Hagee At It Again

[Nbadan]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/ABPub/2006/06/26/2003087733.jpg
Evangelist John C. Hagee speaks at Harvest Rock Church in Pasadena, Calif. He has helped 12,000 Russian Jews move to Israel and donated millions to Israeli hospitals and orphanages. A growing number of fundamentalist Christians are aligning themselves with prophecies saying Gentiles will stand as one with Jews when the end is near.

Tuesday, June 27, 2006
By Louis Sahagun
Los Angeles Times


For thousands of years, prophets have predicted the end of the world. Today, various religious groups, using the latest technology, are trying to hasten it.

Their end game is to speed the promised arrival of a messiah.

For some Christians, this means laying the groundwork for Armageddon.

With that goal in mind, mega-church pastors recently met in Inglewood, Calif., to polish strategies for using global communications and aircraft to transport missionaries to fulfill the Great Commission — to make every person on Earth aware of Jesus' message.

Doing so, they believe, will bring about the end, perhaps within two decades....

Seattle Times (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003087927_theend27.html)

Aircraft and fatalistic religious fanatics are never a good mix.

[Guru of Nothing]

cha-ching forum.

[Ocotillo]

Has Brother Hagee ever considered fasting while in prayer and meditation?

[boutons_]

The Sin of Gluttony is one the "Christians" seem ignore. :lol

[jochhejaam]

I don't think I'll let this thread die with just a couple of potshots aimed at Hagee. I don't know anything about Hagee but I do know what is written in Scripture regarding what I see as the central theme in this thread.
.

All taken from Matthew 24;

12 Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold,

13 but whoever stands firm to the end will be saved.

14 And this gospel of the kingdom will be preached in the whole world as a testimony to all nations, and then the end will come.

There, let it die if it must on a more positive (relatively speaking) note.

[exstatic]

If you knew Hagee like we know Hagee, you'd know why we were throwing potshots. The man is a package of everything disgusting and immoral about TV preachers. He is L. Ron Flubberd, making up his whole denomination (appropriate word: he LOVES money), after being born and raised a Catholic.

[xrayzebra]

exstatic is once again exstatic in his protrayal of others religious beliefs.

[Trainwreck2100]

I know people that go to Cornerstone, and let me just say, Hagee is a moron. And what kind of God complex do you need to try and force what you believe will be the end of the world?

[jochhejaam]

If you knew Hagee like we know Hagee, you'd know why we were throwing potshots.
I wouldn't attempt to defend, nor would I disparage, someone I know nothing about.

There is no doubt that there are charlatans and insincere people masquerading as Christians (God sorts us all out in the end). While some preach or teach God's Word for personal gain they still manage to present His message in it's purest form and the effect can be the same as the same Message presented by someone with a pure heart and sincere motives.



Isaiah "So shall My Word be that goes out of My mouth, it shall not return to me void but shall accomplish what I please."

[Trainwreck2100]

While some preach or teach God's Word for personal gain they still manage to present His message in it's purest form


I doubt God intended his word to be spread through the use of Powerpoint

[jochhejaam]

I doubt God intended his word to be spread through the use of Powerpoint
So do you think He still wants us to use scrolls of parchment?

[Trainwreck2100]

So do you think He still wants us to use scrolls of parchment?

Or just plain old spoken word.

[xrayzebra]

Or just plain old spoken word.


Oh, I see visual aids are not allowed in a church. I didn't know that. Will
God punish him for doing that. Or just you?

[jochhejaam]

Or just plain old spoken word.
Thats one way but it wouldn't help the deaf much.

[Trainwreck2100]

Thats one way but it wouldn't help the deaf much.

how would simple bullets help the deaf.

[jochhejaam]

how would simple bullets help the deaf.
Assuming they can read it's certainly more effective than just speaking.

The method used to get it across is only a vehicle and does not hinder the intent of the message. Visual aids allow for more absorbtion of what's being taught.
Powerpoint in no way dilutes or diminshes a clearly presented message as it should only serve as an enhancer.

[Trainwreck2100]

The method used to get it across is only a vehicle and does not hinder the intent of the message. Visual aids allow for more absorbtion of what's being taught.
Powerpoint in no way dilutes or diminshes a clearly presented message as it should only serve as an enhancer.


The fact that he's full of shit dilutes things though.

[jochhejaam]

The fact that he's full of shit dilutes things though.
If he's a hypocrite then obviously his effectiveness is diminshed.

[xrayzebra]

The fact that he's full of shit dilutes things though.


Another great judgement call. I congratulate you. I assume you attend
all his sermons then. Or do you just listen on the radio. Just wondering.
Or is it that m a y b e you are just a little jealous of his fame. Naw, it
couldn't be that. You are too big a person for that. Right?

[jochhejaam]

The fact that he's full of shit dilutes things though.

Why is he full of shit?

[FromWayDowntown]

I've spend hours listening to John Hagee sermons. When I lived in Corpus Christi and commuted to San Antonio for weekends, I would make my return drive on Sunday evenings and could only get WOAI on my radio -- and therefore, only Hagee sermons. I found his preaching to be distasteful to my sensibilities because it reminded me to some degree of the sermons that David Koresh was preaching in Waco. Hagee's theology is certainly centered on a apocalypse; but it goes beyond preparing for the Apocalypse -- he seems willing to usher it in and almost hellbent on ensuring that it will happen.

I also find that when Hagee isn't preaching his apocalyptic vision, he's playing politician from the pulpit. Frankly, I disagree with virtually every political position he takes, so I find his preaching to be, at a minimum, unpersuasive.

Others are far more familiar with the allegations concerning the enterprenurial efforts of the Hagee ministry. I find it difficult to stomach virutally any televangelist or television preacher, because I find the effort to realize tremendous wealth from preaching God's Word to be unseemly.

[jochhejaam]

I've spend hours listening to John Hagee sermons. When I lived in Corpus Christi and commuted to San Antonio for weekends, I would make my return drive on Sunday evenings and could only get WOAI on my radio -- and therefore, only Hagee sermons. I found his preaching to be distasteful to my sensibilities because it reminded me to some degree of the sermons that David Koresh was preaching in Waco. Hagee's theology is certainly centered on a apocalypse; but it goes beyond preparing for the Apocalypse -- he seems willing to usher it in and almost hellbent on ensuring that it will happen.

I also find that when Hagee isn't preaching his apocalyptic vision, he's playing politician from the pulpit. Frankly, I disagree with virtually every political position he takes, so I find his preaching to be, at a minimum, unpersuasive.

Others are far more familiar with the allegations concerning the enterprenurial efforts of the Hagee ministry. I find it difficult to stomach virutally any televangelist or television preacher, because I find the effort to realize tremendous wealth from preaching God's Word to be unseemly.
Somewhat subjective but rational, that's what I was interested in hearing.
Thanks FWD.

[FromWayDowntown]

Somewhat subjective but rational, that's what I was interested in hearing.
Thanks FWD.

I'm perfectly inclined to engage in a rational discussion, but I'm disarmed a bit by your characterization of my argument as "somewhat subjective," which certainly seems to suggest a dismissiveness that is moderately qualified by your willingness to admit that my opinion is "rational." I'll ask you -- is there any such thing as objectivity in religion? I'd doubt it.

I disfavor Hagee for the reasons that I cite. Others favor Hagee for precisely those reasons. Unless you'd argue that I'm ignoring some objective truth in Hagee's ministry -- which I'd doubt -- then the difference between me and Hagee's followers can be nothing other than subjective.

[jochhejaam]

I'm perfectly inclined to engage in a rational discussion, but I'm disarmed a bit by your characterization of my argument as "somewhat subjective," which certainly seems to suggest a dismissiveness that is moderately qualified by your willingness to admit that my opinion is "rational." I'll ask you -- is there any such thing as objectivity in religion? I'd doubt it.

I disfavor Hagee for the reasons that I cite. Others favor Hagee for precisely those reasons. Unless you'd argue that I'm ignoring some objective truth in Hagee's ministry -- which I'd doubt -- then the difference between me and Hagee's followers can be nothing other than subjective.
I thought you might take it that was FWD. If I were trying to be dismissive I wouldn't have added rational to the post. Even though shared by others they were your personal thoughts about Hagee (and weren't contested by me) but I'm sure they aren't shared by all. That's why I used subjective.

Sorry about disarming you, that had to hurt.

[FromWayDowntown]

I thought you might take it that was FWD. If I were trying to be dismissive I wouldn't have added rational to the post. Even though shared by others they were your personal thoughts about Hagee (and weren't contested by me) but I'm sure they aren't shared by all. That's why I used subjective.

Sorry about disarming you, that had to hurt.

Your response is somewhat illogical, but rational.

[jochhejaam]

Your response is somewhat illogical, but rational.
Nothing like good old illogical rationalism.





By rational I meant you weren't blindly ranting and raving.
(lawyers, harmphh, always trying to pin ya down) :lol

[FromWayDowntown]

Nothing like good old illogical rationalism.





By rational I meant you weren't blindly ranting and raving.
(lawyers, harmphh, always trying to pin ya down) :lol

Again, I don't see the need for you to qualify your point, other than to make it clearer that you think my viewpoint is untenable. If you think that, just say it without hiding behind innuendo.

FWIW, all of your religious views are equally subjective, jochhejaam; but I don't see the need to cleverly suggest that a fundamental disagreement by dismissing your beliefs as subjective in responding to what you say. Perhaps that's because I'm willing to listen to and engage those whose viewpoints diverge from my own, particularly on matters of religion, because I know that there isn't an objective truth that I'm capable of knowing other than one that exists at the most fundamental level. It would be an incorrect statement on my part, therefore, to suggest that I think you might be wrong because, frankly, I don't know. I know what I believe, but my belief is not an objective truth; nobody's is.

My rant takes away from the point of the thread, but I thought it worthwhile to make the point here because it seems to be a growing trend in so many areas of social discourse these days -- there is a nearly-absolute unwillingness by some to listen to an opposing viewpoint without dismissing that viewpoint out of hand. It's highly unproductive.

[DarkReign]

My rant takes away from the point of the thread, but I thought it worthwhile to make the point here because it seems to be a growing trend in so many areas of social discourse these days -- there is a nearly-absolute unwillingness by some to listen to an opposing viewpoint without dismissing that viewpoint out of hand. It's highly unproductive.

QFT

Conform or Condemn. Religion or Politics.

[Trainwreck2100]

Another great judgement call. I congratulate you. I assume you attend
all his sermons then. Or do you just listen on the radio. Just wondering.
Or is it that m a y b e you are just a little jealous of his fame. Naw, it
couldn't be that. You are too big a person for that. Right?


I would not want to be famous the way he is, do you listen to his sermons? Any guy that WANTS TO BRING THE APACOLYPSE belongs on saturday morning cartoon shows.

[jochhejaam]

[QUOTE=FromWayDowntown]Again, I don't see the need for you to qualify your point, other than to make it clearer that you think my viewpoint is untenable. If you think that, just say it without hiding behind innuendo.
You are clearly badgering the witness FWD.

Okay, your position is absolutely, unequivocally, untenable!
(I don't really feel that way at all but if it gets you off my back about it... :lol )






FWIW, all of your religious views are equally subjective, jochhejaam;
I agree Brother D (rappers, again, feel free to use this rhyme)





but I don't see the need to cleverly suggest that a fundamental disagreement by dismissing your beliefs as subjective in responding to what you say.
<raising both hands slightly) But I honestly wasn't trying to be cleverly dismissive...honest. :lol







Perhaps that's because I'm willing to listen to and engage those whose viewpoints diverge from my own, particularly on matters of religion, because I know that there isn't an objective truth that I'm capable of knowing other than one that exists at the most fundamental level. It would be an incorrect statement on my part, therefore, to suggest that I think you might be wrong because, frankly, I don't know. I know what I believe, but my belief is not an objective truth; nobody's is.
FWD>joch. Now do you feel better?


My rant takes away from the point of the thread, but I thought it worthwhile to make the point here because it seems to be a growing trend in so many areas of social discourse these days -- there is a nearly-absolute unwillingness by some to listen to an opposing viewpoint without dismissing that viewpoint out of hand. It's highly unproductive.
Your point doesn't take away from the thread (and I'm not being cleverly dismissive here either)

So help me out here, was this post subjective or not? (If I let you answer that should keep me out of trouble) :lol



<trying to get my kitchen painted. Paint for 2 minutes, post for 15. That's gonna change when the wife gets home.

[xrayzebra]

<trying to get my kitchen painted. Paint for 2 minutes, post for 15. That's gonna change when the wife gets home.

You bet you booties it will. :lol :frying:

[Trainwreck2100]

This guy is so full of shit

[bendmz]

Has Brother Hagee ever considered fasting while in prayer and meditation?
Fasting ? imagine that ..... :lmao :lmao

[2centsworth]

I'm perfectly inclined to engage in a rational discussion, but I'm disarmed a bit by your characterization of my argument as "somewhat subjective," which certainly seems to suggest a dismissiveness that is moderately qualified by your willingness to admit that my opinion is "rational." I'll ask you -- is there any such thing as objectivity in religion? I'd doubt it.

I disfavor Hagee for the reasons that I cite. Others favor Hagee for precisely those reasons. Unless you'd argue that I'm ignoring some objective truth in Hagee's ministry -- which I'd doubt -- then the difference between me and Hagee's followers can be nothing other than subjective."somewhat subjective" because it wasn't specific. Support your conclusion with specific examples since as you claim you've heard hours of sermon from a man you find distasteful.

[scott]

Quick straw poll... who here is a "fan" (for lack of a better word) of Hagee's. Is he a "true Christian"?

[2centsworth]

Quick straw poll... who here is a "fan" (for lack of a better word) of Hagee's. Is he a "true Christian"?
I find it strange he lives in the dominion. However, is it for security reasons? Did he buy his house for pennies and then it appreciated? I don't know. What I do know is from what little I've heard of his sermons they all seem biblical.

Also, his prediction that the end is near I find strange.

As far as your question, is he a "true Christian" I don't know him well enough to know.

However, I'm leaning yes.

[Oh, Gee!!]

Ending the world, a true family value

[Crookshanks]

I'm not 100% positive, but I think Hagee inherited his house in the Dominion. It's not a new house because I remember a few years ago he had to have the house gutted because of a mold problem.

Hagee's style of preaching is not what I prefer, but the man is sound in his doctrine and preaches the gospel with no apologies. He is a great friend of Israel, and I believe God blesses him because of it.

Also, there has been much sniping about his income. Well, did any of you read the Sunday paper? It had an interview with Hagee about his staunch support of Israel. It also said that Hagee has given $12 million of his OWN money to help Russian Jews move to Israel.

The bible says "to whom much is given, much is required." None of us know how much Hagee gives to charity and other religious causes. Also, I have not heard of any scandal involving Hagee. I think much of what I hear about him on the forum stems from either jealousy or a deep hatred of anything Christian!

[2centsworth]

I'm not 100% positive, but I think Hagee inherited his house in the Dominion. It's not a new house because I remember a few years ago he had to have the house gutted because of a mold problem.

Hagee's style of preaching is not what I prefer, but the man is sound in his doctrine and preaches the gospel with no apologies. He is a great friend of Israel, and I believe God blesses him because of it.

Also, there has been much sniping about his income. Well, did any of you read the Sunday paper? It had an interview with Hagee about his staunch support of Israel. It also said that Hagee has given $12 million of his OWN money to help Russian Jews move to Israel.

The bible says "to whom much is given, much is required." None of us know how much Hagee gives to charity and other religious causes. Also, I have not heard of any scandal involving Hagee. I think much of what I hear about him on the forum stems from either jealousy or a deep hatred of anything Christian!
thanks for explaining.

I read the Roddey Stinson Article on Hagee and Roddey was very complimentary. Roddey says he and Hagee are on two different plains religiously. However, that after 9 years and over 1000 interviews of good samiritans that overwhelmingly the good samiratans were members of Cornerstone Church.

[scott]

I find it strange he lives in the dominion. However, is it for security reasons? Did he buy his house for pennies and then it appreciated? I don't know. What I do know is from what little I've heard of his sermons they all seem biblical.

Also, his prediction that the end is near I find strange.

As far as your question, is he a "true Christian" I don't know him well enough to know.

However, I'm leaning yes.

With all due respect, can you provide specific examples since that appears to be the measuring stick of credibility you placed on FWD (who appears to have heard more of him than you)?

[ChumpDumper]

1) Why would Hagee need security? Is Saddam or Castro gunning for him?

2) Why would Hagee have to not be the original owner of a house to have mold? is there some special blessing that excludes original homeowners from mold spores?

[jochhejaam]

Quick straw poll... who here is a "fan" (for lack of a better word) of Hagee's. Is he a "true Christian"?
Get the ball rolling scott. What are your answers to the QSP?

[Ghandi]

Has Brother Hagee ever considered fasting while in prayer and meditation?

Works for me.

[Phenomanul]

Quick straw poll... who here is a "fan" (for lack of a better word) of Hagee's. Is he a "true Christian"?


Although I don't agree with Hagee's infatuation with the apocalypse... or his crusade to the get the ball rolling toward the 'end-of-time'... I can't say the background for it isn't biblical.

Our job is to share the message of Christ with others... and as a result of our efforts the whole world will be exposed to Jesus... that in itself is a biblical sign that the 'end-of-time' is near... We shouldn't share Christ because we want the apocalypse upon us, nor should that ever be the reason.... and therein lies the distinction of purpose.

Personally I'm more of a 'fan' of Max Lucado and Dr. Tony Evans. But that's just me.

[furry_spurry]

However, that after 9 years and over 1000 interviews of good samiritans that overwhelmingly the good samiratans were members of Cornerstone Church.

So almost all the people doing good works in SA are members of this one church?

[Crookshanks]

1) Why would Hagee need security? Is Saddam or Castro gunning for him?

2) Why would Hagee have to not be the original owner of a house to have mold? is there some special blessing that excludes original homeowners from mold spores?

Anwer to question 1 - Many pastors of large churches have security. Dr. George Harris, former pastor of Castle Hills First Baptist, had a bodyguard who escorted him to his office after every service. I attend Oak Hills Church, where Max Lucado is pastor, and we have a visible security presence at every service. With so many crazies out there, it just makes sense. Also, I believe there was a bomb threat against Hagee a few years ago - that's when he got security.

Answer to question 2 - Do you have problems with reading comprehension? What I meant was that Hagee did not have a new house built in the Dominion. He bought an older, existing house with money that he inherited. And, considering the need for security, what better place to live?

[scott]

Get the ball rolling scott. What are your answers to the QSP?

I'm not a fan of Hagee.

I'm not qualified to answer if he is a "true" Christian.

What are your answers?

[FromWayDowntown]

Although I don't agree with Hagee's infatuation with the apocalypse... or his crusade to the get the ball rolling toward the 'end-of-time'... I can't say the background for it isn't biblical.

Our job is to share the message of Christ with others... and as a result of our efforts the whole world will be exposed to Jesus... that in itself is a biblical sign that the 'end-of-time' is near... We shouldn't share Christ because we want the apocalypse upon us, nor should that ever be the reason.... and therein lies the distinction of purpose.

Personally I'm more of a 'fan' of Max Lucado and Dr. Tony Evans. But that's just me.

I agree with you, hegamboa. I wouldn't ever contend that Pastor Hagee's preaching lacks a biblical underpinning. I just disagree with his theology, which is precisely the point I made originally. I find Pastor Hagee's preaching to be at odds with the theology that guides my life. I grew up in a church that taught that Christians should await the day of Christ's return and to live a life of stewardship in God's Word. That didn't mean spending every sermon examining whether the Apocalypse was upon us or lamenting the fact that it hadn't yet come.

I can't quote specific sermons of Pastor Hagee's, or recount specific statements that I disagree with; I can share that I thought there was, in the many sermons on heard on those long drives down I-37, a hint of unhappiness that the world hadn't yet ended. Coupled with some of the overtly-political sermons I heard (which I generally disagreed with from both theological and philosophical perspectives), I developed a particular disdain for Pastor Hagee's preaching. In a very simplified way, it reminded me of a more-refined version of the rambling sermons that David Koresh preached to his followers. That, to me, is contrary to much of what I know and believe from a theological standpoint.

Like I say, I understand that there are those who disagree with me. There is, in my estimation, no real objective truth (other than what God knows) to support either position. Theology is inherently subjective at some level.

[Spurminator]

I'm all for spreading the Gospel, but it undermines the Message when its stated purpose is to expedite the Apocalypse.

The Message of Christ is Love, and it should be spread with Love.

[Yonivore]

I'm all for spreading the Gospel, but it undermines the Message when its stated purpose is to expedite the Apocalypse.

The Message of Christ is Love, and it should be spread with Love.
Amen. Mother Teresa didn't need security.

[jochhejaam]

I'm not a fan of Hagee.

I'm not qualified to answer if he is a "true" Christian.

What are your answers?
I can't be a fan because I just don't know him. There is a verse that states that "he who is not against us, is for us" -Jesus-.

Regarding the second question, it's easy to be skeptical of people's claims to being a Christian. I can formulate opinions in my mind but I'm not comfortable vocalizing a call on the legitimacy of their claim. Part of that hesitancy is the knowledge that God says; "As you judge, so you shall be judged". If I judge harshly I'm going to be judged in the same manner. (trying to save my hide I guess :lol )

My preference would be to err on the side of giving someone the benefit of the doubt.
(That's where the mercy rule comes in; ...they that show mercy, shall obtain mercy).

When push comes to shove, my opinion won't matter.

[scott]

There is a verse that states that "he who is not against us, is for us" -Jesus-.

Was that Jesus or Dubya who said that? :)

[jochhejaam]

Was that Jesus or Dubya who said that? :)
Is this another Quick Straw Poll? :)

[Guru of Nothing]

Regarding the second question, it's easy to be skeptical of people's claims to being a Christian. I can formulate opinions in my mind but I'm not comfortable vocalizing a call on the legitimacy of their claim.

In other words, folks are either with you, against you, or mysteriously somewhere in between?

You are a rock!

[jochhejaam]

In other words, folks are either with you, against you, or mysteriously somewhere in between?

You are a rock!
Case in point for some things being better left unsaid.

Actually, in other words, I'm not the judge.


"Words once spoken never die and can never be retrieved"

[2centsworth]

With all due respect, can you provide specific examples since that appears to be the measuring stick of credibility you placed on FWD (who appears to have heard more of him than you)?
Sort of the same measuring stick except that I admit to having heard little. FWD of course is an expert on the subject.

[2centsworth]

So almost all the people doing good works in SA are members of this one church?
No, almost all the good samaritans Roddy Stinson interviewed.

[SA210]

I can't be a fan because I just don't know him. There is a verse that states that "he who is not against us, is for us" -Jesus-.

Regarding the second question, it's easy to be skeptical of people's claims to being a Christian. I can formulate opinions in my mind but I'm not comfortable vocalizing a call on the legitimacy of their claim. Part of that hesitancy is the knowledge that God says; "As you judge, so you shall be judged". If I judge harshly I'm going to be judged in the same manner. (trying to save my hide I guess :lol )

My preference would be to err on the side of giving someone the benefit of the doubt.
(That's where the mercy rule comes in; ...they that show mercy, shall obtain mercy).

When push comes to shove, my opinion won't matter.
So you won't judge because God says not to, but the support of war and killing is ok?

I see.

[Extra Stout]

"Sin is not what I say it is, sin is not what you say it is, sin is not what the liberal media says it is, sin is what God says it is, give him praise and glory!!!!!!!!"

[2centsworth]

So you won't judge because God says not to, but the support of war and killing is ok?

I see.
God himself commanded the Isrealites to kill 1000s.

[Phenomanul]

"Sin is not what I say it is, sin is not what you say it is, sin is not what the liberal media says it is, sin is what God says it is, give him praise and glory!!!!!!!!"


Sometimes I don't know if/when you're being facetious... hard to tell. :D

[Extra Stout]

Sometimes I don't know if/when you're being facetious... hard to tell. :D
That was my Hagee impression.

[SA210]

God himself commanded the Isrealites to kill 1000s.
And that is the difference between those wars and the wars of today.
You prove my point in that very answer.

[Phenomanul]

That was my Hagee impression.

I had a hunch... :lol

[Phenomanul]

And that is the difference between those wars and the wars of today.
You prove my point in that very answer.


Was GOD himself visibly present to declare every war? Or did his human vessels, i.e. the prophets, relay the message?

We know it's the latter cause it is written as such. Does GOD not use people anymore in the present? Or is He absent from all human matters today?

I'm not saying GOD himself told GWB to start a war. But... you know...

edit: added question mark to emphasize question.

[Spurminator]

SA210 believes God stopped working in the world in 30 AD.

[2centsworth]

SA210 doesn't know what in the world he is saying. first he says it's a sin to support war. Then he says only God can support war. Then he says because God supports war doesn't make it right but he's God so he can make up the rules as he goes.

HUH?

Something out of the NBADAN school of economics.

[SA210]

SA210 doesn't know what in the world he is saying. first he says it's a sin to support war. Then he says only God can support war. Then he says because God supports war doesn't make it right but he's God so he can make up the rules as he goes.

HUH?

Something out of the NBADAN school of economics.
Show me where I have said all these things back and forth.

Really, I'd like you to show me, because if you go back to my initial statements from a very long time ago, since earlier in the year, I have been consistant.

From the beginning I have stated this...



In the bible,

God made war with the nations.

This was war by command. Nations were executed in righteous war by God, using the Isrealites. And the Last War will be the same.

Wars of today are Not made by God. We are NOT to start wars, finish them or be associated with them in anyway.

Simple, "You must not kill" . No exceptions. You can read I and II Kings and I and II Samuel to see the difference.


Nothing changed from what I said before which was my first post on the subject of war.

I don't know why you would post something so false.
2centsworth school of economics?

[Spurminator]

At what point in the Bible did God say "From this point forward I will no longer make war between the Nations"?

[Nbadan]

Anyway, the latest fear tactic by Hagee on his flock is EMPs - or electro magnetic pulse. According to Hagee, Iran has hidden subs of the American coast ready to launch a missile 'into the heartland of America' that will release plutonium into the atmosphere and cause gamma rays to knock out all the electronics in the Western Hemisphere, 'planes will fall from the sky' and send back America to the 19th century.

:lol

'You may be raptured before I finish speaking here today we are so close'

-John Hagee

[sabar]

Yeah, we know how important it is for a country that has limited ocean access to have subs in their nearly non-existant navy. It makes as much sense as Canada putting an aircraft carrier in the great lakes. Actually, that seems more likely.

[ShackO]

Yeah, we know how important it is for a country that has limited ocean access to have subs in their nearly non-existant navy. It makes as much sense as Canada putting an aircraft carrier in the great lakes. Actually, that seems more likely.
:lol :lol :lol

[ShackO]

Although I don't agree with Hagee's infatuation with the apocalypse... or his crusade to the get the ball rolling toward the 'end-of-time'... I can't say the background for it isn't biblical.

Our job is to share the message of Christ with others... and as a result of our efforts the whole world will be exposed to Jesus... that in itself is a biblical sign that the 'end-of-time' is near... We shouldn't share Christ because we want the apocalypse upon us, nor should that ever be the reason.... and therein lies the distinction of purpose.

Personally I'm more of a 'fan' of Max Lucado and Dr. Tony Evans. But that's just me.

LOL.......... Then allow me to share this message with you...Christian Zionism and ethnic salvation are a bit out of the main stream I would say off the top…….


Personally I would be a little leery of anyone claiming to be “a friend of Israel’…. That kinda reminds me of those fools back in the day claiming to be a “friend of the Indian”… Somehow the Indians always seemed to end up short-changed in the end……….

You ever look to see what CRI has to say about him……

JOHN HAGEE (http://www.equip.org/free/DH005.htm)

Christians have listened for many years to the preaching of John Hagee, senior pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas. Hagee attended Trinity University on a football scholarship, where he graduated with a bachelor’s degree before earning his master’s at North Texas State University. He also studied at Southwestern Bible College and was granted an honorary doctorate from Oral Roberts University.

Hagee’s ministerial activities began in 1958 as an evangelist. In 1966 he went to San Antonio to become the founding pastor of what eventually became Trinity Church. After resigning his pastorate of Trinity in May 1975, Hagee took the helm of the 25-member Church of Castle Hill in San Antonio. That church — rebuilt to seat 5,000 and dedicated in October 1987 as Cornerstone Church — now has an active membership of over 13,000.

Through his writings (books, booklets, and articles in his bimonthly John Hagee Ministries magazine), taped messages, and daily appearances on his Global Evangelism Television broadcasts (Cornerstone and John Hagee Today) aired by the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) and other media outlets, Hagee has gained broad visibility and influence among evangelicals.

A number of people consider Hagee’s teachings to be thoroughly biblical. We would disagree with Hagee, however, on the following points.

Preaching Prosperity

John Hagee believes that all Christians should be financially prosperous so long as they continue to walk in obedience to God’s ordinances. Although he does not subscribe to every doctrine common to the so-called Faith movement, he does agree with the movement’s view that “poverty is caused by sin and disobeying the Word of God.”1 Hagee, like most other prosperity preachers, believes that “poverty is a curse.”2

Christians achieve prosperity through giving, asserts Hagee. “When you give to God, He controls your income. There’s no such thing as a fixed income in the Kingdom of God. Your income is controlled by your giving.”3 According to Hagee, Christians grow prosperous through giving because “God created a universe where it is impossible to receive without giving. Everything that God controls, gives. . . . Givers gain. You do not qualify for God’s abundance until you give.”4

Turning to the Bible, however, one finds a number of passages that run contrary to Hagee’s teachings concerning prosperity. Jesus Himself said, “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. . . . But woe to you who are rich . . .” (Luke 6:20, 24 NASB). James underscores this point when he asked, “. . . did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?” (James 2:5). James later follows with stern words to the rich (5:1-6; cf. Mark 10:25).

This is not to say that Christians should consider wealth as something inherently evil. The Bible simply tells us that material wealth is not the measuring stick for righteousness or God’s blessing; its proper value lies in the purpose for which it is used.

This is precisely why Paul gave the following exhortation to Timothy: “Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy. Instruct them to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, storing up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is life indeed” (1 Tim. 6:17-19).

The power of wealth, however, is such that it can lead people into idolatry. Some, for instance, may become so caught up in matters of finances and wealth that they neglect or completely forget about their duties and responsibilities to God. God, for some of these individuals, may begin to fade out of the picture altogether, being replaced by crass materialism. Rather than grounding their primary concerns on the eternal, they instead devote their lives to that which perishes (John 6:27; Matt. 6:19-21).5

Promoting Positive Confession

Along with the prosperity message, Hagee accepts and promotes the doctrine of positive confession — a foundational teaching of the Faith movement which maintains that Christians can speak (i.e., positively confess) physical realities into existence as long as the believer exercises enough faith to accompany his or her verbal confession. “There is a relationship between your soul and physical and financial prosperity,” declares Hagee. “‘This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth’ [quoting Josh. 1:8 KJV]. That’s the spoken Word of God. ‘And then thou shalt prosper and have good success.’ When? After you speak and act upon the Word of God. And you’ve been hearing that tonight out of the mouth of [well-known Faith teacher] John Avanzini.”6

Like his teachings on prosperity, Hagee’s reiteration of the Faith movement’s doctrine of positive confession runs contrary to the teachings of Scripture. Nothing confessed by believers in faith — verbally or otherwise — automatically comes to pass. Only God has the power to create as He wills (Gen. 1:1). Christians are certainly instructed to pray to God for their requests (Matt. 6:8-13; 21:22). Ultimately, however, all such requests are subject to God’s sovereign will; whichever ones come to pass only do so as a direct result of God’s will and not the will of the believer (1 John 5:14).7

Salvation Without Conversion?

Hagee is recognized as a fierce foe of anti-Semitism. An outspoken supporter of the Jewish people, Judaism, and the nation Israel, he has been given the “Humanitarian of the Year” award by the San Antonio B’nai B’rith Council. Hagee has also been bestowed the “ZOA Israel Service Award” by the Zionist Organization in Dallas and honored with the “Henrietta Szold Award” by the Texas Southern Region of Hadassah.8

While his bold stance against anti-Semitism is certainly praiseworthy, Hagee’s zealousness for the Jewish people and their cause has led him to commit a most serious doctrinal error — salvation for the Jews without conversion to Christianity. One newspaper account puts it this way:

Trying to convert Jews is a “waste of time,” he [Hagee] said. . . .

Everyone else, whether Buddhist or Baha’i, needs to believe in Jesus, he says. But not Jews. Jews already have a covenant with God that has never been replaced with Christianity, he says.

“The Jewish people have a relationship to God through the law of God as given through Moses,” Hagee said. “I believe that every Gentile person can only come to God through the cross of Christ. I believe that every Jewish person who lives in the light of the Torah, which is the word of God, has a relationship with God and will come to redemption.

“The law of Moses is sufficient enough to bring a person into the knowledge of God until God gives him a greater revelation. And God has not,” said Hagee . . .9

“There are right now Jewish people on this earth who have a powerful and special relationship with God,” declares Hagee in one of his books. “They have been chosen by the ‘election of grace’ in which God does what he does without asking man to approve or understand it. Let us put an end to the Christian chatter that “all the Jews are lost” and can’t be in the will of God until they convert to Christianity! . . . there are a certain number of Jews in relationship with God right now through divine election.” 10

Hagee also affirms: “If God blinded the Jewish people to the identity of Jesus as Messiah, how could He send them to hell for not seeing what he had forbidden them to see?”11 He continues, “All people will gain entrance into heaven through Christ. The question is one of timing.” 12

Such rhetoric raises some thorny questions. When Hagee says “all people will gain entrance into heaven through Christ,” he is either advocating universalism (literally all people — Jewish and Gentile — will be saved), or he believes that all Jews will be saved. In either case, both positions are in serious error, but the latter is more consistent with his other statements.

The “timing” of the salvation of the entire Jewish nation is actually irrelevant to Hagee’s argument since he advocates that it is a waste of time attempting to convert them. At best, then, Hagee implies that even if they are not currently saved, God will save all Jewish keepers of the Law — past, present, and future — at some future point.

The Bible paints a different picture. The apostle Paul demonstrates that Israel had a responsibility to respond to the Gospel, but rejected it. In Romans 10:19-21, he asks, “Did they [the Jews] fail to hear?” The rhetorical answer is “no.” Paul relates that, as light and darkness are understood by all, so the gospel has been made known to all the Jews (cf. Acts 17:6; 21:28). He continues, “Did they fail to understand?” The answer once again is “no.” Since Israel has become disobedient through unbelief (Rom. 11:30), God has delivered the gospel to the Gentiles.13

But God has not entirely rejected Israel — Paul (himself a Jew) is living proof of this (Rom. 11:1). God has preserved a remnant, while the others were hardened as a consequence of their unbelief and trusting in works instead of the righteousness of Christ (Rom. 11:5-7; cf. 9:31-32; 11:20-23). Elsewhere the apostle writes, “. . . by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His [God’s] sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. . . . for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 3:20, 23-24, emphasis added).

To drive the point home, Paul goes on to say, “. . . the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise nullified; . . . it is by faith, that it might be in accordance with grace” (Rom. 4:13-14, 16). Scripture draws no distinction between Jews and Gentiles on the issue of salvation, which is attained by grace through faith alone in Christ, “apart from works of the law” (3:28; cf. vv. 21-22).

Paul recognized that the Jews of his day had a misguided zeal that caused them to stumble on this very point (9:31-32; 10:2-4). Why would he suffer great anguish and wish he were accursed for Israel’s sake if none of them were truly lost? His anguish comes from the realization that many Israelites are not saved (Rom. 9:3, 6, 27; 10:1, 9-15; cf. Acts 2:14, 21, 37-39; Rom. 11:14, 17-23).

The Law, revealed through the Jews, was meant to be “our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor” (Gal. 3:24-25). As the Bible clearly states: “There is neither Jew nor Greek . . . for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (vv. 28-29). To be saved, a person — whether Jew or Gentile — must turn to Christ (5:4-6; cf. John 14:6; Acts 4:12; Rom. 10:9-13) who is “the end of the law for righteousness for everyone who believes” (Rom. 10:4). In writing that the “message of the gospel was from Israel, not to Israel,”14 Hagee discourages Christians from sharing the Good News with unsaved Jews who, like everyone else, have need of the gospel if they are to spend eternity with God in heaven.

The Reluctant Messiah

In Hagee’s theology, the Jews can hardly be faulted for not flocking to Christianity since it was supposedly Jesus who declined their request for Him to be their Messiah. “The [Jewish] people wanted Him to be their Messiah, but He absolutely refused,” writes Hagee. “The Jews were not rejecting Jesus as Messiah, it was Jesus who was refusing to be the Messiah to the Jews!”15

Suffice it to say, Jesus’ explicit claim to be the Messiah (or Christ) during His trial before the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish tribunal (Matt. 26:64), flatly contradicts Hagee’s assertion. In that same passage, Jesus called Himself the “Son of Man,” an unmistakable reference to the Book of Daniel (7:13) which alludes to the Messiah. Jesus also applied the same title to Himself in revealing His identity to “a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council” (John 3:1, 14-15), as well as to the crowd who questioned His authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:10).

Furthermore, in response to Jesus’ question, “Who do you say I am?” (Matt. 16:15), Peter answered, “You are the Christ [Messiah]” (v. 16). Surely, had the Jewish apostle been wrong, Jesus would have corrected him at that moment; instead, Peter received the Lord’s blessing (v. 17).16 Jesus, however, instructed Peter, along with several others, not to reveal His messianic identity until due time (v. 20). He did so to avoid the prevalent misconceptions about the title, which had by then become largely understood in political terms17 — something wholly inappropriate for Jesus’ mission at that time — though Jesus did, on occasion, give public indications of His messiahship (cf. Luke 4:17-21; 20:41-44).

Indeed, Hagee’s view is made especially ironic by the fact that Jesus Himself said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus’ own people rejected Him, and not the other way around (John 1:11; Mark 12:1-12).

Judging Alternative Viewpoints as Anti-Semitic

Hagee’s personal view regarding the Jewish people has led him to render harsh and inaccurate statements about individuals who differ with him on Israel’s relationship with the church. Those who believe the church is now the true Israel are, in his opinion, guilty of spreading the message of anti-Semitism.18 And along with amillennialism — “the view that when Christ returns, eternity begins with no prior thousand-year (millennial) reign on earth”19 — it is condemned as “ancient Godless heresy that is again raging through the Church masquerading as truth.”20

Whether Hagee realizes it or not, a number of orthodox Christian denominations (especially in the Reformed and Presbyterian traditions) espouse the very view he caricatures and condemns. The view that there has always been and will only be one people of God (namely, Israel) and that the church comprises that faction of humanity (the new Israel, made up of both Jews and non-Jews) is a feature of what is commonly known as Covenant theology — a theological framework long recognized as biblical and in no way anti-Semitic.21

According to Hagee, this purported “heresy” goes by various names, including “Kingdom Now, Kingdom Age, New Wave and New Age.”22 He declares, however, that such “Replacement theology” (so-called by Hagee because of its view that the church is the new Israel or spiritual Israel — though Hagee did not originate the term) is in reality an “old heresy”23 and “idolatry.”24 He also claims that so-called “Replacement theologians are now carrying Hitler’s anointing and his message.”25

Judging from the quotes and references he cites, Hagee seems to have based his idea of “Replacement theology” primarily on the teachings of Earl Paulk, the premiere advocate of Kingdom theology.26 While Paulk can be criticized for any number of unbiblical elements comprising Kingdom Theology (including positive confession, the “fivefold ministry,” and the “Manifest Sons of God” doctrine),27 Hagee all but limits his attack on Paulk’s view that the church is spiritual Israel — a view that is, in fact, orthodox.

Paul states, “. . . they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel” (Rom. 9:6). Going on, he clarifies that “. . . it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants” (v. 8). Paul explains that “. . . he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God” (2:28-29; cf. Phil. 3:3).

Clearly, then, believers in the One true God are, at least in a spiritual sense, identified with Israel — as God’s chosen people. “Therefore,” as Paul so aptly puts it, “be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham” (Gal. 3:7; cf. vv. 26-29; 6:15-16).28 Conversely, Judaizers — those who rejected justification by faith by their insistence that adherence to Jewish laws and practices is, at least in part, necessary for salvation — are called the “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9; 3:9).

“Is it important to be right on the Israel question?” asks Hagee. “When you consider that being wrong brings you under the curse of God and headed for eternal, everlasting fire with the devil and his angels . . . it’s important! Israel is not a ‘take it or leave it’ subject. It is a life and death matter . . . eternal life!”29

It is indeed unfortunate that Hagee would think one’s personal view of Israel can radically affect an individual’s eternal destiny. Nowhere does Scripture state that salvation hinges upon a person’s perspective of the new Israel. Hagee has no biblical basis for his denouncement. By making such unwarranted statements, Hagee winds up condemning many erstwhile believers, theologians, and defenders of the faith — both past and present.


Though many may claim Hagee’s preaching is helping to spread the Word of God and building a bridge of unity between the Christian and Jewish communities, the fact remains that his message contains elements which lie in direct and serious opposition to biblical truth.

NOTES

1John Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), 16 April 1993.

2John Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, TBN, 4 November 1992.

3Ibid.

4Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, 16 April 1993.

5For extended critiques of the so-called “prosperity gospel,” see Hank Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1993), 181-231; and D. R. McConnell, A Different Gospel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), 170-83.

6Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, 4 November 1992. Avanzini, a leading figure in the Faith movement, focuses much of his message around the theme of financial prosperity. He teaches, among other things, that Jesus was a wealthy individual who “wore designer clothes” and “had a nice house, a big house,” while the apostle Paul “had the kind of money that people . . . would block up justice to try to get a bribe out of old Paul” (John Avanzini, Believer’s Voice of Victory program, TBN, 20 January 1991).

7Detailed discussions can be found in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 61-102, 285-90; and McConnell, A Different Gospel, 134-47.

8John Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel? (San Antonio, TX: Dominion Publishers, 1987), [174-75].

9Julia Duin, “San Antonio Fundamentalist Battles Anti-Semitism,” The Houston Chronicle, 30 April 1988, 1.

10Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 124-25, 127 (emphasis in original).

11John Hagee, personal faxed correspondence to CRI, 18 October 1994, 3.

12Ibid., 6.

13To cement the use of the rhetorical “no,” these verses are supported by the Greek negative particle me. Whenever the me particle is used in an interrogative sentence, the response is negative (cf. 1 Cor. 9:8-10; 11:22; 14:29-30; Rom. 11:1). Had a “yes” — rather than a “no” — response been intended, the Greek particle ou — instead of me — would have appeared (cf. Rom. 9:21). For documentation, see A. T. Robertson, A Grammar Of The Greek New Testament In Light Of Historical Research (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1934),1173-74; and A. T. Robertson & W. Hersey Davis, A New Short Grammar Of The Greek Testament, 10th ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1977), 390.

14Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 61 (emphasis in original).

15Ibid., 67-68 passim; cf. 69, 72.

16For further discussions on the messianic identity of Jesus, see Robert L. Reymond, Jesus, Divine Messiah (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1990); and Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976 [orig. 1886]).

17See, for example, Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co./Inter-Varsity Press, 1992), 427; R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964), 632-33; and D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 8:374-75.

18Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 1.

19Robert Lightner, The Last Days Handbook (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990), 22. Quoted in Lightner’s book is amillennialist J. G. Voss, who defines the amillennial position as follows: “Amillennialism is that view of the last things which holds the Bible does not predict a ‘millennium’ or period of world-wide peace and righteousness on this earth before the end of the world. At the second coming of Christ, the resurrection and judgment will take place, followed by the eternal order of things — the absolute, perfect kingdom of God, in which there will be no sin, suffering, nor death” (72). For presentations and critiques of the various options regarding the millennium by theologians who take different sides on the issue, see Robert G. Clouse, ed. The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1977).

20Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 1.

21For an exposition of this particular view, see Edmund P. Clowney, “The New Israel,” A Guide to Biblical Prophecy (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1989), 207-20. Paul E. Leonard presents the opposite point of view in the article following Clowney’s, titled “Two Peoples of God” (221-30), though he does not classify the former as anti-semitic. For a detailed treatment of Covenant theology, see O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980).

22Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 1.

23Ibid., 74. Hagee quotes Ignatius of Antioch (c. A.D. 30-107) as a teacher of this “old heresy.” Ironically, Ignatius was one of the earliest defenders of orthodoxy noted for his forceful responses against false teachings. He supported apostolic authority and became the bishop of Antioch, one of the leading churches in the first century (cf. Acts 11:19-29; 13:1-3). His view that the church was the new Israel would thus have been a teaching passed on to him by the apostles. Ignatius’s writings are reprinted and translated in J. B. Lightfoot and J. R. Harner, eds. The Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1984), 97-162; and Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985), 1:45-131.

24Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 86.

25Ibid., 132.

26Ibid., 1, 59, 76-77, 105.



27A reprint of the two-part Christian Research Journal article,“The Gospel According to Paulk: A Critique of ‘Kingdom Theology,’” is available through CRI (order part #DK-150).

28Commenting on Galatians 6:16, Bible scholar Alan Cole writes: “This would identify the new group, the ‘third race of men’ of whom the Church fathers delighted to talk — neither Jew nor Gentile, but Christian — with God’s Israel. This is often put bluntly as ‘the Church is the new Israel’” (The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians [Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965], 183). Cf. Herman N. Ridderbos, The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1953), 227; and R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, to the Ephesians and to the Philippians (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 321.

29Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 169.http://www.nutritiondynamics.com/images2/john%20hagee.jpg

[ShackO]

At what point in the Bible did God say "From this point forward I will no longer make war between the Nations"?

@ What point did he say he would make perpetual war??? Anything could be inferred by what it is not said……

[smeagol]

John Hagee is the result of Protestantism. When people are left to interpret the written Word claiming it's the Holy Spirit inspiring them in their interpretation, you end up with the Hagees of this World.

I know my good friend hegamboa diasagrees, but that is the way I feel.

[2centsworth]

You ever look to see what CRI has to say about him……

who is CRI? Also, it doesn't take much upstairs to copy and paste other people's opinions.

[2centsworth]

John Hagee is the result of Protestantism. When people are left to interpret the written Word claiming it's the Holy Spirit inspiring them in their interpretation, you end up with the Hagees of this World.

I know my good friend hegamboa diasagrees, but that is the way I feel.
How can you judge the merits of Hagees interpretations if you don't believe followers should interpret the bible? Wouldn't you consider yourself a follower and unqualified to judge? Or are you the only smart one?

[smeagol]

How can you judge the merits of Hagees interpretations if you don't believe followers should interpret the bible? Wouldn't you consider yourself a follower and unqualified to judge? Or are you the only smart one?
I follow the Catholic Church and it's interpretations of the Bible. The Catholic Church was founded by Christ himself and He gave it the power to interpret His teachings. The Church has been around for 2000 years. The practice of common mortals interpreting the Bible by themselves is a practice that started 500 years ago.

[2centsworth]

I follow the Catholic Church and it's interpretations of the Bible. The Catholic Church was founded by Christ himself and He gave it the power to interpret His teachings. The Church has been around for 2000 years. The practice of common mortals interpreting the Bible by themselves is a practice that started 500 years ago.
Again, why does a mere mortal like yourself have an opinion of Hagee's teachings? You've admitted it's beyond you.

[ShackO]

who is CRI? Also, it doesn't take much upstairs to copy and paste other people's opinions.

Well now, how much upstairs does it take to question someone’s post when you don't even know who CRI is.......... Maybe you thought this was the video game forum???

If you don't even know what CRI is what is the point in discussing what I posted with you????

Why not show me up and post your opinion, and please hurry the end is near…LOL.. :violin

[ShackO]

I follow the Catholic Church and it's interpretations of the Bible. The Catholic Church was founded by Christ himself and He gave it the power to interpret His teachings. The Church has been around for 2000 years. The practice of common mortals interpreting the Bible by themselves is a practice that started 500 years ago.


I would disagree with about all of that..... The pope is but a man, oh, and definitely fallible......

It might make a great discussion in another thread to go over the differences within Christianity….

[2centsworth]

Well now, how much upstairs does it take to question someone’s post when you don't even know who CRI is.......... Maybe you thought this was the video game forum???

If you don't even know what CRI is what is the point in discussing what I posted with you????

Why not show me up and post your opinion, and please hurry the end is near…LOL.. :violin
I challenge you to a copy and paste war.:lol

[ShackO]

I challenge you to a copy and paste war.:lol

So I guess that is your opinion....:spin NOTHING!!! :lol
http://www.feebleminds-gifs.com/peeing-man.gif
.................................................. ..................2centsworth

[gtownspur]

I challenge you to a copy and paste war.:lol


Owned! Good job 2 cents!

[ShackO]

Hurry, hurry the end is still near.............. :lol

http://www.heartlandradio.org/wvhm/John_Hagee.jpg

[smeagol]

Again, why does a mere mortal like yourself have an opinion of Hagee's teachings? You've admitted it's beyond you.
Because I have a standard of how the Bible should be interpreted. Anything that deviates from that standard, makes those teachings false. The more you deviate, the further from the truth those teachings are.

Not sure what you don't understand.

[smeagol]

I would disagree with about all of that..... The pope is but a man, oh, and definitely fallible......

It might make a great discussion in another thread to go over the differences within Christianity….
That's your opinion and I have mine, which is that the Pope is infalible (in matters of Doctrine and morals).

I've had long discussions in this forum about this topic; I don't mind having another one.

[ShackO]

Cool............ One day I hope to discuss it with you............ It seems your friend 2cents askes a lot of questions and rarely if ever offers any of the answers...

He certainly isn’t the only one doing it here…. Why you all have let them get away with it is beyond me…..


It is cool with me if he chooses to believe in the “prophet” Hagee..

I guess there are far worse things to believe in but you would think some of his sheep would be actually listening to what he is saying now and then……….

@ least then they would have something to baaAAhhhaaa-back him up now and then……………

[Nbadan]

Christian Right led by Hagee Steps Up Pro-Israel Lobby


Last week, while the Israeli-Hezbollah conflict continued to escalate, Christians United for Israel (CUFI) -- an organisation founded less than six months ago by Texas evangelist Rev. John C. Hagee, pastor of the 18,000-member Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas and the author of "Jerusalem Countdown," a 2006 book about a nuclear-armed Iran -- rolled into Washington for its first major get-together.

More than 3,400 delegates from across the United States attended the inaugural meeting.

CUFI kicked off the gathering on Jul. 19 with its "A Night to Honour Israel" banquet at the grand ballroom in the Washington Hilton. The festivities attracted a number of high-profile Israeli and U.S. political leaders, including Israeli Ambassador Daniel Ayalon, retired Israeli defence chief Lt. Gen. Moshe Yaalon and Republican National Committee Chairman Ken Mehlman.

According to a report posted at Israpundit, Hagee read greetings from President George W. Bush and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. Bush commented: "God bless and stand by the people of Israel and God bless the United States."

Olmert's letter referred to CUFI's "bold stand at this crisis time," and the group's acknowledgement of Israel's biblical 'birthright'."

The following day, at a well-attended press conference, Hagee said that "The dots are there to be connected and it is not some big thing called terrorism. It is Islamic fascism... all of the various things and forces that we've seen around the world are not merely hot spots but they are all part of a theme -- a war against western civilisation."

Common Dreams (http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0727-11.htm)

You sure Hagee isn't G-town?

[Nbadan]

Birth Pangs of a New Christian Zionism
by MAX BLUMENTHAL
Washington, DC


Over the past months, the White House has convened a series of off-the-record meetings about its policies in the Middle East with leaders of Christians United for Israel (CUFI), a newly formed political organization that tells its members that supporting Israel's expansionist policies is "a biblical imperative." CUFI's Washington lobbyist, David Brog, told me that during the meetings, CUFI representatives pressed White House officials to adopt a more confrontational posture toward Iran, refuse aid to the Palestinians and give Israel a free hand as it ramped up its military conflict with Hezbollah.

The White House instructed Brog not to reveal the names of officials he met with, Brog said.

CUFI's advice to the Bush Administration reflects the Armageddon-based foreign-policy views of its founder, John Hagee. Hagee is a fire-and-brimstone preacher from San Antonio who commands the nearly 18,000-member Cornerstone Church and hosts a major TV ministry where he explains to millions of viewers how the end times will unfold. He is also the author of numerous bestselling pulp-prophecy books, like his recent Jerusalem Countdown, in which he cites various unnamed Israeli intelligence sources to claim that Iran is producing nuclear "suitcase bombs." The only way to defeat the Iranian evildoers, he says, is a full-scale military assault. "

The Nation (http://www.thenation.com/docprint.mhtml?i=20060814&s=new_christian_zionism)

Did you catch that line?

"CUFI's advice to the Bush Administration reflects the Armageddon-based foreign-policy views of its founder, John Hagee."

[ShackO]

I wonder how many of the Christians being bombed in Lebanon feel the same way???

For that matter how many Israeli's are calling for armageddon in their front yard???

Has hagee ever even acknowledged the Christian Palestinians and Lebanese??

[smeagol]

The only way to defeat the Iranian evildoers, he says, is a full-scale military assault.

Why are these pseudo-Christians always so quick to shout "Let's go to war!"

[ShackO]

And hagee will be home safe in San Antonio praying for the poor dead American boys and for the "infidels" to burn in hell......

I have never meet one Irainian that supports the wacko's running the place... They got issues with the US and it is understandable given the US role there but that don't mean they want to go to war..........

It is the leaders there not the vast majority of the ppl........

This just kill them all shit has got to be taken out of the conversation....

[Nbadan]

I don't know why he just doesn't drop the man behind the curtain routine and declare a fatwa.

[Guru of Nothing]

May your children grow up and have nothing in common with John Hagee.

[ShackO]

I don't know why he just doesn't drop the man behind the curtain routine and declare a fatwa.

He has done about everything else but.............. :oops

Maybe he is saving it for his next book..........

[Nbadan]

Check this out...


http://www.crystalinks.com/redheifer2002.jpg

Signal of Messiah?


Besides his million-dollar compensation package, Hagee has a portfolio of other ventures, including a cattle ranch in south Texas that may have religious significance. Many evangelicals believe that the arrival of a “perfect red heifer” will signal the end times. In the Old Testament, burning a red heifer and sprinkling its ashes is described as a purification ritual for priests entering the temple. Ultra-orthodox Jews believe that the birth of a modern perfect red heifer will herald the arrival of the messiah, leading to a confrontation with Muslims over the Temple Mount, where Jews believe the Temple will be rebuilt. Some evangelicals likewise regard the red heifer as a harbinger of the ultimate showdown at the Temple Mount, which they believe will be the site of the Second Coming. And they believe that time is near.

To many other observers, the advent of the red heifer threatens to provoke a violent struggle for control of the Temple Mount, with worldwide repercussions. In the late 1990s, a group of unidentified Texas ranchers reportedly bred a perfect red heifer, which generated excitement in evangelical circles until the animal sprouted some black hairs.

Six years ago, the John C. Hagee Royalty Trust paid more than $5.5 million for a 7,600-acre ranch in Brackettville, Texas, where cattle are raised in a venture with the Texas Israel Agricultural Research Foundation, a nonprofit outfit operated by the pastor. (Another part of the property is a resort hunting facility, where guests paying up to $250 for a night’s stay can also land their planes at the ranch’s private airstrip.) Last year, Hagee hired one of the top lobbyists in San Antonio, David Earl, to urge the state Legislature to exempt Hagee’s foundation from water-use regulations. A spokeswoman for the bill’s sponsor, Representative Frank Corte, whose district includes Hagee’s church, said that he introduced it on behalf of a constituent, but added that she was not authorized to divulge the identity of that constituent. (The bill stalled in committee.) Earl said that Hagee wants to “share information” to “improve” the “production of livestock,” particularly cattle, with an Israeli research project, but otherwise claimed to be unsure of the particulars. Dr. Scott Farhart, an obstetrician and trustee of the John C. Hagee Royalty Trust (and an elder at Hagee’s church), did not respond to a request for comment, nor did the director of the ranch.

Prospect (http://www.prospect.org/web/view-print.ww?id=11541)

Holy Heifer this matada is loco!!

:hat

[Phenomanul]

Check this out...


http://www.crystalinks.com/redheifer2002.jpg

Signal of Messiah?



Prospect (http://www.prospect.org/web/view-print.ww?id=11541)

Holy Heifer this matada is loco!!

:hat

It's for stuff like this that I can't take Hagee seriously....

[Extra Stout]

John Hagee is the result of Protestantism. When people are left to interpret the written Word claiming it's the Holy Spirit inspiring them in their interpretation, you end up with the Hagees of this World.

I know my good friend hegamboa diasagrees, but that is the way I feel.
Yes, in the good old days of the Catholic Church, Hagee would have been drawn and quartered for heresy. :spin

[Phenomanul]

LOL.......... Then allow me to share this message with you...Christian Zionism and ethnic salvation are a bit out of the main stream I would say off the top…….


Personally I would be a little leery of anyone claiming to be “a friend of Israel’…. That kinda reminds me of those fools back in the day claiming to be a “friend of the Indian”… Somehow the Indians always seemed to end up short-changed in the end……….

You ever look to see what CRI has to say about him……

JOHN HAGEE (http://www.equip.org/free/DH005.htm)

Christians have listened for many years to the preaching of John Hagee, senior pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas. Hagee attended Trinity University on a football scholarship, where he graduated with a bachelor’s degree before earning his master’s at North Texas State University. He also studied at Southwestern Bible College and was granted an honorary doctorate from Oral Roberts University.

Hagee’s ministerial activities began in 1958 as an evangelist. In 1966 he went to San Antonio to become the founding pastor of what eventually became Trinity Church. After resigning his pastorate of Trinity in May 1975, Hagee took the helm of the 25-member Church of Castle Hill in San Antonio. That church — rebuilt to seat 5,000 and dedicated in October 1987 as Cornerstone Church — now has an active membership of over 13,000.

Through his writings (books, booklets, and articles in his bimonthly John Hagee Ministries magazine), taped messages, and daily appearances on his Global Evangelism Television broadcasts (Cornerstone and John Hagee Today) aired by the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) and other media outlets, Hagee has gained broad visibility and influence among evangelicals.

A number of people consider Hagee’s teachings to be thoroughly biblical. We would disagree with Hagee, however, on the following points.

Preaching Prosperity

John Hagee believes that all Christians should be financially prosperous so long as they continue to walk in obedience to God’s ordinances. Although he does not subscribe to every doctrine common to the so-called Faith movement, he does agree with the movement’s view that “poverty is caused by sin and disobeying the Word of God.”1 Hagee, like most other prosperity preachers, believes that “poverty is a curse.”2

Christians achieve prosperity through giving, asserts Hagee. “When you give to God, He controls your income. There’s no such thing as a fixed income in the Kingdom of God. Your income is controlled by your giving.”3 According to Hagee, Christians grow prosperous through giving because “God created a universe where it is impossible to receive without giving. Everything that God controls, gives. . . . Givers gain. You do not qualify for God’s abundance until you give.”4

Turning to the Bible, however, one finds a number of passages that run contrary to Hagee’s teachings concerning prosperity. Jesus Himself said, “Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. . . . But woe to you who are rich . . .” (Luke 6:20, 24 NASB). James underscores this point when he asked, “. . . did not God choose the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?” (James 2:5). James later follows with stern words to the rich (5:1-6; cf. Mark 10:25).

This is not to say that Christians should consider wealth as something inherently evil. The Bible simply tells us that material wealth is not the measuring stick for righteousness or God’s blessing; its proper value lies in the purpose for which it is used.

This is precisely why Paul gave the following exhortation to Timothy: “Instruct those who are rich in this present world not to be conceited or to fix their hope on the uncertainty of riches, but on God, who richly supplies us with all things to enjoy. Instruct them to do good, to be rich in good works, to be generous and ready to share, storing up for themselves the treasure of a good foundation for the future, so that they may take hold of that which is life indeed” (1 Tim. 6:17-19).

The power of wealth, however, is such that it can lead people into idolatry. Some, for instance, may become so caught up in matters of finances and wealth that they neglect or completely forget about their duties and responsibilities to God. God, for some of these individuals, may begin to fade out of the picture altogether, being replaced by crass materialism. Rather than grounding their primary concerns on the eternal, they instead devote their lives to that which perishes (John 6:27; Matt. 6:19-21).5

Promoting Positive Confession

Along with the prosperity message, Hagee accepts and promotes the doctrine of positive confession — a foundational teaching of the Faith movement which maintains that Christians can speak (i.e., positively confess) physical realities into existence as long as the believer exercises enough faith to accompany his or her verbal confession. “There is a relationship between your soul and physical and financial prosperity,” declares Hagee. “‘This book of the law shall not depart out of your mouth’ [quoting Josh. 1:8 KJV]. That’s the spoken Word of God. ‘And then thou shalt prosper and have good success.’ When? After you speak and act upon the Word of God. And you’ve been hearing that tonight out of the mouth of [well-known Faith teacher] John Avanzini.”6

Like his teachings on prosperity, Hagee’s reiteration of the Faith movement’s doctrine of positive confession runs contrary to the teachings of Scripture. Nothing confessed by believers in faith — verbally or otherwise — automatically comes to pass. Only God has the power to create as He wills (Gen. 1:1). Christians are certainly instructed to pray to God for their requests (Matt. 6:8-13; 21:22). Ultimately, however, all such requests are subject to God’s sovereign will; whichever ones come to pass only do so as a direct result of God’s will and not the will of the believer (1 John 5:14).7

Salvation Without Conversion?

Hagee is recognized as a fierce foe of anti-Semitism. An outspoken supporter of the Jewish people, Judaism, and the nation Israel, he has been given the “Humanitarian of the Year” award by the San Antonio B’nai B’rith Council. Hagee has also been bestowed the “ZOA Israel Service Award” by the Zionist Organization in Dallas and honored with the “Henrietta Szold Award” by the Texas Southern Region of Hadassah.8

While his bold stance against anti-Semitism is certainly praiseworthy, Hagee’s zealousness for the Jewish people and their cause has led him to commit a most serious doctrinal error — salvation for the Jews without conversion to Christianity. One newspaper account puts it this way:

Trying to convert Jews is a “waste of time,” he [Hagee] said. . . .

Everyone else, whether Buddhist or Baha’i, needs to believe in Jesus, he says. But not Jews. [/COLOR]Jews already have a covenant with God that has never been replaced with Christianity, he says.

“The Jewish people have a relationship to God through the law of God as given through Moses,” Hagee said. “I believe that every Gentile person can only come to God through the cross of Christ. I believe that every Jewish person who lives in the light of the Torah, which is the word of God, has a relationship with God and will come to redemption.

“The law of Moses is sufficient enough to bring a person into the knowledge of God until God gives him a greater revelation. And God has not,” said Hagee . . .9

“There are right now Jewish people on this earth who have a powerful and special relationship with God,” declares Hagee in one of his books. “They have been chosen by the ‘election of grace’ in which God does what he does without asking man to approve or understand it. Let us put an end to the Christian chatter that “all the Jews are lost” and can’t be in the will of God until they convert to Christianity! . . . there are a certain number of Jews in relationship with God right now through divine election.” 10

Hagee also affirms: “If God blinded the Jewish people to the identity of Jesus as Messiah, how could He send them to hell for not seeing what he had forbidden them to see?”11 He continues, “All people will gain entrance into heaven through Christ. The question is one of timing.” 12

Such rhetoric raises some thorny questions. When Hagee says “all people will gain entrance into heaven through Christ,” he is either advocating universalism (literally all people — Jewish and Gentile — will be saved), or he believes that all Jews will be saved. In either case, both positions are in serious error, but the latter is more consistent with his other statements.

The “timing” of the salvation of the entire Jewish nation is actually irrelevant to Hagee’s argument since he advocates that it is a waste of time attempting to convert them. At best, then, Hagee implies that even if they are not currently saved, God will save all Jewish keepers of the Law — past, present, and future — at some future point.

The Bible paints a different picture. The apostle Paul demonstrates that Israel had a responsibility to respond to the Gospel, but rejected it. In Romans 10:19-21, he asks, “Did they [the Jews] fail to hear?” The rhetorical answer is “no.” Paul relates that, as light and darkness are understood by all, so the gospel has been made known to all the Jews (cf. Acts 17:6; 21:28). He continues, “Did they fail to understand?” The answer once again is “no.” Since Israel has become disobedient through unbelief (Rom. 11:30), God has delivered the gospel to the Gentiles.13

But God has not entirely rejected Israel — Paul (himself a Jew) is living proof of this (Rom. 11:1). God has preserved a remnant, while the others were hardened as a consequence of their unbelief and trusting in works instead of the righteousness of Christ (Rom. 11:5-7; cf. 9:31-32; 11:20-23). Elsewhere the apostle writes, “. . . by the works of the Law no flesh will be justified in His [God’s] sight; for through the Law comes the knowledge of sin. . . . for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, being justified by His grace through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus” (Rom. 3:20, 23-24, emphasis added).

To drive the point home, Paul goes on to say, “. . . the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise nullified; . . . it is by faith, that it might be in accordance with grace” (Rom. 4:13-14, 16). Scripture draws no distinction between Jews and Gentiles on the issue of salvation, which is attained by grace through faith alone in Christ, “apart from works of the law” (3:28; cf. vv. 21-22).

Paul recognized that the Jews of his day had a misguided zeal that caused them to stumble on this very point (9:31-32; 10:2-4). Why would he suffer great anguish and wish he were accursed for Israel’s sake if none of them were truly lost? His anguish comes from the realization that many Israelites are not saved (Rom. 9:3, 6, 27; 10:1, 9-15; cf. Acts 2:14, 21, 37-39; Rom. 11:14, 17-23).

The Law, revealed through the Jews, was meant to be “our tutor to lead us to Christ, that we might be justified by faith. But now that faith has come, we are no longer under a tutor” (Gal. 3:24-25). As the Bible clearly states: “There is neither Jew nor Greek . . . for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s offspring, heirs according to promise” (vv. 28-29). To be saved, a person — whether Jew or Gentile — must turn to Christ (5:4-6; cf. John 14:6; Acts 4:12; Rom. 10:9-13) who is “the end of the law for righteousness for everyone who believes” (Rom. 10:4). In writing that the “message of the gospel was from Israel, not to Israel,”14 Hagee discourages Christians from sharing the Good News with unsaved Jews who, like everyone else, have need of the gospel if they are to spend eternity with God in heaven.

The Reluctant Messiah

In Hagee’s theology, the Jews can hardly be faulted for not flocking to Christianity since it was supposedly Jesus who declined their request for Him to be their Messiah. “The [Jewish] people wanted Him to be their Messiah, but He absolutely refused,” writes Hagee. “The Jews were not rejecting Jesus as Messiah, it was Jesus who was refusing to be the Messiah to the Jews!”15

Suffice it to say, Jesus’ explicit claim to be the Messiah (or Christ) during His trial before the Sanhedrin, the supreme Jewish tribunal (Matt. 26:64), flatly contradicts Hagee’s assertion. In that same passage, Jesus called Himself the “Son of Man,” an unmistakable reference to the Book of Daniel (7:13) which alludes to the Messiah. Jesus also applied the same title to Himself in revealing His identity to “a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a member of the Jewish ruling council” (John 3:1, 14-15), as well as to the crowd who questioned His authority to forgive sins (Mark 2:10).

Furthermore, in response to Jesus’ question, “Who do you say I am?” (Matt. 16:15), Peter answered, “You are the Christ [Messiah]” (v. 16). Surely, had the Jewish apostle been wrong, Jesus would have corrected him at that moment; instead, Peter received the Lord’s blessing (v. 17).16 Jesus, however, instructed Peter, along with several others, not to reveal His messianic identity until due time (v. 20). He did so to avoid the prevalent misconceptions about the title, which had by then become largely understood in political terms17 — something wholly inappropriate for Jesus’ mission at that time — though Jesus did, on occasion, give public indications of His messiahship (cf. Luke 4:17-21; 20:41-44).

Indeed, Hagee’s view is made especially ironic by the fact that Jesus Himself said, “I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel” (Matt. 15:24). Scripture clearly teaches that Jesus’ own people rejected Him, and not the other way around (John 1:11; Mark 12:1-12).

Judging Alternative Viewpoints as Anti-Semitic

Hagee’s personal view regarding the Jewish people has led him to render harsh and inaccurate statements about individuals who differ with him on Israel’s relationship with the church. Those who believe the church is now the true Israel are, in his opinion, guilty of spreading the message of anti-Semitism.18 And along with amillennialism — “the view that when Christ returns, eternity begins with no prior thousand-year (millennial) reign on earth”19 — it is condemned as “ancient Godless heresy that is again raging through the Church masquerading as truth.”20

Whether Hagee realizes it or not, a number of orthodox Christian denominations (especially in the Reformed and Presbyterian traditions) espouse the very view he caricatures and condemns. The view that there has always been and will only be one people of God (namely, Israel) and that the church comprises that faction of humanity (the new Israel, made up of both Jews and non-Jews) is a feature of what is commonly known as Covenant theology — a theological framework long recognized as biblical and in no way anti-Semitic.21

According to Hagee, this purported “heresy” goes by various names, including “Kingdom Now, Kingdom Age, New Wave and New Age.”22 He declares, however, that such “Replacement theology” (so-called by Hagee because of its view that the church is the new Israel or spiritual Israel — though Hagee did not originate the term) is in reality an “old heresy”23 and “idolatry.”24 He also claims that so-called “Replacement theologians are now carrying Hitler’s anointing and his message.”25

Judging from the quotes and references he cites, Hagee seems to have based his idea of “Replacement theology” primarily on the teachings of Earl Paulk, the premiere advocate of Kingdom theology.26 While Paulk can be criticized for any number of unbiblical elements comprising Kingdom Theology (including positive confession, the “fivefold ministry,” and the “Manifest Sons of God” doctrine),27 Hagee all but limits his attack on Paulk’s view that the church is spiritual Israel — a view that is, in fact, orthodox.

Paul states, “. . . they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel” (Rom. 9:6). Going on, he clarifies that “. . . it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants” (v. 8). Paul explains that “. . . he is not a Jew who is one outwardly; neither is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God” (2:28-29; cf. Phil. 3:3).

Clearly, then, believers in the One true God are, at least in a spiritual sense, identified with Israel — as God’s chosen people. “Therefore,” as Paul so aptly puts it, “be sure that it is those who are of faith who are sons of Abraham” (Gal. 3:7; cf. vv. 26-29; 6:15-16).28 Conversely, Judaizers — those who rejected justification by faith by their insistence that adherence to Jewish laws and practices is, at least in part, necessary for salvation — are called the “synagogue of Satan” (Rev. 2:9; 3:9).

“Is it important to be right on the Israel question?” asks Hagee. “When you consider that being wrong brings you under the curse of God and headed for eternal, everlasting fire with the devil and his angels . . . it’s important! Israel is not a ‘take it or leave it’ subject. It is a life and death matter . . . eternal life!”29

It is indeed unfortunate that Hagee would think one’s personal view of Israel can radically affect an individual’s eternal destiny. Nowhere does Scripture state that salvation hinges upon a person’s perspective of the new Israel. Hagee has no biblical basis for his denouncement. By making such unwarranted statements, Hagee winds up condemning many erstwhile believers, theologians, and defenders of the faith — both past and present.


Though many may claim Hagee’s preaching is helping to spread the Word of God and building a bridge of unity between the Christian and Jewish communities, the fact remains that his message contains elements which lie in direct and serious opposition to biblical truth.

NOTES

1John Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN), 16 April 1993.

2John Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, TBN, 4 November 1992.

3Ibid.

4Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, 16 April 1993.

5For extended critiques of the so-called “prosperity gospel,” see Hank Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis (Eugene, OR: Harvest House Publishers, 1993), 181-231; and D. R. McConnell, A Different Gospel (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1988), 170-83.

6Hagee, Praise-A-Thon broadcast, 4 November 1992. Avanzini, a leading figure in the Faith movement, focuses much of his message around the theme of financial prosperity. He teaches, among other things, that Jesus was a wealthy individual who “wore designer clothes” and “had a nice house, a big house,” while the apostle Paul “had the kind of money that people . . . would block up justice to try to get a bribe out of old Paul” (John Avanzini, Believer’s Voice of Victory program, TBN, 20 January 1991).

7Detailed discussions can be found in Hanegraaff, Christianity in Crisis, 61-102, 285-90; and McConnell, A Different Gospel, 134-47.

8John Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel? (San Antonio, TX: Dominion Publishers, 1987), [174-75].

9Julia Duin, “San Antonio Fundamentalist Battles Anti-Semitism,” The Houston Chronicle, 30 April 1988, 1.

10Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 124-25, 127 (emphasis in original).

11John Hagee, personal faxed correspondence to CRI, 18 October 1994, 3.

12Ibid., 6.

13To cement the use of the rhetorical “no,” these verses are supported by the Greek negative particle me. Whenever the me particle is used in an interrogative sentence, the response is negative (cf. 1 Cor. 9:8-10; 11:22; 14:29-30; Rom. 11:1). Had a “yes” — rather than a “no” — response been intended, the Greek particle ou — instead of me — would have appeared (cf. Rom. 9:21). For documentation, see A. T. Robertson, A Grammar Of The Greek New Testament In Light Of Historical Research (Nashville, TN: Broadman Press, 1934),1173-74; and A. T. Robertson & W. Hersey Davis, A New Short Grammar Of The Greek Testament, 10th ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1977), 390.

14Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 61 (emphasis in original).

15Ibid., 67-68 passim; cf. 69, 72.

16For further discussions on the messianic identity of Jesus, see Robert L. Reymond, Jesus, Divine Messiah (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing, 1990); and Alfred Edersheim, The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1976 [orig. 1886]).

17See, for example, Leon Morris, The Gospel According to Matthew (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co./Inter-Varsity Press, 1992), 427; R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Matthew’s Gospel (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1964), 632-33; and D. A. Carson, The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. by Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas, 12 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1984), 8:374-75.

18Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 1.

19Robert Lightner, The Last Days Handbook (Nashville, TN: Thomas Nelson Publishers, 1990), 22. Quoted in Lightner’s book is amillennialist J. G. Voss, who defines the amillennial position as follows: “Amillennialism is that view of the last things which holds the Bible does not predict a ‘millennium’ or period of world-wide peace and righteousness on this earth before the end of the world. At the second coming of Christ, the resurrection and judgment will take place, followed by the eternal order of things — the absolute, perfect kingdom of God, in which there will be no sin, suffering, nor death” (72). For presentations and critiques of the various options regarding the millennium by theologians who take different sides on the issue, see Robert G. Clouse, ed. The Meaning of the Millennium: Four Views (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1977).

20Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 1.

21For an exposition of this particular view, see Edmund P. Clowney, “The New Israel,” A Guide to Biblical Prophecy (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1989), 207-20. Paul E. Leonard presents the opposite point of view in the article following Clowney’s, titled “Two Peoples of God” (221-30), though he does not classify the former as anti-semitic. For a detailed treatment of Covenant theology, see O. Palmer Robertson, The Christ of the Covenants (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed Publishing Co., 1980).

22Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 1.

23Ibid., 74. Hagee quotes Ignatius of Antioch (c. A.D. 30-107) as a teacher of this “old heresy.” Ironically, Ignatius was one of the earliest defenders of orthodoxy noted for his forceful responses against false teachings. He supported apostolic authority and became the bishop of Antioch, one of the leading churches in the first century (cf. Acts 11:19-29; 13:1-3). His view that the church was the new Israel would thus have been a teaching passed on to him by the apostles. Ignatius’s writings are reprinted and translated in J. B. Lightfoot and J. R. Harner, eds. The Apostolic Fathers (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House, 1984), 97-162; and Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds. The Ante-Nicene Fathers, 10 vols. (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1985), 1:45-131.

24Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 86.

25Ibid., 132.

26Ibid., 1, 59, 76-77, 105.



27A reprint of the two-part Christian Research Journal article,“The Gospel According to Paulk: A Critique of ‘Kingdom Theology,’” is available through CRI (order part #DK-150).

28Commenting on Galatians 6:16, Bible scholar Alan Cole writes: “This would identify the new group, the ‘third race of men’ of whom the Church fathers delighted to talk — neither Jew nor Gentile, but Christian — with God’s Israel. This is often put bluntly as ‘the Church is the new Israel’” (The Epistle of Paul to the Galatians [Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1965], 183). Cf. Herman N. Ridderbos, The Epistle of Paul to the Churches of Galatia (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1953), 227; and R. C. H. Lenski, The Interpretation of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians, to the Ephesians and to the Philippians (Minneapolis, MN: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961), 321.

29Hagee, Should Christians Support Israel?, 169.http://www.nutritiondynamics.com/images2/john%20hagee.jpg


I missed this post earlier (the biggest one and I miss it....)...

Yeah, Haggee believes in several concepts that are not biblically supported.

[Phenomanul]

John Hagee is the result of Protestantism. When people are left to interpret the written Word claiming it's the Holy Spirit inspiring them in their interpretation, you end up with the Hagees of this World.

I know my good friend hegamboa diasagrees, but that is the way I feel.


I guess I missed this one too... But, in all fairness it was posted when I was out on vacation.

Yes, Hagee may have distorted views... but clearly they are not supported by the Bible. They are fallacies since one can't claim to have 'divine inspiration' and then proceed to deviate from GOD's Word. Anyway, I can't judge the state of his heart, since that is only something GOD should and can do; ergo, I may disagree with some of Hagee's concepts, but he may still be 'right' with GOD on a personal level.

As you already know, I also disagree with the notion that only one man (the Pope) can be given the priviledge of doctrinal infallacy -- on several grounds, in fact. But I won't needlessly 'bash' the doctrines of the Catholic creed based on the fact that I believe several Catholics are true followers of Christ, and this despite certain Biblical deviations on doctrines that emanate from the Vatican. And if I have learned one thing in discussions with my Catholic brothers, is that no good is gained by harping on our differences. Especially because they are trivial in light of a person's authentic subservience to GOD.

[ShackO]

lol.............. So then if hagee is not doing the lord's work...

Who's work is he doing????????? :devil

[Phenomanul]

lol.............. So then if hagee is not doing the lord's work...

Who's work is he doing????????? :devil


He is confused on certain things.... just like many people are. The only reason we know of him is because he is very eloquent and persuasive -- and as such he has built himself an 'empire'. So unless the constituency of his congregation were scripturally sound many of his interpretations would probably pass over their heads.

[ObiwanGinobili]

:stirpot: :stirpot: :stirpot: :stirpot: :stirpot:

sooooo. Question about the Pope....

If the bible says that God is not that far off from each one of us .... and the only way to him is thru his son Jesus Christ ...... then why do we need the intervention of a man, the pope or a priest, to reach him/ pray to him / recieve his blessings ???


:corn:

[ObiwanGinobili]

lol.............. So then if hagee is not doing the lord's work...

Who's work is he doing????????? :devil


well if A (a being that Hagee is NOT doing God's work) than B would be true.

B being that he is doing his own work, ie wolf in sheeps clothing.
which would of course lead straight into C which is the work of the Devil known or unknown.

[ShackO]

;)

[Extra Stout]

well if A (a being that Hagee is NOT doing God's work) than B would be true.

B being that he is doing his own work, ie wolf in sheeps clothing.
which would of course lead straight into C which is the work of the Devil known or unknown.
Many would say the same about the JW's.

[Phenomanul]

:stirpot: :stirpot: :stirpot: :stirpot: :stirpot:

sooooo. Question about the Pope....

If the bible says that God is not that far off from each one of us .... and the only way to him is thru his son Jesus Christ ...... then why do we need the intervention of a man, the pope or a priest, to reach him/ pray to him / recieve his blessings ???


:corn:


We don't.... that is why the moment immediately after JESUS died when the veil in the Jewish Temple was rent in two from top to bottom is very significant. This heavy veil, about a foot thick, separated the 'Holy of Holies' (representing GOD's presence) from the rest of the Jewish Temple. But when Christ died, and the veil no longer served this purpose the transcendence of that moment meant that from that moment forward everyone would have direct access to GOD, should they seek it.

A priest is no longer required as an intermediary between GOD and man. Today they exist simply as counselors, and spiritual guides but that's it... they are no different from any other man, and they too require redemption of their sins through Christ.

Also, the 'prayer of a righteous man' is powerful, and intercession for our loved ones is always helpful; but each and every one of us -- no matter how sinful -- has access to GOD through JESUS Christ. "Jesus answered, I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one cometh to the Father except through me." - John 14:6

[Guru of Nothing]

We don't.... that is why the moment immediately after JESUS died when the veil in the Jewish Temple was rent in two from top to bottom is very significant. This heavy veil, about a foot thick, separated the 'Holy of Holies' (representing GOD's presence) from the rest of the Jewish Temple. But when Christ died, and the veil no longer served this purpose the transcendence of that moment meant that from that moment forward everyone would have direct access to GOD, should they seek it.

Quack.

[Phenomanul]

Quack.

:wtf

[smeagol]

We don't.... that is why the moment immediately after JESUS died when the veil in the Jewish Temple was rent in two from top to bottom is very significant. This heavy veil, about a foot thick, separated the 'Holy of Holies' (representing GOD's presence) from the rest of the Jewish Temple. But when Christ died, and the veil no longer served this purpose the transcendence of that moment meant that from that moment forward everyone would have direct access to GOD, should they seek it.

A priest is no longer required as an intermediary between GOD and man. Today they exist simply as counselors, and spiritual guides but that's it... they are no different from any other man, and they too require redemption of their sins through Christ.

Also, the 'prayer of a righteous man' is powerful, and intercession for our loved ones is always helpful; but each and every one of us -- no matter how sinful -- has access to GOD through JESUS Christ. "Jesus answered, I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one cometh to the Father except through me." - John 14:6
:tu

Agreed