Sunday, December 30, 2007
John Hagee: Jesus Christ not the Messiah
Watch this commercial of John Hagee promoting his book "In Defense of Israel" in which he claims, among other things:
1. Jesus Christ denied by word and deed to claim to be the Messiah.
2. Jesus Christ did not come to earth to be the Messiah.
I've discussed this video with many discerning believers and they agree that this is completely heretical. View and judge for yourself.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Hi David. Hope you and your family had a wonderful Christmas and a Happy New Year.
I wanted to comment on the John Hagee controversy. I like Hagee, but think what he was trying to say was far too nuanced, at least that's how I'm interpreting it, although I could be wrong.
Here's what he said in italicized bold blue, which has turned so many against him, with my commentary below.
The Jewish people as a whole did not reject Jesus as Messiah.
That Jesus did not come to earth to be the Messiah.
That Jesus refused by word and deed to claim to be the Messiah.
So how can the Jews be blamed for rejecting what was never offered. .
Although his intentions may be noble, I think Hagee was trying too hard to absolve the Jewish people for their monstrous error in not acknowledging Christ as their savior when he came the first time.
What I'm quite sure Hagee was saying with his comments above is that if Christ had wanted the Jewish people to know, without any doubt, that he was their savior, don't any of us think he could of? Don't get me wrong. I'm not questioning Christ or God's instructions to Christ when he sent him to us, but if we disagree with the statements by Hagee, we also have to admit (which would be wrong) that Christ did not have the wherewithal to do enough to convince the Jewish people he was their savior, and we know that's not true.
I think God brought Christ into this world the first time "to conduct himself in a very specific way" that would require a certain amount of blind faith from those for whom he was sent as savior.
Christ could have easily come the first time and instead had the Jews witness miracles of such enormous splendor and magnitude so frequently that all would have believed he was their savior without hesitation, and remember, they were asking for more proof. However, I think it's clear that God wasn't going to make it that easy and never has. Think about it. What reward could God possibly justify for his flock if he first had to "Wow them" to have faith in the savior he sent? I just think Hagee hasn't spent enough time addressing this aspect of what he was trying to say
On a totally different subject, what do you think about the non-canonized books of the bible? I started reading the Book of Enoch (an important and highly thought of figure in the bible) and it seems to provide far more significance to the role of the Nephilim. Just curious if you're aware of anything in the bible that supports limiting God’s Word to what we know as the current books of the bible. I’m beginning to think there may have been a sinister plan (there are already many, don’t you agree?) long ago to minimize the significance of this almost sci-fi area of scripture. It’s hard to ignore many of the coincidences and ignoring this area of scripture makes it easy to dismiss those talking about UFOs, reptilian races (i.e. ties in why satan is described as a snake, etc.) and much more.
Have you looked in the subject of Precession? This Six Part Video discusses it. It sounds like it's narrated by James Earl Jones and so was probably on TV. It's not a Christian perspective, but definitely gives alot of background into what appears to support the idea of a grander scheme in the universe that is probably related to the role of the nephilim/fallen angels, etc.
David, when you get a chance,
read this.. It's a short, but excellent article about a prophesied war (and it's not Isaiah 17) that purportedly precedes the Ezekiel 38 & 39 war and appears to answer alot of other questions raised by Ezekiel 38 & 39 as well.
For example, if the war mentioned in this article that Israel wins, means that Israel conquers and acquires Saudi Arabia (and its oil), then that would explain the spoil Gog and his armies are coming to take, among other questions also seemingly answered by this article.
I think he is speaking with a jewish perspective in mind here, Jesus, when asked if he was the messiah did not come right out and say he way, according to what we see in the new testament, this however does not reflect in any way that he was in fact the messiah. How could we know this? the fulfillment of prophecy what Jesus did say when asked was what you have said is correct. It would be hard to form a bias thought on this matter without reading his book first to see where he was going with this thought.
Nathan,
I don't quite understand your comment. Jesus did actually, clearly, state that he was the Messiah:
Joh 4:25 The woman said to him, "I know that Messiah is coming" (the one called Christ); "whenever he comes, he will tell us everything."
Joh 4:26 Jesus said to her, "I, the one speaking to you, am he."
Now, how much more clear could he make it? When John Hagee says, "Jesus did not come to earth to be the Messiah," and "Jesus refused by word and deed to to claim to be the Messiah," he is completely wrong.
Also, Hagee apparently has no understanding of the term "Messiah". It's simply an English word, so we must look at the Greek word(s) for "Messiah".
"Messias" (Gr.) appears twice, and "Christos" (Gr.) appears hundreds of times in the New Testament. Both words mean "the anointed one". In the Old Testament, the equivalent Hebrew word is "mashiach," and it also means "the anointed one".
"Christ" was not Jesus' last name. It was a title. It literally meant "Jesus the anointed one." So, when the writers of the New Testament over and over called him Jesus Christ, they were calling him the equivalent of the "mashiach" or Messiah in English.
Dave
Hi Carlton,
In response to your first comment above, I disagree that Jesus didn't do enough miracles to convince the Jews he was the Messiah. First, read my comment in response to Nathan, above. That is my frame of reference for Jesus' title "Christ" in the NT.
I've done quite a bit of research into John Hagee on the Internet. I believe his intentions are clear. His loyalty is to Israel because it is profitable for him. If you don't believe me, do the research for yourself.
Dave
Carlton,
Regarding your second comment, I believe the Book of Enoch is a very valuable book and should be studied by the student of the Bible. The same goes for the Book of Jubilees and the Book of Jasher. I've studied all these books, and there are many more. Some of them were referred to and quoted in the Bible itself, so that validates them in my view.
The nephilim, the watchers, the divine council, and such topics are among my favorite mysterious topics in the Bible!
Dave
Post a Comment