Hagee's Serious Error

This article is followed by responses from authorities within Messianic Judaism:

Video Clip

Although Evangelical minister John Hagee has a "heart for Israel", his theology has often been nothing less than confusing on the issue of the Jewish people and their relationship with Yeshua, the Messiah. Not long ago a debate raged when Pastor Hagee made statements indicating that Jewish people do not need a relationship with Yeshua in order to find reconciliation with G-d. He later retracted these statements, but the controversy over his remarks has never quite died down.

More recently, Pastor Hagee has caused an even greater controversy by stating that he no longer believes that Yeshua is the Messiah at all.

In his latest book "In Defense of Israel" Pastor Hagee announces to all of Christendom that Yeshua is not the Messiah.

In "Defense" Hagee said "It has been my privilege to join Congregation Rodfei Sholom in San Antonio for the celebration of Passover with Rabbi Aryeh Scheinberg. Four cups of wine are served at the Passover with a meal that symbolized the tears and suffering of the Hebrew slaves in Egypt.

The first cup is the cup of Remembrance.

The second cup is the cup of Redemption.

The third cup is the cup of Salvation.

The fourth cup is the cup of Messiah.

When Jesus and his disciples came to the final cup during their last celebration of the Passover, Jesus refused to drink the Messiah’s cup. He told his disciples, "Take this [Messiah’s cup] and divide it among yourselves; for I say to you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the kingdom of God comes" (Luke 22:17-18).

In refusing to drink the cup, Jesus rejected to the last detail the role of Messiah in word or deed. The Jews did not reject Jesus as Messiah; it was Jesus who rejected the Jewish desire for him to be their Messiah. (144, 145)"

It is also disturbing is that Pastor Hagee's web site and his new book are in conflict as to whether or not Yeshua is the Messiah.

"Jesus prophesied that before His return there would be many false messiahs and false christs (Matt. 24:23). Think about it. Anyone can stand up and say, "I am Jesus." See paragraph 4 under the topic "Bible Prophecy and the Rapture.

Pastor Hagee, what are you talking about?

The first major problem with Hagee's new revelation that Jesus us NOT the Messiah based on the meaning of the symbols of the seder is that there is no consensus as to the meaning of the four cups.

In response to a question about the meaning of the four cups, the Rabbi of said: "The Torah uses four expressions to describe our redemption from Egypt: G-d said to the Jews in Egypt (Exodus 6:6-8):

"I will take you out from under Egypt's burdens - Vehotzeiti"

"And I will save you from their servitude - Vehitzalti"

"And I will redeem you - Vega'alti"

"And I will take you as My nation - Velakachti"

Orthodox Rabbi Eli Teitelbaum , Executive Director of explains the meaning of the four cups this way;

"Over the first cup of wine we thank Hashem for having removed us from the burden of slavery. No more hard and tortuous work. This was Hashem’s first promise to us: V’hotzeisi eschem mi’tachas sivlos Mitzrayim- refers to the hard and tortuous work from which we were freed.

Over the second cup of wine we thank Hashem for releasing us from the state of servitude: "V’hitzalti eschem mei’avodosom"

The third cup we drink in thanks of our freedom, and that’s "V’goalti eschem "

Over the fourth cup we thank Hashem for taking us as His very own nation. That's for: "v’lochachti li l’om" Matan Torah is compared to marriage, as it says: "byom simchas libi, zu mattan Torah."

It is the "fifth" cup that the vast majority of Rabbinic scholars associate with things "messianic".

Another serious problem with Hagee's logic is that the tradition of the four cups did not exist during the days of Yeshua but were devised later during the rabbinic period after the destruction of the 2nd Temple.

In the peer review article "The Origins of the Seder and Haggadah" , by Joshua Kulp

Kulp explained:

"Emerging methods in the study of rabbinic literature now enable greater precision in dating the individual components of the Passover seder and haggadah. These approaches, both textual and socio-historical, have led to a near consensus among scholars that the Passover seder as described in rabbinic literature did not yet exist during the Second Temple period. Hence, cautious scholars no longer seek to find direct parallels between the last supper as described in the Gospels and the rabbinic seder. Rather, scholarly attention has focused on varying attempts of Jewish parties, notably rabbis and Christians, to provide religious meaning and sanctity to the Passover celebration after the death of Jesus and the destruction of the Temple. Three main forces stimulated the rabbis to develop innovative seder ritual and to generate new, relevant exegeses to the biblical Passover texts: (1) the twin calamities of the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple and the Bar-Kokhba revolt; (2) competition with emerging Christian groups; (3) assimilation of Greco-Roman customs and manners. These forces were, of course, significant contributors to the rise of a much larger array of rabbinic institutions, ideas and texts. Thus surveying scholarship on the seder reviews scholarship on the emergence of rabbinic Judaism." 1

Then there is the question of whether or not Yeshua ever got to eat that longed for last Pesach seder with his disciples. The B'rit Chadasha is very clear (see Yochanan/John 13: 26-30 that when Judas left the table, the rest of the disciples thought he had gone out to purchase items needed for the feast (Pesach). There is also the problem of the meaning of the Greek word used for "bread" during that last meal, it seems that the bread eaten that night was "leavened" bread, not "unleavened" as would be required for the meal to have been a seder. For more information read the lengthy article by .

Mr. Reinhold did an extremely thorough study that demonstrates that the B'rit Chadasha does not portray the last supper as a Pesach seder.

As a Jewish believer, I picked up on that during my first reading of the Gospels. It amazes me that John Hagee has been so easily swayed, but then again, he seems to be easily blown from theological pilar to post.

For further reading see the lengthy article The Four Cups of the Seder by Rav Doniel Schreiber of

Rav Schreiber draws his work from the annals of the sages, citing Rashi, Rambam, Gritz and R. Yitzchak Zev Halevi Soloveitchik, none of whom actually agreed on every aspect of the cup ritual, including what the meaning behind it really is.

Perhaps Pastor Hagee's ministry will once again recover, but you have to wonder just how many believers will ever take him seriously again after this, his most recent faux paux.

Messianic Jewish Authorities Respond

Messianic Jews Respond to John Hagee

On November 28, 2007, the Executive Committee of the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations issued the following statement concerning certain doctrinal positions espoused in the recently published book, In Defense of Israel, by Pastor John Hagee:

As Messianic Jews we appreciate the support for Israel and the Jewish community that many Christians have shown in recent years. This remarkable change in Jewish-Christian relations corrects centuries of Christian anti-Semitism and promises to bear much fruit in the coming years. In particular, we recognize the important work that Pastor John Hagee has accomplished in rallying thousands of Christians to this cause. At the same time, we must note serious concerns about some of Pastor Hagee's doctrinal positions, particularly as expressed in his recent book, In Defense of Israel. These teachings contradict biblical doctrine, undermine the testimony of Jewish followers of Jesus, and weaken the cause of Christian supporters of the Jewish people.

Hagee argues that Jesus is not the Messiah of the Jews, but rather the Savior of the world. The premise that Jesus is not Messiah not only ignores numerous passages in the New Testament, but also undermines the very claim that Jesus is Savior. The New Testament opens with the words, "An account of the genealogy of Jesus the Messiah, the son of David, the son of Abraham" (Matthew 1:1, NRSV). (John 1:41 and 4:25 state that the words Messiah and Christ are equivalent, respectively the Hebrew and Greek terms for "anointed one.") If Messiah, son of David, is not Israel's king, then whose king is he? Matthew connects the Messiahship of Jesus to his descent from Israel's greatest king, David, and the father of the Jewish people, Abraham. At the feast of Shavuot (Pentecost) Peter proclaimed to "Jews from every nation," "Therefore let the entire house of Israel know with certainty that God has made him both Lord and Messiah . . ." (Acts 2:5, 36). As a result, thousands of Jewish people acknowledged Jesus as Messiah that day. By the end of the 1st century there were multiple thousands of Jews who acknowledged Jesus as Messiah. Were they wrong?

Paul speaks of the Jews who accepted Jesus in his own day as a remnant that served as a reminder and anticipation of God's unchanging purposes for all Israel (Romans 11:1-6, 16). How about today? There are hundreds of Messianic Jewish congregations around the world, comprising thousands of Jews who acknowledge Jesus as Messiah. We represent Paul's great statement regarding the return of the Jewish people to the Messiah: "What will their acceptance be but life from the dead?" Yet, Hagee ignores these realities and the foundational Biblical truths they reflect.

Hagee's book also weakens the cause of Christian Zionism to which he has devoted so much of his life's work. If his theology is so clearly aberrant on the Messiahship of Jesus, why should thinking Christians accept anything he says in support of the Jewish state? But the extreme interpretations that he advocates are not necessary to build the case for support for Israel and the Jewish people. We affirm that Christians can proclaim faith in Jesus as Messiah and also support for Israel without diminishing either.

To teach that Jesus did not come as the Messiah for the Jews is ultimately anti-Jewish. Jesus becomes the savior of the world, but with no particular relationship to the Jewish people. If Jews want to respond to him as savior they have to leave Israel and its messianic hope and become part of something universal. In contrast, when we declare Jesus to be the Messiah of Israel, we do not invalidate Israel or the Jewish people. Yes, Jews need to respond to Jesus, as do all people, yet in this response they discover that he is distinctly Jewish, distinctly relevant to them, and very much part of the Jewish story.

Michael Brown Responds to Hagee's New Teaching

IS THERE SERIOUS ERROR IN THE NEW BOOK, IN DEFENSE OF ISRAEL?

By Dr. Michael Brown

Pastor John Hagee’s new book, In Defense of Israel: The Bible’s Mandate for Supporting the Jewish State (Lake Mary, Florida: Front Line, 2007), was publicized by announcements stating that the book would “shake Christian theology.” The following positions are explicitly laid out in the book:

The Jewish people, as a whole, did not reject Jesus as Messiah.

Jesus did not come to earth to be the Messiah.

Jesus refused by word and deed to be the Messiah.

The Jews cannot be blamed for not accepting what was never offered.

Statements like this must be evaluated in light of 1 John 2:22: “Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ [i.e., Messiah]. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son.” As commentator Stephen S. Smalley explained, “The true believer is the one who accepts the Christhood of Jesus, whereas those who deny his messianic identity declare themselves to be on the side of the antichrist” (Word Biblical Commentary).

What could possibly be the motivation for teaching such error? First, In Defense of Israel desires to dispel once and for all the notion that all Jews are Christ-killers, a terrible lie that has fueled anti-Semitism in the Church for more than 1,500 years. Second, the book wants to refute the false teaching of replacement theology, explaining that, “Replacement theologians have said that ‘the covenant with Israel was broken because she would not accept Jesus Christ whom God sent.’” (See p. 132 of In Defense of Israel.) Tragically, in the attempt to fight against these serious errors, a more serious error has now been introduced. Yet some believers – and even leaders! – are buying into this error hook, line, and sinker, and some have begun to teach and preach it as well.

Since the publication of the book, Pastor Hagee issued some clarifying remarks, but the clarifications only complicate the issues and fail to renounce and remove the error.

Here are three fundamental statements that all believers should be able to affirm without hesitation:

1) Jesus came to be the Messiah. This is the fundamental message of the New Testament, which is why we call him “Christ” (meaning, “Messiah”). And it is a fundamental message of the Scriptures that the Messiah had to suffer and die if he was one day to rule and reign (see, e.g., Luke 24:25-27, 44-47), a biblical truth that most of the Jewish people of Yeshua’s day missed, a biblical truth that most Jews through the ages have continued to miss, and a biblical truth that In Defense of Israel has now fed into as well.

In the clarifying statements that have been made since the publication of his book, it was explained that Jesus came to be the suffering Messiah but not the reigning Messiah – something, of course, that we all knew, and something that would hardly “shake Christian theology” – but these statements have simply introduced another nuance to the error, since nowhere in the New Testament is such a distinction made.

In other words, God did not say to Israel, “It’s fine that you rejected Jesus as Messiah because he did not come in the political way you expected. He had to die in order to be the Savior of the world, so you are not guilty.” There is not a hint of such a message in the Scriptures, which simply proclaim him as the Messiah, period.

That’s why Jesus explicitly identified himself as the Messiah in the Gospels (see, e.g., Matt 16:16-17; Mark 14:61-62; Luke 7:20-23; John 4:25-26; 5:39, 45-47; 10:24-25) – not as the suffering Messiah, whom his people were supposed to reject so that he could die, as opposed to the reigning Messiah, whom they would one day receive, but simply as the Messiah – and that’s why the Gospel authors frequently announced him as the Messiah (in Greek, the Christ; see, e.g., Luke 2:11, 26; John 1:41; 3:28; 11:27; 20:31). And that’s why the apostles proclaimed him as the Messiah in Acts (see, e.g., Acts 2:31, 36; 3:18, 20; 4:26; 5:42; 8:5; 9:22; 17:2-3; 18:5, 28; 26:23).

I would encourage you to look up every reference cited here. It is all quite simple, forthright, and easy to understand, and nowhere is any distinction made between the suffering and reigning Messiah. To repeat: Jesus is proclaimed as the Messiah of Israel, period, and because he is the Messiah of Israel, he is the Savior of the world.

2) The Jewish people rejected their Messiah. Although all Jews are not Christ-killers (God forbid!), and although the entire Jewish nation did not play a role in the crucifixion of Jesus, God held the Jewish people in Jesus’ day responsible for his death and, more significantly, he held them responsible for rejecting Jesus the Messiah after his resurrection. The New Testament witness is explicit and consistent on this.

That’s why the apostles preached to “the people of Israel” that they were guilty of rejecting the Messiah (Acts 2:22-23, 36; 3:13-15, 17, 19; 4:10-11; 5:30; 7:52; 13:27-28; see also John 1:12), and that’s why Paul spoke of Israel’s hardening, breaking off, stumbling, transgression, and rejection (see Rom 9:31; 10:3; 11:7, 11-12, 15, 20 – although with the full expectation of Israel’s future redemption; see Rom 11:11-15, 25-26). Again, I encourage you to take a moment to look up these passages. They are striking in their force and consistency.

Because of this rejection, severe judgment came on the Jewish people in the first century, as prophesied by Yeshua with tears (see Luke 19:41-44; see also Matt 23:29-37) and as taught in his parables (see, e.g., Matt 21:33-46; 22:1-14).

As painful as this witness is, it cannot be rewritten, nor can anyone lessen Israel’s guilt because it was God’s will that Jesus died on the cross. To the contrary, just as it was God’s will that Joseph be sold into Egyptian slavery and yet at the same time his brothers were guilty of sinning against him (Gen 44:16-45:5; 50:14-20), so also it was God’s will that Yeshua die for our sins while at the same time the Jewish people, along with Herod and Pilate and the Romans, were guilty of having him crucified (see Acts 2:22-24; 4:27-28).

It is scripturally impossible to claim that “the Jews cannot be blamed for not accepting what was never offered.” A glorious offer was made and refused, and that’s why Paul’s heart was broken (see Rom 9:1-5).

3) Jesus remains the Jewish Messiah, and there is no salvation for the Jewish people outside of faith in him. Although Pastor Hagee has consistently stated that he does not teach “dual covenant” theology, referring to the false concept that Jews can be saved outside of faith in Jesus, his new teaching certainly aids and abets that error. After all, if “The Jews Did Not Reject Jesus as Messiah” (as stated in bold print in his book), and if “Jesus refused by word and deed to be the Messiah” (be it the “reigning Messiah” or not), then, not only can it be said that “the Jews [in Jesus’ day] cannot be blamed for not accepting what was never offered” but that the Jews in any day cannot be blamed for not accepting Yeshua.

This again is a fundamental denial of the Word of God, and although In Defense of Israel claims that the “message of the gospel was from Israel, not to Israel,” Jesus, Peter, and Paul declared that the message of the gospel was to Israel first, and then from Israel to the nations (see Luke 24:47; Acts 1:8; 3:26; 13:32-39; Rom 1:16; in Paul’s words to the Jewish leaders in Rome, it was “for the sake of the hope of Israel” that he was bound in chains; Acts 28:20).

To be sure, there are a number of other errors found in the critical section of In Defense of Israel (including the myth that there was a so-called cup of the Messiah, the alleged fourth cup of the Passover meal that Yeshua supposedly refused to drink), but this is not the place to address those concerns, and to focus on the smaller problems would detract from the larger picture.

If you are not currently on our e-list, I would encourage you to sign up today. And let’s continue to make the truth known: Yeshua is the Messiah of Israel, the King of the Jews, the Savior of the World!

In Him,

Michael L. Brown, Ph.D.

President, ICN Ministries and FIRE School of Ministry

Director, Coalition of Conscience

Host, Think It Thru TV

ONLINE EXTRA: Hagee answers questions from the Express-News

Web Posted: 12/12/2007 06:35 PM CST

Pastor John Hagee, author of "In Defense of Israel," agreed to respond to questions only in writing for this story. Here are the written questions posed by Express-News reporter Abe Levy and Hagee's responses:

Question: What revisions to the book are planned and why?

The Rev. John Hagee: Strang Publications requested that I expand and clarify Chapter 10 for people who misunderstood the concept that Jesus Christ came the first time as the Suffering Servant predestined from the foundations of the earth to be crucified and will come the second time as the Reigning Messiah who will be King of Kings.

The Bible is very clear about the difference between the two appearances of Christ on Earth and their purpose. This distinction is central to my analysis in Chapter 10, and in the rewrite I intend to make my point as simple as possible by using the words "Suffering Messiah" and "Reigning Messiah" every single time I refer to Messiah. This will remove any hindrance to complete understanding for those reading the book. Many are commenting on the text of the book without reading the book.

Q: Does your book have heretical teachings made in error because you were wanting to counter replacement theologians and other Christians who believe Jews rejected Jesus as a basis to be antisemitic?

Hagee: There is absolutely nothing in this book that even slightly approaches scriptural error. Replacement Theologians will deeply resent In Defense of Israel because Replacement Theology teaches that God broke His covenant with the Jewish people and replaced them with the Church of Jesus Christ. The Bible simply does not teach Replacement Theology.

The feelings of Replacement Theologians are expressed in such books as To Whom Is God Betrothed? which states, "That if Christians will quit supporting Israel and will economically boycott the Christ rejecting Jews, they will accept Jesus Christ." This Anti-Semitic logic defies and ignores both history and the Bible.

The Crusaders economically attacked the Jews and robbed them of their last dime in the name of God. The Jews did not convert to Christianity. The leaders of the Spanish Inquisition robbed the Jews of their wealth while the Roman Church and State split the plunder. The Jews did not convert.

Adolf Hitler brought economic ruin to the Jews by forbidding them to have jobs, destroying their places of business in the infamous Kristallnacht, and then fining them billions of marks to repair the damage his Nazi hoodlums inflicted. Six million Jews were systematically slaughtered as they walked into the gas chamber reciting the Shema prayer. They did not convert to Christianity.

Christian theology teaches that when Jesus Christ returns to earth the Jewish people will see Him and accept Him as described in Zechariah 12:10.

Until then, Christians are commanded scripturally to bless the Jewish people (Genesis 12:3), to pray for the peace of Jerusalem (Psalms 122:6), to speak out in defense of the Jewish people (Isaiah 62:1) and to financially give aid and comfort to the Jewish people (Romans 15:27).

St. Paul teaches in Romans 11 that the roots of Christianity are Jewish and not to boast against the Jewish people but to remember "thou bearest not the root, but the root bearest thee" (Romans 11:18).

Q: Do you believe Jesus presented himself to the Jewish people as the Messiah and are accountable for accepting/rejecting him like non-Jews, according to traditional Christian beliefs? If so, is that a retraction of your statement in the book that Jews shouldn't be blamed for rejecting what was never offered to them?

Hagee: I'm not retracting anything in my rewrite. I'm simply clarifying what some have misunderstood. Jesus was the Messiah, but He came as the Suffering Messiah while the Jews were looking for a Reigning Messiah.

Jesus presented Himself to His disciples as the Suffering Messiah that would be delivered into the hands of the Gentiles and die for the sins of the world. He never at any time presented Himself as the Reigning Messiah who would set up an earthly kingdom. When He was asked to give the Jewish people a sign that He was Messiah He refused, saying the only sign would be that of the Prophet Jonah.

Jesus' disciples wanted nothing to do with a Suffering Messiah. They wanted an earthly kingdom with a Reigning Messiah.

Peter was ready to take up a sword and fight the Romans to prevent Christ from going to the cross. Jesus rebuked him saying, "Get thou behind me Satan."

The mother of James and John wanted Jesus to be the Reigning Messiah. Immediately before the crucifixion she tried to get Jesus to agree to place her two sons at the right hand and at the left hand of His Kingdom (Matthew 20:20-28). She was not thinking about a Roman cross, she was thinking about positions of influence and power for her sons in an earthly political kingdom.

The disciples on the Emmaus road were looking for a Reigning Messiah, not a Suffering Messiah (Luke 24:17-21).

There are no retractions in this clarification and expansion of Chapter 10.

Q: You've stated you would tell a Jewish person about the Gospel if asked but is that enough to fulfill the Great Commission and the Bible's obligations about sharing the Christian faith to mankind when basic Christian doctrine holds that all people, including Jews, risk eternal damnation if they don't believe in Jesus?

Hagee: I am not now nor have I ever been Dual Covenant. I am an Orthodox Christian who believes that redemption for all men comes through Jesus Christ.

If you look at Cornerstone Church and my television ministry, it is obvious I've devoted my life to fulfilling the Great Commission and have helped spread the Gospel to the four corners of the earth. I've never targeted my preaching to particular communities or ethnic groups. I've always preferred to share the Gospel with millions on an equal opportunity basis.

Q: The book's critics, including Dr. Michael Brown, believe the initial, proposed revisions to the book are "cosmetic." He says he's seen revisions to the book and they do not go far enough if they don't state the need to tell Jews that Jesus is their Messiah. How do you see it and are you still in communications with him with the idea that more revisions are possible?

Hagee: Dr. Michael Brown has not seen the complete revisions to Chapter 10. The document he read was a partially revised manuscript, a work in progress. I was frankly surprised that Michael chose to issue press releases and e-mail blasts about the revision as if it were final rather than share his comments with me directly.

Michael Brown is a Messianic Jew whose top priority is to proselytize the Jews. He has opposed the non-proselytizing agenda of Christians United for Israel from the beginning.

Q: What do you make of Mr. Brown's email blast (critiquing the book), especially the parts that say you're denying the Word of God?

Hagee: Michael Brown is hardly the final word on Christian Theology. He's one man with one opinion and a very busy fax machine. I have been preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ for 50 years to America and the nations of the world. If I ever failed to "preach the Word" the public support of my ministry would vanish.

There are many people and organizations who deeply resent my efforts to help the Nation of Israel and the Jewish people. I will continue to stand with Israel because it is the clear teaching of the Word of God

Following the outcry of only G-d knows how many people, Pastor Hagee has decided to "reword" and clarify the portions of his book found so offensive to Christians and Messianic Jews. It may well be "too little" and way too late. I have a very difficult time understanding how Pastor Hagee went from stating emphatically "Jesus rejected to the last detail the role of Messiah in word or deed" to his new stance that it was just a failure of communication.

My guess is that the editions and revisions will include information on the two Messiahs of rabbinic tradition; Messiah ben Yosef (identified by sages as the suffering servant of Isaiah 53) and Messiah ben David. Although the "two" Messiahs is buried within ancient Jewish writings, most Rabbis choose to ignore or deny it. Few Jews or Christians have ever heard of Messiah ben Yosef.

In response to an e-mail from True Jew School, pastor Hagee sent a canned letter that was anything if not even more confusing as it appears to put the onus on the reader of "In Defense of Israel" rather than where it belongs, on the "author". Pastor Hagee wrote in part "I trust this simple explanation will clarify any concerns you might have concerning Jesus the Lamb of God and the Lion of Judah, as "Suffering Savior and Reigning Messiah." We were never concerned nor confused as to the role of Yeshua as the world's Messiah, as Pastor Hagee's letter implies.

I have posted his e-mail below in its entirety. Following it is another mass mailing sent by John Hagee Ministries. We submit them for your review.

"JESUS CHRIST: SUFFERING SERVANT AND REIGNING MESSIAH - (By Pastor Hagee)

As many witness the tragedies of this world, Christians are often asked the question, "If the Messiah has come, why is there still war, poverty, disease, and man's inhumanity to man?

ANSWER: Scripture presents differing pictures of the Messiah, who is sometimes described as the "Suffering Servant" and at other times as the "Reigning King".

Jesus came first as the "Suffering Servant" and men received Him into their hearts as Savior and Lord, “He was despised and rejected by men,

a man of sorrows, and familiar with suffering.

Like one from whom men hide their faces

he was despised, and we esteemed him not.” (Isaiah 53:3).

We now await His Second Coming in Revelation 19 as our "Reigning Messiah", riding on the White horse followed by the armies that are in heaven and the Church Triumphant.

FACT: According to Webster's Dictionary, the word “Messiah” means "the expected king who delivers from oppressors." A reigning Messiah is one who "rules and reigns over a given people”; reigning Messiah's do not die, they have to live to rule and reign.

Many denominations have constructed a Catch 22 concerning Jesus and the Jews. The Catch 22 is this: “Jesus came to be Messiah but because the Jews rejected Him as Messiah He had to go to the cross instead, hence, the Jews are the Christ Killers.”

FACT: The God of the Bible is sovereign! That means He is in control of everything in heaven and on earth all the time. If God is not sovereign, He cannot be God.

QUESTION: What was God's sovereign will for Jesus Christ in His first coming from the foundations of the earth?

ANSWER: Revelation 13:8 reads that Jesus Christ was the “Lamb of God slain from the foundations of the world.”

This verse says it was God's Sovereign plan for Jesus to die as Savior, as the suffering Messiah, before the world was created in Genesis 1:1.

FACT: THERE IS NO DUAL COVENANT! The Bible says, “Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved”, (Acts 4:12).

Jesus Himself stated in Mark 14:8, Luke 24:46 and Mark 10:33-34 that He had come to die for the sins of the world as Savior.

John the Baptist introduced Jesus as the “Lamb of God that takes away the sin of the world”, (John 1:29). The only purpose for a sacrificial lamb was to be slaughtered as a sin offering.

FACT: We now await the Second Coming of Christ, our Reigning Messiah.

"I saw heaven standing open and there before me was a white horse, whose rider is called Faithful and True. With justice, He judges and makes war. His eyes are like blazing fire, and on His head are many crowns. He has a name written on Him that no one knows but He himself. He is dressed in a robe dipped in blood, and His name is the Word of God. The armies of heaven were following Him, riding on white horses and dressed in fine linen, white and clean. Out of His mouth comes a sharp sword with which to strike down the nations. "He will rule them with an iron scepter." He treads the winepress of the fury of the wrath of God Almighty. On his robe and on his thigh he has this name written:

KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS.

Revelation 19:11-16

I trust this simple explanation will clarify any concerns you might have concerning Jesus the Lamb of God and the Lion of Judah, as "Suffering Savior and Reigning Messiah!"

Let us prepare for the soon coming of King Jesus, our Deliverer and Reigning Messiah! It will be very soon!

Pastor John Hagee

Christians United for Israel

Below is Pastor Hagee's "Special Message".

A Special Message from Pastor John Hagee Regarding His Book In Defense of Israel

Dear Friend:

I am writing to share with you some important news pertaining to my latest book In Defense of Israel. It has come to my attention that my choice of language and some of the interpretation being given that language in Chapter Ten has caused some confusion and actually led some readers to question whether I believe that Jesus is the Messiah. If people are reaching such a conclusion, then I have clearly failed to communicate my views as well as I should have.

I have decided to release a new edition of In Defense of Israel with an expanded Chapter Ten. The new version will make the same point as the prior one, but using language which cannot mislead anyone about my bedrock belief that Jesus was and is Lord, Savior and Messiah.

I was surprised to learn that some people were interpreting my words as a rejection of this most fundamental Christian belief that Jesus came to earth as the Messiah promised in the Hebrew Scriptures. I have been preaching the gospel for half a century. Almost every Sunday for the past 50 years, I have stood in front of Christian audiences to clearly proclaim the glory of our Lord, Savior and Messiah, Jesus Christ. For the past 30 years, these weekly sermons have been beamed to millions around the world on Christian television.

Given my long years of preaching the gospel to so many, it simply never occurred to me that anyone would question my belief in the fundamentals of the faith. I chose to use challenging language that I hoped would confront the body of Christ to consider events from the Jewish and historical perspective and therefore develop greater empathy for our Jewish friends.

Over the centuries, Christians have been quick to condemn the Jews for failing to recognize Jesus as Messiah. This approach led to replacement theology and the viewpoint of some that God has rejected and broken covenant with the Jewish people. These ideas, in turn, opened the door to a vicious Christian anti-Semitism that led to the Crusades, the Inquisition and countless pogroms.

I tried to challenge this view by highlighting a distinction that has been long recognized in Christian theology between the role Jesus played in His first coming, and the role He will play in his second coming. Jesus came the first time as the suffering Messiah, as exemplified by His persecution, rejection and crucifixion. Jesus will come back as the reigning Messiah, who will rule the world from His throne in Jerusalem as King of Kings and Lord of Lords.

We Christians believe that the suffering Messiah was clearly foreshadowed in the writings of the Hebrew prophets. However, most Jews have never read the prophets in this way. The Jews were expecting the reigning Messiah. I know this, you know this, and our omniscient and omnipotent Savior knows this.

God could have sent His Son to earth as the reigning Messiah the Jews were expecting. Instead He chose to send Him as the suffering Messiah, who submitted to the Cross, and I thank Him every day that He did. But I also regret daily that this divine move has led so many of the fallen humans it saved to denigrate and persecute the Jewish people from whom our Lord sprang.

In the expanded Chapter Ten, I will make the same point with language that does not hide my own perspective on the matter. The primary change will involve how I use the word “Messiah.” In the expanded version, I will clarify the clear distinction between the “Suffering Messiah,” the Lamb of God and the “Reigning Messiah,” the Lion of the Tribe of Judah!

I am deeply grieved for any confusion my writing may have caused the body of Christ. It was never intended. I trust this letter and the expanded edition of In Defense of Israel will clarify what I believe. I also hope that we can return our focus to what I had anticipated to highlight all along, the fact that we Christians must shift from condemning the Jews for what they missed to thanking them for what they gave.

Blessings to you and those you love,

Pastor John Hagee

1. Schechter Institute for Jewish Studies, Jerusalem, kulp@uscj.org Currents in Biblical Research, Vol. 4, No. 1, 109-134 (2005)

DOI: 10.1177/1476993X05055642