Dispensational Hedging
By George C. Stewart

While the most radical dispensationalist will set specific dates for the Lord’s return, most want to show their "knowledge" of prophecy while at the same time hedging their bets. Typical of the latter is David Reagan.

In Reagan’s January-February (2007) issue of his Lamplighter he has an article entitled: "Could Jesus Return in 2007?" Reagan claims he is "ardently opposed to date-setting." So, he says, the article "does not represent an attempt to set a date for the Lord’s return. Rather, we are simply challenging our readers to think seriously about whether or not Jesus could possibly return this year" (p. 1). It seems to me that any student of Scripture would believe that Jesus "could possibly return this year." That has been the conviction of Bible-believing Christians for centuries. So what does Reagan offer that is new?

As with most other dispensationalists, Reagan speaks authoritatively about Christ’s return but vaguely about specifics. It is more of a rehash of what God has promised the Jews, rather than the hope for God’s true Israel—the Church.

In his editorial, introducing his article which I am critiquing, Reagan claims "that although we cannot know the date of the Rapture, we can know the season of the tribulation and the Second Coming because we have been given signs to watch" (p. 1).

The first few pages of Reagan’s article he addresses "Six reasons why all Christians should desire the soon return of Jesus." I would think all who are walking close to the Lord would love to see his return—today. The New Testament encourages this attitude. But this does not give any clue to when He will return! Following the Six Reasons" Reagan lists four reasons Christians are apathetic about the Lord’s return: Unbelief, Ignorance, Fear and Carnality. Again, there is nothing new here.

Once a person spends years in promoting "the soon return of the Lord" it is near impossible for them to admit the possibility that Jesus may have been right when He said no one knows (Matthew 24:36). I believe Reagan is in that crowd.

On page seven of Reagan’s article we find the most telling evidence of his attempt to remain a "prophet" while hedging on specifics. He says the answer to the question of whether Jesus will return in 2007 "depends upon the meaning of the word, ‘return.’" (Is that something like defining the meaning of "is"?) Reagan gives the accepted dispensational explanation that Christ’s return is in two stages: The Rapture and then the Return after seven years. He believes the rapture could occur at any moment—even in 2007—but "The Second Coming cannot occur until a number of prophecies are fulfilled." Here are the six prophecies he refers to.

For lack of time and space I will address only the first statement concerning Daniel 9:27. Dispensationalism sees Daniel 9-12 as a prophecy of national Israel’s suffering during the "great tribulation," and just before the Second Coming and "millennium." In this system God’s "prophetic clock" stopped after the sixty-ninth week of Daniel 9:24-27, and will not begin until the "tribulation" period of seven years. They see a "gap" betweeen Daniel 9:26 and 9:27. Consequently the "last days" spoken of in Daniel refers to a period of time yet future. Such a position does not square with Scripture.

In the last part of Daniel 9 God gives His answer to Daniel’s sincere and fervent prayer concerning the end of the seventy-year Babylonian captivity. God’s answer is that the Jewish people would have some very difficult times (e.g., Antiochus Epiphanes), and eventually their beloved Jerusalem would be destroyed, but God had a grander plan of restoration than Daniel could ever imagine—the forgiveness of sins (Daniel 9:24-27).

From this portion of Scripture dispensationalists enter into some of their most far-fetched speculations. And all without a shred of evidence from the word of God. It is from Daniel 9:24-27—this glorious promise of the Messiah—that they launch their theory which dictates every other aspect of their eschatology. This is their "postponement" theory. A theory derived not from Scripture, but from an empty conviction that God must eternally own Israel as His special people.

Since dispensationalists read a "gap" into Scripture between verses 26 and 27, they conclude that the seventieth week is a period of seven years between the "rapture" of the church and the return of Christ to establish a Jewish kingdom. Why do they believe such a gap exists between verses 26 and 27? Because "Israel has been set aside," and all the "promised blessings" to Israel have not been accomplished. These "reasons" for a gap distill down to one non-biblical assumption: physical Israel must have a future glory apart from the Gentiles.

If this erroneous assumption had no affect upon fundamental doctrines of Scripture, it would hardly be worth refuting. But that is far from the case. Because of this presupposition, dispensationalists such as Reagan insert a "gap" of thousands of years between Daniel 9:26 and 27, resulting in a denial that Christ has already fulfilled the promises of Daniel 9:24-27. This surely borders on blasphemy.

We will allow the New Testament to interpret Daniel 9:24. And if that be "spiritualizing," so be it. Within this seventy weeks the following is prophecied to be accomplished:

• Finish the transgression. Dispensatonalists consider this a "blessing." In the context of this portion of Daniel, as well as the New Testament, and history, this must refer to the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. Jesus clearly taught that God’s wrath upon Israel fits this description. He said to the Scribes and Pharisees, "fill up then the measure of the guilt of your fathers" (Matthew 23:32). Then He said that "all these things shall come upon this generation" (Matthew 23:36). In lamenting over Jerusalem, He said, "Behold, your house is being left to you desolate" (Matthew 23:38)! In Matthew 24 Jesus tells the apostles that the temple was to be destroyed and "not one stone here shall be left upon another, which will not be torn down" (v.2). He also said this event would take place in their generation (Matthew 24:34).

• Make an end of sin. The whole gospel supports the truth that Christ has already accomplished this. Hebrews 9:28 says Christ has "been offered once to bear the sins of many." And Hebrews 10:12 says, "He, having offered one sacrifice for sins for all time, sat down at the right hand of God." How dispensationalists expect this to be accomplished in the future is unclear.

• Make atonement for iniquity. Colossians 1:13-14 says that through "His beloved Son". . . "we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins." And Romans 5:10-11 reads:

For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life. And not only this, but we also exult in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation (atonement, KJV). Must Christ be sacrificed again for the Jews to be saved? God Forbid!

• Bring in everlasting righteousness. Dispensationalists believe that this can only refer to the millenniel kingdom promised Israel. But Romans 3:21 says, "But now apart from the Law the righteousness of God has been manifested, being witness (foretold) by the Law and the Prophets." And Romans 14:17; "for the kingdom of God is not eating and drinking, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Spirit." Those who have obeyed the gospel enjoy these blessings now.

• Seal up vision and prophecy. The writer to the Hebrews says this is an accomplished fact. For "God, after He spoke long ago to the fathers in the prophets in many portions and in many ways, in these last days has spoken to us in His Son" (Hebrews 1:1-2).

• Anoint the most holy. Although the NASB says "holy place," the word "place" is not in the original. This could be a reference to the baptism of Jesus as mentioned earlier. For "after being baptized, Jesus went up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened, and he saw the Spirit of God descending as a dove, and coming upon Him" (Matthew 3:16). Peter declared, "Thou art the Christ" (annointed one, Matthew 16:16).

The New Testament witness is that only Christ could accomplish the prophecy of Daniel 9:24—and that He has already done it. Therefore, the events of Daniel 9:24-27 are historical: the death, resurrection and enthronement of Messiah, and the destruction of Jerusalem in AD 70. There is no gap, no postponement, no church as "parenthesis." Yet, it seems that dispensationalists are blind to this glorious truth. Dwight Pentecost (dispensationalist) says the six events of Daniel 9:24 are related to Messiah’s death and reign. Even that the "first three have special reference to the sacrifice of the Messiah." But, he says, this sacrifice "anticipated the removal of sin from the nation." In other words, in Pentecost’s mind, the blessing of forgiveness of sin through the death of Christ was not intended for Gentiles. This contradicts the New Testament, for "the Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand to Abraham, saying, ‘All the nations shall be blessed in you’" (Galatians 3:8). This also involves the dispensationalists in an internal contradiction. For if Daniel 9:24 anticipated the death of Christ, and the death of Christ was the result of the Jewish rejection of their king, how can they say the Old Testament did not foresee the Church?

Dispensationalists, like Reagan, say that the last three events prophesied in Daniel 9:24 have to do with Christ’s future reign over Israel. If we correctly understand that only Christ can fulfill the promises of Daniel 9:24, how could one not see that He has already brought about all these things?

There is no physical temple promised in the New Testament. Rather the church is already the temple of God. The first coming of Christ marked the end of God’s special relationship with Old Testament Israel. God has a New Covenant with those in the body of Christ. God dwells personally with each individual Christian. This is a promise to both Jews and Gentiles (Acts 2:38-39). This individual indwelling is a present reality: "Or do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit who is in you" (1 Corinthians 6:19)? Paul says that this presence of God is also with the whole body of believers: "Do you not know that you are a temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwells in you" (1 Corinthians 3:16)?

Consequently, when the physical temple in Jerusalem was destroyed the last vestige of the old system was removed. God’s special presence is no longer confined to a building. Instead, Christians "as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 2:5). No Christian should ever consider that a physical Jewish temple is in God’s future plans.

Although Reagan admits that "The Bible tells us over and over that no one can know the date of the lord’s return" he insists that "These warnings must apply to the Rapture and not the Second Coming." Why is that so? Because, he says, "the date of the Second Coming can be calculated precisely once the Great Tribulation begins." Then how can Reagan know the return of Christ is near? Because, as he sees it, "The current signs of the times point to the beginning of the Great Tribulation and the Second Coming." Therefore, Reagan concludes, "2007 could very well be the year of the Rapture, but not the year of the Second Coming."

These "signs of the times" as evidence of Christ’s soon return have been a theme of "prophets" for many years. But the "signs" are applied to different times. For centuries "prophets" have used such things as wars, famines, earthquakes and immorality (Matthew 24) as "signs" of our Lord’s soon return. But whether used during the early days of the Protestant Reformation, or near the turn of centuries, they have all been wrong!

When the "prophets" do set dates for Christ’s return they are "red-faced" for a while before resuming their "prophecies." To avoid this embarrassment "wiser" "prophets"—such as David Reagan—preach authoritatively about "signs of the times" but hedge on dates. While it prolongs their careers, this hedging is no less dangerous to the faith of their followers or the credibility of the church in the world.