The Falling Away

[Ekklesian]

The "falling away" of which the Hebrew Christians were warned (Heb. 6:6), was a return to Judaism and the Old Testament manner of worship. They crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, meaning they agree with the judgment of the Jews.

Dispensationalism basically says that the Jewish Messiah has not come. That He is coming for the Jews sometime in the future to set up Jewish reign from the Jewish temple for a thousand years. The Jews look for the same thing, though they think it will be forever.

The latest figures I've seen are that 80% of evangelicals are Zionists, and subscribe to some form of the doctrine above.

Could the Christian giddiness over the Jews and Israel™, and the salivating over the prospect of a third temple be paving the way for the apostacy Paul spoke of in 2 Thessalonians 2:3?

B

Thread 'Israel's High Priest & Red Heifer READY for Daniel Third Temple PROPHECY!'

Nov 17, 2025

This is crazy, Israel has trained and appointed a new high Priest for the first time in 2000 years and have selected a Red Heifer, its all ready and waiting for the altar and the third temple of Daniel’s prohecy to be rebuilt..check it out

• bigoldnick
• Replies: 9
• Forum: Current General News Topics

B

Thread 'Mount of Olives Jerusalem cracks'

Nov 13, 2025

The Coming Day of the Lord​

Zec 14:1 Behold, the day of the LORD cometh, and thy spoil shall be divided in the midst of thee.

Zec 14:2 For I will gather all nations against Jerusalem to battle; and the city shall be taken, and the houses rifled, and the women ravished; and half of the city shall go forth into captivity, and the residue of the people shall not be cut off from the city.

Zec 14:3 Then shall the LORD go forth, and fight against those nations, as when he fought in the day of battle.

Zec 14:4 And his feet shall stand in that day upon the...

• biscuit1953
• Replies: 27
• Forum: The Fighting Forum

 

[BrianH]

Dispensationalism basically says that the Jewish Messiah has not come.

Some dispensationalists have suggested that we should set aside the Epistle to the Hebrews for the time being, claiming it only pertains to Jews during Christ's millennial reign on earth.

 

[Ransom]

Some dispensationalists have suggested that we should set aside the Epistle to the Hebrews for the time being, claiming it only pertains to Jews during Christ's millennial reign on earth.

Some Dispensationalist theologians believe that the covenant Jesus inaugurated at the Last Supper was not the New Covenant of Jeremiah 31:31, which is for national Israel and to be fulfilled in the millennium, but a "better covenant" which is spiritual and for the Church, based, presumably, on the phrasing of Hebrews 7:22 or 8:6. I assume one belief is based on the other.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

Dispensationalism basically says that the Jewish Messiah has not come.

This is where I must push back! I am no dispensationalist but what credible dispensationalist can you point to that actually believes this?

Pretty much all I know of (including myself back when I was a Dispy) see Christ's coming as the coming of Messiah of whom the Jews largely rejected.

I believe that most Dispies would agree (along with most Covenant folk) with the "Already - Not Yet" paradox concerning the kingdom This was Ryrie's position.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

Some dispensationalists have suggested that we should set aside the Epistle to the Hebrews for the time being, claiming it only pertains to Jews during Christ's millennial reign on earth.

Yes, you do have some real whack-a-do "Dice it, Slice it" dispies (especially the dry-erase marker sniffers) out there who insist that many of the New Testament books are not suitable for formulating doctrine for the "Church age." I was exposed to a good bit of this during my early IFB days as an impressionable young "Squid" who was well indoctrinated by his Ruckmanite Sunday School teacher. They were speaking mainly that we needed to stick mainly with the Pauline Epistles for doctrinal matters because Acts 2:38 taught "Baptismal Regeneration" which was not for the Church, that James taught a "Works Salvation" which was "tribulation context," and that Hebrews taught that you could "Lose your salvation" (Old Testament, Tribulation, and Millennium). Much of this, I learned from the Second-Generation Ruckmanite "Back-Room Bible Institute" back in 1989. It is the prettiest diploma I have on my wall though!

Life sure got simpler once I actually learned some good theology. I sleep better too!

 

[illinoisguy]

Dispensationalism basically says that the Jewish Messiah has not come.

I am no dispensationalist but what credible dispensationalist can you point to that actually believes this?

John Hagee. Most dispensationalists would not come right out and admit that they believe the Jewish Messiah has not come. But John Hagee did. He took dispensationalism to its logical conclusion - since dispies mistakenly believe that the Messiah was to be a political deliverer and earthly king, and since Jesus did not fulfill that role, therefore Hagee concludes that Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah.

This review quotes Hagee's repudiation of the Messiahship of Jesus from Hagee's book "In Defense of Israel:"

"Hagee says, 'Jesus refused by word and deed to claim to be the Messiah.' Hagee says that he will 'prove that Jesus did not come to earth to be the Messiah.' Hagee writes; 'If God intended for Jesus to be the Messiah of Israel, why didn’t he authorize Jesus to use supernatural signs to prove he was God’s Messiah, just as Moses had done?' Hagee says that Jesus refused to produce a sign for Herod. . . . because it was not the Father’s will, nor his, to be Messiah.' Hagee asks, 'how can the Jews be blamed for rejecting what was never offered?' Hagee interprets this to suggest that, 'They wanted him to be their Messiah, but he flatly refused' (p. 141)."

IN DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL – a response to John Hagee’s "In Defense of Israel"

www.messianicgoodnews.org

The same review does a good job of refuting Hagee's heretical teaching:

"The dispensational method of interpretation propagated by Hagee, which has insidiously spread through the church, undermines the good news of what Christ accomplished through the cross, essentially vindicating the unbelief of the Jews by suggesting that God’s purpose for Israel has been put on hold while he is accomplishing the salvation of the Gentiles. It sees the church as merely a parenthesis in God’s dealings with Israel and maintains that God does have another purpose for Israel that he did not fulfil through the historical coming of the Messiah (which contradicts his stated purpose in Ephesians of making one new man out of the two). . . .

"Hagee has unwittingly followed the way of Judas, betraying Jesus 'with a kiss,' professing to serve him while at the same time betraying him before the Jews who reject him. . . . By his own words Hagee declares that his intention is to 'shake Christian theology.' He has indeed launched an attack against the very cornerstone of the Christian faith – i.e. that Jesus is the Messiah. It is upon the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah that he founded his Church. . . .

"The apostle John wrote, Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a man [Hagee] is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also (1 John 2:22-23)."

 

[Ransom]

This is where I must push back! I am no dispensationalist but what credible dispensationalist can you point to that actually believes this?

Apart from the aforementioned John Hagee, I don't know that any mainstream Dispensationalist would come out and say this. But it's the logical implication of the Dispensationalist belief that the Temple must be rebuilt so that the sacrifices may be resumed and they will carry on in the Millennium.

Of course, if the Messiah has indeed come, then there is no need of a third Temple nor the resumption of sacrifices. The Temple rituals are useless, since Christ's sacrifice alone can atone for sin; and Jesus Christ himself is the new and greater temple (Matt. 12:6; Heb. 9:11; Rev. 21:22). They will argue that the sacrifices are re-established as a memorial, but a) Jesus himself established the Lord's Supper as his proper memorial; and b) Jesus rules, bodily, on the throne of David during the millennium, right? The sacrifices were meant as a foreshadowing; the reality is right there.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

John Hagee. Most dispensationalists would not come right out and admit that they believe the Jewish Messiah has not come. But John Hagee did. He took dispensationalism to its logical conclusion - since dispies mistakenly believe that the Messiah was to be a political deliverer and earthly king, and since Jesus did not fulfill that role, therefore Hagee concludes that Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah.

This review quotes Hagee's repudiation of the Messiahship of Jesus from Hagee's book "In Defense of Israel:"

"Hagee says, 'Jesus refused by word and deed to claim to be the Messiah.' Hagee says that he will 'prove that Jesus did not come to earth to be the Messiah.' Hagee writes; 'If God intended for Jesus to be the Messiah of Israel, why didn’t he authorize Jesus to use supernatural signs to prove he was God’s Messiah, just as Moses had done?' Hagee says that Jesus refused to produce a sign for Herod. . . . because it was not the Father’s will, nor his, to be Messiah.' Hagee asks, 'how can the Jews be blamed for rejecting what was never offered?' Hagee interprets this to suggest that, 'They wanted him to be their Messiah, but he flatly refused' (p. 141)."

IN DEFENCE OF THE GOSPEL – a response to John Hagee’s "In Defense of Israel"

www.messianicgoodnews.org

The same review does a good job of refuting Hagee's heretical teaching:

"The dispensational method of interpretation propagated by Hagee, which has insidiously spread through the church, undermines the good news of what Christ accomplished through the cross, essentially vindicating the unbelief of the Jews by suggesting that God’s purpose for Israel has been put on hold while he is accomplishing the salvation of the Gentiles. It sees the church as merely a parenthesis in God’s dealings with Israel and maintains that God does have another purpose for Israel that he did not fulfil through the historical coming of the Messiah (which contradicts his stated purpose in Ephesians of making one new man out of the two). . . .

"Hagee has unwittingly followed the way of Judas, betraying Jesus 'with a kiss,' professing to serve him while at the same time betraying him before the Jews who reject him. . . . By his own words Hagee declares that his intention is to 'shake Christian theology.' He has indeed launched an attack against the very cornerstone of the Christian faith – i.e. that Jesus is the Messiah. It is upon the revelation that Jesus is the Messiah that he founded his Church. . . .

"The apostle John wrote, Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Messiah. Such a man [Hagee] is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son. No one who denies the Son has the Father; whoever acknowledges the Son has the Father also (1 John 2:22-23)."

Thank you for the clarification. Hagee certainly is a loon but I was thinking of mainstream Dispies who would also consider Hagee as being a few bricks short of a full load!

As Ransom stated, there are some Dispies who believe the Temple will be in operation during the millennium as a "Memorial" rather than an actual sacrifice for atonement. I have heard this. There are also those who believe that the salvation of "Millennium Saints" will be purely by "Works" as they must follow the law and bring a sacrifice for a burnt offering any time they sin so I guess they believe that Jesus will be a "Catlick" Messiah during his millennial reign? It was such nuttiness as this that caused me to eventually walk away completely from dispen-sensation-al theology! I would say that most today (and probably most here) are likely either revised or progressive dispensationalists and probably know little of the actual teachings of dispensationalism aside from whatching all of the "Left Behind" movies.