The New Christian Zionists?

Back in April I noted that Mark Tooley had convened a conference to discuss how the current tide of anti-Israel sentiment among young evangelicals could be countered. You can read my initial thoughts HERE

Tooley is aware that activism by certain professional agitators has been a problem. But he went on to say:

Compounding this activism is the fading of the old Religious Right, whose leaders, like the late Jerry Falwell, were outspokenly pro-Israel and claimed to speak for millions. A new generation of Evangelical leaders is more reluctant to wade into controversy. Some old Religious Right figures were believers in Dispensationalism, a 19th century movement asserting and stressing various End Times events, including the restoration of Israel, before Christ’s return.

Can Christian Zionism be defended in the 21st century? Theologically? Historically? Can it be defended in ways that are consistent with Jewish and Christian scriptures? Are its legal, moral and political out-workings compatible with the ideals of the biblical covenant?

Neither Providence nor the Bible are neutral between a people striving to survive against many others who hope for their elimination. Effectively explaining why requires both good political and theological judgment.

I suspected then that Tooley was giving the impression that dispensationalism had fumbled the job and that a more biblical approach had to be exercised. Enter the "New Christian Zionists." Following that conference, which included Darrel Bock and Craig Blaising, I made some further observations HERE

Despite incessant allusions to Hagee and the so-called popular "Left Behind" theology of LaHaye and Lindsey supposedly fumbling the cause of biblical Zionism - the issue does not lie there. Tooley, Bock, Blaising and anyone else who cares to wade into the murky waters of anti-Israel activism among some leading evangelicals will confront a wall of resistance against the more biblical approach.

I've been writing and researching columns on this topic for the Omega Letter for a number of years now. The likes of Dexter Van Zile, Jim Fletcher and Brian Shrauger (and others) have been writing about this long before I came along. They'll confirm this has little to do with dispensationalism or the pop-apocalyptic pretribulational rapture, as one opportunistic activist recently suggested. He may want to take a look at what some of the proponents of his rapture view have been doing over the years. Get a clue.

As an aside, I find it ironic that I discovered this individual's rapture view via an email exchange which mentioned Herb Peters. Peters thought he'd located the Antichrist and the timing of Daniel's 70th week (ENPI theory). Time proved him wrong. But among his avid supporters were leading prewrath proponents who were so attached to that theory that they were willing to re-interpret Scripture in an attempt to keep it alive after it failed.  

No, it has nothing to do with pop-apocalypticism. Israel hatred flows deep in the veins of some leading Christians who will use any excuse to run down Israel. This bizarre attitude includes ignoring the suffering of Christians in the Middle East and the suffering of Palestinians under Hamas and the Palestinian Authority. See also HERE

They hate Israel. It's that simple.

Further reading:

Declining United Church of Christ’s Israel divestment may not pack any punch

The ENPI theory

Recently, the Fulfilled Prophecy website moved away from the ENPI theory.

Kudos to them for taking an objective stance! However, unlike FP some haven’t let it go and are reviewing their understanding of the Bible in innovative ways in an effort to keep the ENP viable.

Changing how we understand Scripture for the sake of the ENP is like the tail wagging the dog. Midst means middle – the middle of the week has come and gone. Even if we take the 4th year of the seven as being the midst, none of the dynamics of the seals of Revelation are apparent. Theorizing that the seven-year covenant is different to Daniel’s 70th week is another attempt to keep the theory alive that has no biblical justification. In fact the ENP has failed to meet prophetic expectations.

I’ve also seen a few statements regarding pretribulationists made by these people. One is that pretribbers risk falling prey to the Mark of the beast because they will suddenly find themselves at the Abomination of Desolation period and won’t recognize the fact. Thus they may take the Mark of the Beast unawares.

Let me see now, there’s something about the subject of worshiping and a certain Mark somewhere…Rev 4:10; 9:20; 11:1; 22:8-9. And this looks fairly important…Rev 13:8-12.

Pretribbers have also been accused of not watching because they expect to be raptured away. I believe the ENP theory has already done the pre-trib prophetic circles. Everyone is watching Europe and the Middle East and just about everyone interested in End Times Prophecy knows about JS. It’s not exactly a secret.

Another one is that fear drives belief in a pre-trib rapture and pretribbers will fail to deal with the tribulation when it occurs because they are unprepared. Now that makes a whole lot of sense!

Possibly one of the most bizarre allegations I’ve read is that Tim LaHaye hijacked Marv Rosenthal’s rapture view using the Left Behind series. Apparently this was aided by the creation of the Pre-Trib Research Center. I suppose there couldn’t be any other explanation.

Partial quote:

“They also successfully stopped the spread of the pre wrath position. It also placed prophecy in the entertainment playground sector of religion. In your typical Christian Church Library prophetic FICTION has replaced the scholarly tomes of previous generations. Prophecy study was successfully dumbed (sic) down.”

First of all people who denigrate pretribulationism generally go after either Tim LaHaye or Hal Lindsey. This causes me to wonder if that is the extent of their research into pre-trib. Griping about LB fiction isn’t exactly an academic exercise. Secondly, “scholarly tomes of previous generations” would have to exclude the new pre-wrath view.

I don’t presume to judge Tim LaHaye’s motivations. The Research Center was inaugurated to defend both pretribulationism and premillennialism. Long before I was interested in the rapture topic, my passion was studying the debate between preterists and premillennialists. Interestingly, guys like preterist Gary Demar opined that the Research Center was set up to counter preterism.

Here’s a clue – yes it was. And the problem is…? There’s a Post-Trib Research Center, several preterist organizations and even Prewrath Rapture Dot Com - to name only one among many pre-wrath sites! There are even some well-regarded pre-wrath novels out there with probably more to come. And didn’t Van Kampen pen one as well?

Some time ago prewrather Ryan Habbena wrote a book called “The parable of the Fig Tree”. His association with pastor Bob Dewaay and pastor Eric Douma led to conversations about rapture timing. Douma leaned somewhat towards pre-wrath and Dewaay was a rapture timing agnostic.

Dewaay and Douma took up the challenge and researched. The result of that study is presented HERE and via a previous post. The Left Behind series was not on their list of theological notes and references.

There are a number of possible dynamics as to why pre-wrath hasn’t kicked off as well as some hoped. I’ve personally noticed a trend towards posttribulationism. My experience since studying this subject is that pretribulationism is commonly derided. To blame LaHaye’s fiction and pre-trib sabotage is myopic.