Does War With Israel Signal the End Is Near?
There is much being made these days by some Christians about the Israel-Hamas war as a signal of “the end time” (Jude 18 HCSB). For more detailed background information on this subject, please take a look at the Category headings: “End of the World,” and “Israel,” on this site.
However, the Bible indicates that “old covenant” (2 Corinthians 3:14) with “Israel according to the flesh” (1 Corinthians 6:18 NKJV) was “cancelled” (Ephesians 2:14 NLT), and “replaced” (2 Corinthians 3:11 NLT) by his “new covenant” (Hebrews 9:15) with the Christian “Israel of God” (Galatians 6:15,16 NIV), which has Jesus Christ as its “high priest” and “mediator” (Hebrews 9:11,15). Indeed, according to the scriptures, “the kingdom of God” was “taken away from” fleshly Israel, “and given to a people, producing the fruit of it” (Matthew 21:43 NASB), that is, to Christians in the “new covenant” (2 Corinthians 3:6).
This means that modern Israel does not fulfill Bible prophecy. How about Old Testament restoration prophecies concerning “Israel,” (Ezekiel 37), and prophecies about “Jerusalem” defeating its enemies (Zechariah 12)?
“Israel” (Revelation 7:1-8) represents the “vast crowd too great to count, from every nation and tribe and people and language,” who are Christians led by “the Lamb,” Jesus Christ (Revelation 7:9-15 NLT). “Jerusalem” represents “the heavenly Jerusalem” (Hebrews 12:22), “the Jerusalem above” (Galatians 4:26) that Christians have “approached,”, and live under, not earthly Jerusalem.
Nevertheless, how about a “sign” that the end is near? That is not going to happen, because, as Jesus told the people of his day: “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But no sign will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah” (Matthew 12:39 NIV). The same is true today!
The “sign” that Jesus’ apostles asked for will not be seen until the very end, when “the sign of the Son of Man will appear in the sky” (Matthew 24:3,30 NASB). At that future time when Jesus comes unexpectedly (Matthew 24:36,42,44; Revelation 16:15), everyone on earth will know it (Matthew 24:27).
So, no, war with Israel does not signal the end is near. Jesus said that “wars” (Matthew 24:6-8; Luke 21:9) would be business as usual for this world until the end. Jesus even warned that “many will come in my name . . . saying, ‘The time has come!’ But don’t believe them” (Luke 21:8 NLT).
What we should keep uppermost in mind is that we “must be ready all the time, for the Son of Man will come when least expected” (Matthew 24:44 NLT).
5 thoughts on “Does War With Israel Signal the End Is Near?”
BA: However, the Bible indicates that “old covenant” (2 Corinthians 3:14) with “Israel according to the flesh” (1 Corinthians 6:18 NKJV) was “cancelled” (Ephesians 2:14 NLT), and “replaced” (2 Corinthians 3:11 NLT) by his “new covenant” (Hebrews 9:15)…
GW: Nonsense. If God did exist, he would make one and only one covenant with all persons! And he would publicly present it directly to all persons. You are talking about a god lesser than God. And so were the Bible writers. They and you are confused.
BA: This means that modern Israel does not fulfill Bible prophecy.
GW: No Bible writer made any accurate predictions with the help of God. How could he? God does not exist. And if he did exist, he wouldn’t communicate to just a few individuals. He would communicate to all of humankind at the same time! Duh.
BA: Nevertheless, how about a “sign” that the end is near?
GW: The end is not near. What end are you talking about? When Jesus flies down from heaven? Pure fiction.
We refer you to the article, “The Evidence Proves God’s Existence,” on this website.
I refer you to my many responses to that article on this website. Whatever evidence you presented, and it is weak in quantity and quality, does not prove that God exists, not even close. At best it is equivocal — it supports the hypothesis “Reality is devoid of God” as much or more than the hypothesis “God is part of reality.”
But to nail the coffin shut, I present my Holocaust argument proving that God does not exist. So far, after over a hundred attempts, nobody has found an error in it.
Notice: After you read the argument below, please provide answers to these questions:
1. Do you understand the argument? If not, what specifically do you not understand?
2. Is there an error in the argument? If so, what is it?
3. Do you agree that the argument and its conclusion are correct? If not, why not?
The Three-Way Argument Against the Existence of God Based on the Holocaust: By Gary Whittenberger, Copyright 1-29-2023, 7-13-2023, 7-29-2023, 8-14-2023
1. Definition: God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, intelligent agent, or sentient entity. He is OMNI lasting (eternal), present, knowing, powerful, intelligent, rational, creative, and resilient (invincible). He is also OMNI loving, compassionate, and moral with respect to other persons. He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator), occasional interventionist in the world, and afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die. or 2) the greatest imaginable possible person (the “GIPPer”) who, if he existed, would possess all desirable traits to their highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship.
The First Way
2. If God can and does exist, because of his nature he would have attempted to prevent the Holocaust and he would have succeeded. Consequently, the Holocaust would not have occurred.
3. But the Holocaust did occur.
4. Therefore, God cannot and does not exist.
The Second Way
5. If God can and does exist, and if the Holocaust did occur, then because of his nature God had at least one morally justified reason to allow the Holocaust.
6. The Holocaust did occur.
7. Thus, if God can and does exist, then he had at least one morally justified reason to allow the Holocaust.
8. There are specific morally justified reasons for some persons to allow the horrible harm of the Holocaust to occur, but God would not have any of them; none would be available to him.
A. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they did not know that the Holocaust was going to occur. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be all-knowing.
B. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they did not have the power to prevent it or immediately stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be all-powerful.
C. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they knew that somebody else was in the process of preventing it and the other was likely to succeed. But this could not be a reason for God since he would know about the Holocaust ready to happen before anyone else would know since he would be all-knowing. Also, God would know that a successful prevention of the Holocaust by human beings was very unlikely. (Note that there were at least 15 attempts to assassinate Hitler and they were all unsuccessful.)
D. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they would have been killed in an attempt to prevent or stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be invulnerable, all-powerful, and eternal.
E. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they would have been significantly injured in an attempt to prevent or stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be invulnerable and all-powerful.
F. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they would have significantly suffered in an attempt to prevent or stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be invulnerable and all-powerful.
G. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because allowing it would be necessary for them to prevent some greater harm than the Holocaust itself. But this could not be a reason for God since nothing at all would be necessary for him to allow in order to prevent some greater harm since he would be all-powerful. God would have dominion over all necessities and natural laws.
H. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because allowing it would be necessary for them to produce a benefit which outweighed the Holocaust. But this could not be a reason for God since nothing at all would be necessary for him to allow in order to produce some benefit that would outweigh the Holocaust since he would be all-powerful. God would have dominion over all necessities and natural laws.
I. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because it resulted in perfect punishments for all the victims for their past immoral behaviors. But the Holocaust did not have the features of perfect punishments for all victims. For example, it lacked advance rule declaration, administration by proper authority, individualized proportional severity, and the least severity effective for all victims. Since the Holocaust harms did not exhibit the features of perfect punishments for all victims, the harms could not have been punishments from God. Hitler thought that annihilation of the Jewish people would be a morally justified and deserved punishment. He was wrong, and God would never agree with him on this point.
J. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust if they pre-arranged for all potential victims to experience benefits after the Holocaust which were logically contingent on the harms (e.g. care, character development, criminal justice, and compensation), which outweighed any harms from the Holocaust, and which occurred in life on Earth. But after the Holocaust, a substantial proportion of the victims received no logically contingent benefits and for most of them who did, the benefits were outweighed by the harms. And so, God would have had no involvement with this.
K. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they acquired the advance informed consent of all potential victims to experience the harms of the Holocaust in exchange for assured consequent benefits. But there is no good evidence that such consent was acquired by anyone, even God, from any victim.
9. And so, God could not and did not have even one morally justified reason to allow the Holocaust.
10. Therefore, God cannot and does not exist.
The Third Way
11. Furthermore, if any tribunal is investigating or evaluating the occurrence of any horrible harm to a group of persons, then any person who has knowledge of any detail related to that occurrence should offer or present their testimony about what they know. Every person knowledgeable of the occurrence has a moral duty to come forward to the tribunal and testify to what they know, telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
12. The Nuremberg Trials constituted a tribunal investigating or evaluating the occurrence of the Holocaust.
13. And so, if God can exist and does exist, because he would be both omni-powerful and omni-moral, then at the Nuremberg Trials he would have testified as a witness, sworn to tell “the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me myself,” and this truth would have included any reasons for his allowing the Holocaust.
14. But God did not testify at the Nuremberg Trials.
15. Once again, therefore, God cannot and does not exist.
The article, “Why Does God Allow Suffering?”, on this website, answers your questions.
I already read that article and refuted its claims in the comments’ section.
God neither allows nor prevents suffering! How could he? He doesn’t exist, as proven by my Holocaust argument. You and over a hundred other persons have found no error in the argument, and so the conclusion stands — God does not exist.
You have not proven that if God did exist, it is even possible that he would have had a morally justified reason to allow the Holocaust. In addition, if this were possible, you have not identified a morally justified reason which God would have for this, if he did exist. But don’t feel too bad. Nobody else has done either of these. You are not alone.