 14:14, 17:10–14). Competent scholars imagine that Sheik Abraham’s household probably included at the very least 3,000 persons. These servants multiplied as the years went by, and Jacob inherited them all (Gen. 27:37). Although only 70 from the loins of Jacob went down into Egypt, so many servants went along that they had to be given the whole land of Goshen in which to live.[47]
Is this supposed to be a problem? Over time it appears that the Gentiles who became part of Abraham’s clan integrated with his descendants so that by the time of the Exodus that nation was indeed Jewish — descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. At least this is the view that the Bible takes toward this matter. The Lord promised Abraham: “To your descendants I will give this land” (Gen. 12:7). “I will make your descendants as the dust of the earth, so that if anyone can number the dust of the earth, then your descendants can also be numbered” (Gen. 13:16). “And He took him outside and said, ‘Now look toward the heavens, and count the stars, if you are able to count them.’ And He said to him, ‘So shall your descendants be’ ” (Gen. 15:5). “God said to Abram, ‘Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years’ ” (Gen. 15:13). “Moreover, the angel of the Lord said to her, ‘I will greatly multiply your descendants so that they will be too many to count’ ” (Gen. 16:10). “I will establish My covenant between Me and you and your descendants after you throughout their generations for an everlasting covenant, to be God to you and to your descendants after you” (Gen. 17:7). I could go on with many more similar passages that indicate that God thought of all of those in the line of descent as the offspring of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
Even though the Jews surely have intermarried with Gentiles, that does not invalidate their Jewishness any more than intermarriage that was practiced in the Old Testament did not invalidate their Jewishness. Jesus Himself had a number of Gentiles within His genealogical line, yet He was certainly Jewish. In the time of the New Testament these people were still known as Jews — the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Jesus referred to the residents of Israel in His day as Jews. When reading the New Testament, there does not appear to be a problem identifying who the Jews were in Christ’s day. The notion that Jews cannot have the blood of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob flowing through their veins is purely one manufactured by those with an anti-Semitic bias.
Since there was about a 2,000-year period from the call of Abraham until the time of Christ, and Jesus referred to the residents of Israel as Jews, then we have a precedent to do so today. It has been about another 2,000 years since the time of Christ until our present day. If the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were considered Jews after 2,000 years by Jesus in His day, then why should they not be considered descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob today, after another 2,000 years have passed? In fact, the last 2,000 years have seen some Gentile intermarriage, but for the most part, the nations have shut up the Jewish people into their own ghettos and not allowed them to intermingle with Gentiles. Even though an unintended result by perpetrators, anti-Semitism has helped to keep the blood of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob flowing through the veins of modern Jewry. Also, those Jews that have repeatedly married Gentiles have lost their Jewish identity and are no longer part of the Jewish race and indeed are not considered Jews after a while.
Since the Bible is the ultimate authority on any matter, it is significant to realize that both the Old and New Testaments speak of a specific destiny for Israel or the Jewish people in a day future to our own time. Since God’s Word tells us that there will be Jewish people in the world even beyond our own day, then Divine viewpoint should trump the imaginations of human viewpoint any day. This means that there has to be Jewish people who have the blood of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob flowing through their veins for these prophecies to occur. When has God ever failed to bring to pass what He has decreed? Never! What are some of these passages?
About 3,400 years ago Moses predicted a future time when the nation of Israel “will seek the Lord . . . with all your heart and all your soul. When you are in distress . . . in the latter days, you will return to the Lord your God and listen to His voice” (Deut. 4:29–30). No biblically literate person would say that the nation of Israel has ever fulfilled this passage at any time in their past, thus, it is still a future event. So there must me a nation of Israel in the future, which would mean that the Jews of today would have to be actual Jews in order to provide a bridge to this future time.
God spoke through Jeremiah about 2,600 years ago and said, “ ‘For, behold, days are coming,’ declares the Lord, ‘when I will restore the fortunes of My people Israel and Judah.’ The Lord says, ‘I will also bring them back to the land that I gave to their forefathers, and they shall possess it’ ” (Jer. 30:3). “ ‘Alas! for that day is great, there is none like it; and it is the time of Jacob’s distress, but he will be saved from it’ ” (Jer. 30:7). “ ‘Fear not, O Jacob My servant,’ declares the Lord, ‘and do not be dismayed, O Israel; for behold, I will save you from afar and your offspring from the land of their captivity. And Jacob will return,and will be quiet and at ease, and no one will make him afraid. For I am with you,’ declares the Lord, ‘to save you; for I will destroy completely all the nations where I have scattered you, only I will not destroy you completely. But I will chasten you justly and will by no means leave you unpunished’ ” (Jer. 30:10–11). “ ‘You shall be My people, and I will be your God’ ” (Jer. 30:22). “In the latter days you will understand this.” (Jer. 30:24). When has this ever occurred in the past? Like the passage in Deuteronomy, we see that Israel will go through a time of tribulation or distress, which will be in the latter days, leading to the spiritual restoration of the nation. Once again, no one would say that national Israel has ever in history arisen to such a spiritual level. It can only be in the future, which means the Jews have to exist as Jews future to our own day in order for this to occur.
Many other Old Testament passages could be cited which speak of Jewish existence beyond our current day, but one final example from Daniel will be noted. “Now at that time Michael, the great prince who stands guard over the sons of your people, will arise. And there will be a time of distress such as never occurred since there was a nation until that time; and at that time your people, everyone who is found written in the book, will be rescued” (Dan. 12:1). “He said, ‘Go your way, Daniel, for these words are concealed and sealed up until the end time.’ ” (Dan. 12:9). As in the two previous passages, we see that same pattern in Daniel. There will be a time of tribulation or distress for “your people,” which are Daniel’s people (i.e., the Jewish people). This will take place in the end time and Israel will come into a new spiritual relationship with the Lord.
The Bible anticipates a future time in which God will interact with His people Israel. Such a future period is also expected in the New Testament. Paul speaks of future plans for Israel in Romans when he says, “For I do not want you, brethren, to be uninformed of this mystery — so that you will not be wise in your own estimation — that a partial hardening has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in; and so all Israel will be saved; just as it is written, ‘The Deliverer will come from Zion, He will remove ungodliness from Jacob. This is My covenant with them, when I take away their sins.’ From the standpoint of the gospel they are enemies for your sake, but from the standpoint of God’s choice they are beloved for the sake of the fathers; for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable” (Rom. 11:25–29). We see in this passage that current Jewish rejection of the gospel by most, not all, is temporary and will come to an end when the full number of elect Gentiles are added to the Church through faith in Christ. It will be after that time that every Jewish person alive, when the Deliverer will come from Zion, will come to faith in the Messiahship of Jesus. No one would say that this has yet to occur in history. Thus, Jews must exist as descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in the future for this to occur. This means that there has to be Jewish people alive and well on planet Earth today.
The Apostle John, in his well-known and final book of the New Testament canon, speaks of future events in Revelation 4 through 22. It is clear that the Jewish people will be around when these events unfold since they are referenced throughout the book. Revelation 12 is an entire chapter that speaks of their persecution during the second half of that seven-year period. However, Revelation 7 not only speaks of a multitude of the bond-servants of God, but that they are said to be “one hundred and forty-four thousand sealed from every tribe of the sons of Israel” (Rev. 7:4). If that is not clear enough, the biblical text tells us the specific tribes of Israel from which 12,000 males are taken from as follows: “from the tribe of Judah, twelve thousand were sealed, from the tribe of Reuben twelve thousand, from the tribe of Gad twelve thousand, from the tribe of Asher twelve thousand, from the tribe of Naphtali twelve thousand, from the tribe of Manasseh twelve thousand, from the tribe of Simeon twelve thousand, from the tribe of Levi twelve thousand, from the tribe of Issachar twelve thousand, from the tribe of Zebulun twelve thousand, from the tribe of Joseph twelve thousand, from the tribe of Benjamin, twelve thousand were sealed” (Rev. 7:5–8). Even if Israel’s tribal records were lost to human beings 2,000 years ago, it does not mean that God cannot keep track of one’s nationality. After all, He is the one who will seal the 144,000 Jewish servants via a supernatural act.
Revelation 7 not only demonstrates that Jewish men will exist in the future, but that God Himself can identify who they are. Such implications mean that not only are Jews viewed by the Bible as a distinct race in contrast to Gentiles, but they will remain so throughout history. Not only does the Bible teach that Jewish descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob can be identified as a distinct race after almost 4,000 years, but that God will even be able to distinguish their tribal identity into the future. This can only mean that there is a distinct Jewish race today.
Israel, during her 4,000 years of existence, has been by far the most literate people in the history of the world, unlike the Gypsies. Rabbi Kleman’s DNA studies demonstrate that, “Genetics research as described has clearly shown that the Jewish people today are the descendants of the ancient biblical Hebrews.”[48] In addition, no nation has kept better records of her own history, whether through divinely inspired Scripture or mere human writings than the Jewish people. These records provide ample evidence that the Jews of today have had continual existence, even though they were often scattered around the world for much of their existence. We see that not only do recent DNA studies provide a scientific basis for verifying that modern Jewry really are descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, this view is also supported by biblical logic and the testimony of history. Jews are a racial class that stands in contrast with Gentiles, according to the Bible. Only bias or prejudice would lead one to a contrary opinion when examined in the light of Scripture. Therefore, it is with utmost certainty that anyone examining the record should conclude that those who are Jews today, whether in or out of the land of Israel, have the blood of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob flowing through their veins. This fact provides a basis for their Zionistic claim that the land of Israel belongs to the Jews because God gave it to them.
[1] James B. Jordan, “The Future of Israel Reexamined” (Part 1), Biblical Horizons, no. 27, July 1991, p. 4.
[2] Kevin Alan Brook, “From the East, West, and South: Documenting the Foundation of Jewish Communities in Eastern Europe” in Roots-Key, Newsletter of the Jewish Genealogical Society of Los Angeles, vol. 24: no. 1, Spring 2004, p. 6.
[3] James B. Jordan is a Presbyterian replacement theologian coming from the preterist, postmillennial, and covenant theology orientation.
[4] Jordan, “Future of Israel” (Part 1), p. 4.
[5] Ibid., p. 4.
[6] Ibid., p. 4.
[7] Ibid., p. 4.
[8] Arthur Koestler, The Thirteenth Tribe (New York: Random House, 1976).
[9] For a history of the rise of the Khazar theory see Robert Singerman, “Contemporary Racist and Judeophobic Ideology Discovers the Khazars, or, Who Really Are the Jews?” on the website of the National Foundation for Jewish Culture located at the following: www2.jewishculture.org/jewish_scholarship/feinstein/singerman.html.
[10] Robert B. Thieme Jr., Anti-Semitism (Houston, TX: Robert B. Thieme, Jr., Bible Ministries, 1991), p. 77.
[11] Koestler, Thirteenth Tribe, p. 223.
[12] Bernard Lewis, Semites and Anti-Semites: An Inquiry into Conflict and Prejudice (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1999), p. 48.
[13] Albert D. Pastore, The Dancing Israelis: An Unprecedented Honest Analysis of 9/11 and Bush’s War on Terror” from the website Aljazerra.com; www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/conspiracy_theory/fullstory.asp?id=303.
[14] James B. Jordan, “Christian Zionism and Messianic Judaism,” in The Sociology of the Church: Essays in Reconstruction (Tyler, TX: Geneva Ministries, 1986), p. 176.
[15] Jordan, “Christian Zionism,” p. 176–77.
[16] Ibid., p. 177.
[17] John L. Bray, Israel in Bible Prophecy (Lakeland, FL: John L. Bray Ministry, 1983), p. 44.
[18] Bray, Israel, p. 44.
[19] Theodore Winston Pike, Israel: Our Duty . . . Our Dilemma (Oregon City, OR: Big Sky Press, 1984), p. 328.
[20] Jordan, “Christian Zionism,” p. 178.
[21] Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. 10, reference to “Khazars,” p. 944–54.
[22] Thieme, Anti-Semitism, p. 76–77.
[23] Koestler, Thirteenth Tribe, p. 58.
[24] Kevin Alan Brook, The Jews of Khazaria (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2002), p. 136–39.
[25] Encyclopaedia Judaica, Vol. 10, reference to “Khazars,” p. 949.
[26] Steven M. Collins, “The Khazars and The Modern Jews,” posted at www.britam.org/steven-collins-khazars.html.
[27] Collins, “The Khazars.”
[28] Ibid.
[29] Sawyer, “Zionism and the Talmud,” World Association of International Studies, Blog Archive at cgi. stanford.edu/group/wais/cgi-bin/index.php?p=108.
[30] Sawyer, “Zionism and the Talmud.”
[31] Collins, “The Khazars.”
[32] Anonymous, “The Khazars: Who were the Khazars, and with whom should they be identified today?” http://www.imninalu.net/Khazars.htm.
[33] Brook, The Jews of Khazaria.
[34] Kevin Alan Brook, “Re: Jews and the Khazars,” on the Jewish Genealogy Forum, www.genealogy.com, posted on Aug. 4, 2004.
[35] Brook, “From the East, West, and South,” p. 6.
[36] Sawyer, “Zionism and the Talmud.”
[37] Rabbi Yaakov Kleiman, DNA & Tradition: The Genetic Link to the Ancient Hebrews (Jerusalem: Devora Publishing Co., 2004), p. 169.
[38] Joel Bainerman, “So What If a Small Portion of World Jewry Are Descendants Of Khazars!” Jan. 3, 2003, www.rense.com/general33/sowhat.htm.
[39] Koestler, Thirteenth Tribe, p.223.
[40] Sawyer, “Zionism and the Talmud.”
[41] Jordan, “Christian Zionism,” p. 177.
[42] Ibid. p. 183.
[43] Ibid. p. 184.
[44] Arnold Fruchtenbaum, Israelology: The Missing Link in Systematic Theology, rev. ed.(Tustin, CA: Ariel Ministries Press, 1992), p. 2
[45] Erroll Hulse, The Restoration of Israel (Worthing, England: Henry E. Walter, Ltd., 1982), p. 175.
[46] Ronald E. Diprose, Israel in the Development of Christian Thought (Rome: Istitutio Biblico Evangelico Italiano, 2000), p. 7.
[47] Jordan, “Christian Zionism,” p. 177.
[48] Kleiman, DNA & Tradition, p. 173.
These are the PPT notes from Mondo’s message on whether Revelation 3:10 can be understood as applying to the rapture. Download PDF notes below.
The video can be found here:
Check out Mondo’s new book on the Red Heifer!
ARE WE ABOUT TO WITNESS THE BUILDING OF THE 3RD TEMPLE?
The Red Heifer Ritual is set to be the definitive guidebook on understanding the enigmatic ceremony involving a pure red heifer to be slaughtered and burned on the slopes of the Mount of Olives. Biblical prophecy is unfolding at a rapid pace and the book you hold in your hands will help you understand fully all the Third Temple preparations of the religious Jews in the land of Israel and around the world. After almost 2000 years, Jewish rabbis have all the pieces in place to erect this temple on the Temple Mount… except for one last piece of the puzzle.
It is available now!
https://prophecywatchers.com/product/pre-sale-coming-in-september-the-red-heifer-ritual-the-october-examination-deadline-approaches-by-mondo-gonzales/
By Mondo Gonzales
It is not often when the world media agrees with biblical eschatology. I read an article recently put out by Axios entitled, “Elon the self-employed diplomat” which was written by Miriam Kramer and Alison Snyder. I want to unpack some of the details of that article, but before I do, it might be good to remind our readers (and some who are new) about some foundational biblical ideas concerning the 10 kings.
In the November 2020 Prophecy Watcher magazine, Gary wrote an article discussing the need for the discerning Christian to be on the lookout for the rise of 10 kings. There is no doubt the antichrist figure will arrive at the proper time, but biblically speaking, he is preceded by a group known as the 10 kings. If you missed that issue, this article can also be found on our prophecywatchers.com website under articles.
Gary recognized that we need to keep a lookout for those that might fit the descriptions as found in Scripture. One of the terms that has become common in potentially describing these figures is oligarch. An oligarch, by definition, is one of a few who rule. Gary writes:
Oligarchs are in a constant competition for world domination, and the old political ties of the twentieth century are being steadily altered to fit a “New World Order.” That’s an old term, but now, it is buttressed by high-level digital technology that was only a dream a decade ago. A number of dark figures have quietly risen to power, backed by super-technology and incalculable wealth. At the moment, they operate in the background, but their names continually pop up. They are the technocrats, innovators of new technologies in transportation, communications, shipping and the daily transfer of coded information in trillions of daily transactions. Information controls the world. It is power. Once, it was common for those who went before us to honor God as all-powerful. Our nation prayed for God’s blessing. He brought us through earthquakes, famine, pestilence and horrific wars. It was recognized that He saves us from spiritual death. But now, technology is seen as the world’s savior. Without referring to any of them by name, just think of the billionaires of the digital world, who are publicly linked to a new order of science, genetic transformation, digitized global politics and any of a variety of technologies. They are now hailed as the ones who will save the world through their new methodologies.
In this quote, Gary also used the word technocrat. That would be important to define also. A technocrat is a proponent of technocracy which is defined as: “a theory and movement, prominent about 1932, advocating control of industrial resources, reform of financial institutions, and reorganization of the social system, based on the findings of technologists and engineers.” Ultimately, a technocrat seeks to influence all areas of society and need not be in a governmental position to wield power. In fact, we will see that they often get more done outside the bounds of governmental positions.
When we think of the “ten kings” we need to remind ourselves of the Scriptures that speak of these figures.
Daniel 7:19-20 “Then I desired to know the exact meaning of the fourth beast, which was different from all the others, exceedingly dreadful, with its teeth of iron and its claws of bronze, and which devoured, crushed and trampled down the remainder with its feet, and the meaning of the ten horns that were on its head and the other horn which came up, and before which three of them fell, namely, that horn which had eyes and a mouth uttering great boasts and which was larger in appearance than its associates.”
Daniel 7:24 “As for the ten horns, out of this kingdom ten kings will arise; and another will arise after them, and he will be different from the previous ones and will subdue three kings.”
Revelation 17:12-13 “The ten horns which you saw are ten kings who have not yet received a kingdom, but they receive authority as kings with the beast for one hour. “These have one purpose, and they give their power and authority to the beast.”
From these Biblical passages we learn several characteristics of these ten “kings”:
I wrote a follow up article in the Prophecy Watcher in April 2022 which can also be found on our website (“Are the Ten Kings Actually Ten Oligarchs?”). In that article I spent time discussing the various sectors that these oligarchs and technocrats are developing and advancing technologies at a blistering pace. These areas involve finance, satellites, surveillance, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, censorship, and innovation zones among others.
As we watch prophecy unfold, I find it encouraging and also inspiring when unbelievers, who have no biblically prophetic worldview, come to the place of seeing things as we predicted they would come to be. Case in point is Elon Musk. He is worth $221 billion dollars and is number one on the world’s richest. Number two sits at $159 billion. That’s quite a difference. As was mentioned in my previous article noted above, Elon Musk is on the cutting edge of several industries. Just very recently, his acquisition of Twitter has become finalized. Almost all the previous executives have been fired or left. Musk has made it clear that the new Twitter will be far different than what it had become. Before we get too excited that Musk seems to be for a censorship free Twitter, we should be very cautious. Musk has shown himself to be no friend of Bible believing Christians. Just because we share a couple common goals for free speech does not mean he is a friend of the gospel. Interestingly, if you saw his recent costume for Halloween which was filled with Satanic symbols, we might be wisely cautious in giving him too much credence.
His Neuralink research seeks to develop ultra high bandwidth brain-machine interfaces to connect humans and computers. There was supposed to be a big demonstration of this in October but has been pushed back to later November. This is a development that we will definitely keep our eyes on. Especially, as it relates to control. I can envision quite easily a future time when Musk (a potential as one of the ten kings) could give even more sophisticated advancements of this technology over to the antichrist.
Another of Musk’s technological endeavors is Tesla Motors and its advanced research into artificial intelligence, but we must also remember that Space X and the subsidiary Starlink are changing the world. As we ponder this background, let us now address the article.
The Axios article begins with these comments:
Billionaire businessman Elon Musk is wielding significant geopolitical power with his global internet Starlink satellites.
Why it matters: Private spacecompanies are meeting — and often exceeding — the capabilities of governments, giving not just technological but also geopolitical power to those who operate them.
After Russia invaded Ukraine and knocked out much of their communication capabilities, Elon Musk stepped in and unilaterally changed the course of events by offering freely his internet options through his Starlink Satellite network. There are over 20,000 Starlink terminals currently operating in Ukraine and has been used by the military to increase its artillery effectiveness. Elon Musk is donating the services at a cost of over $20 million per month. When you think in terms of the success of Musk’s goals in Ukraine specifically, the US government is not capable of duplicating his achievements. Yes, they are providing other forms of military equipment, but one man was able to accomplish more in this particular area than the largest super power in the world. This should cause all of us to make connections between the ten kings and the influence (power/authority) that will be handed over to a single one world dictator (the antichrist) at a future time.
The Axios authors go on further to describe the influence and ramifications of Musk’s actions in the Ukraine war. They write:
The impact: Musk’s moves related to Ukraine show just how much global influence he now wields.
It is not just in Ukraine where Musk is flexing his technological muscle, but now with Russia and the USA demonstrating very strained relations, the US space industry has taken a decidedly narrow turn towards Musk. NASA has been very reliant on the Russians to transport its astronauts to the International Space Station. Since the sanctions on Russia by the US due to Ukrainian invasion, Russia has officially stopped all cooperation with NASA.
Enter Elon Musk and Space X to fill the void left by another world super power (Russia). Are we getting the picture? Concerning this development, Axios writes:
Between the lines: Years of U.S. policy accelerating and supporting private space companies have led to this moment, where these companies are starting to exceed the government in their capabilities.
As turmoil between nations continues to increase as Jesus said it would (Luke 21:25), poor planning and governmental failure (like much of NASA’s space program) will increasingly give people like Elon Musk power and influence on an even greater global scale. What happens if there is an emergency on the Space Station (similar to what happened recently with a gas leak) and an American astronaut needs to be rescued? Musk could theoretically hold his services at bay unless the government was willing to make behind the door deals allowing him even greater implementations of his technology. So far, he has approval by the FCC for approximately 12,000 satellites in low earth orbit with 3,000 already there. However, he has said he wants up to 42,000 and will need FCC permission. It is obvious that Musk is in a great leveraging position when the time comes as he is currently the front runner to provide services to NASA. And he knows this quite well.
Elon Musk also needs to play his cards carefully. By providing free internet in Ukraine, he has made himself an enemy of Russia. These developments have not gone unnoticed. Axios writes:
What to watch: As commercial satellites take on more national security and military importance, what could be considered a military target in space is also shifting.
Other journalists are reporting that China is already well entrenched in creating anti-satellite weapons and they are certainly considering the potential weaponized use of the Starlink network. China is researching how to use a multi-megaton nuclear detonation in near-earth orbit to cause interruptions to Elon Musk’s Starlink web of satellites.
One article described it as creating a “radioactive “debris cloud” that could “cause failures of spacecraft moving in it, such as satellites, or even cause direct damage that can lead to destruction.” This article goes on to write, “China’s military has also noted its serious concerns: “The Starlink project has decided to increase the planned 12,000 satellites to 42,000, underscoring that it is widely distributed, flexible, and could be reconfigured quickly,” according to a People’s Liberation Army (PLA) publication just last week.
“The ambition to militarize Starlink and its barbaric expansion,” it added, “deserve high alert from the international community.”
I could write an article like this on each of the top 20 billionaires worldwide. Most billionaires did not receive their wealth from being idle, but instead through ingenuity and aggressive implementation of their technological vision. As we watch these technocratic oligarchs continue to increase their global geopolitical influence, it is no surprise that the time is coming when a deal will be made with one man. This one man receives their technological prowess and he gives them the right to rule with him for a short period of time.
Revelation 17:12-13 The ten horns of the beast are ten kings who have not yet risen to power. They will be appointed to their kingdoms for one brief moment to reign with the beast. They will all agree to give him their power and authority.
We live in exciting times and whether Elon Musk is actually one of the final ten influencers who aligns himself with the coming one world leader will only be seen in time. Nevertheless, he is well on his way to positioning himself for an offer of world dominating power by the antichrist.
Jesus told us to watch (Mark 13:37) and to be actively doing kingdom work (Luke 19:13). Our redemption is drawing ever closer. Let’s evangelize and bring as many people with us when the Lord rescues us before the day of His wrath arrives (Luke 17:26-37)!