Hagee's "simple" explanation confirms his heretical views
John Hagee is apparently getting some heat for his recent
heretical statement that Jesus did not come to earth to be the
Jewish Messiah. One of our readers emailed him with her concerns
and received this response from his ministry.
approach is exactly what I expected. He claims not to be teaching a
dual covenant belief system but rather that Jesus role as savior of the
world was separate from his role as Messiah of the Jews. We will show
from a biblical standpoint that this argument is manifestly untrue and
that Hagee is still being deceitful in his selective interpretation of
Let's start with Hagee's straw man argument that Christian have constructed a "catch 22" regarding Jesus as Messiah.
Many Christians have constructed a catch 22 concerning Jesus as Messiah. The catch 22 is this:
came to be Messiah but because the Jews rejected Him as Messiah He had
to go to the cross, hence the Jews are the Christ Killers."
40+ years of exposure to protestant Christianity, I have never heard
this taught by anyone at anytime. The idea that Christ went to the cross
because the Jews rejected him as Messiah may have been popular at some
point in the distant past but it has never been a part of true
Christianity. I am not aware of any reputable church,
denomination, or ministry that teaches such nonsense. It may well be
that many Jewish people believe this is what Christianity teaches but to
say that many Christians believe this is like saying that the racial
views of white supremacists are shared by many white people. It is a
fringe view at best that is just not true for the vast majority of
is called a 'straw man' argument and is typical of false teachers.
Having begun with a false premise (the straw man) Hagee will now proceed
to use the word of God to tear it down. All of the scriptures he will
use are true and you will be forced to agree with them. But don't be
distracted by this rhetorical sleight of hand. The fact remains that he
has begun with a false premise.
Hagee's next step in his defense of heresy is even more enlightening.
According to Webster's Dictionary the word "Messiah" means "the
expected king who delivers from oppressors." A Messiah is one who
rules and reigns over a given people.
of Hagee's religious credentials should know that the first rule of
Biblical interpretation is to let the Bible interpret the Bible. So why
do you suppose he goes to Webster's dictionary for the definition of the
word Messiah? Because if he uses the Bible definition of Messiah his
argument is immediately destroyed. Is anyone else beginning to smell a
rat here? It seems clear from the first three lines of his defense
that Hagee has an agenda that does not include being true to scripture.
Let's see how the Bible defines the word Messiah
word Messiah is the Hebrew word mashiyach (mä·shē'·akh). It means
simply, anointed, or anointed one. Since it is a Hebrew word it appears
primarily in the Old Testament. The Greek form of the word is Messias
and it appears in the New Testament only twice (John 1:41 & John
4:25) The Greek equivalent word for Messiah is Christos, translated as
Christ and meaning anointed or anointed one.
word mashiyach is translated by the King James translators as Messiah
only twice (Daniel 9:25&26) but it is translated as anointed 37
times starting with:
If the priest that is anointed (mashiyach) do sin according to the sin
of the people; then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a
young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering.
In this case the term refers to the High Priest who makes atonement for the people.
Here is another use of mashiyach as anointed.
Behold, this day thine eyes have seen how that the LORD had delivered
thee to day into mine hand in the cave: and some bade me kill thee: but
mine eye spared thee; and I said, I will not put forth mine hand against
my lord; for he is the LORD'S anointed (mashiyach).
Here, the word refers to the king of Israel as David calls Saul the Lords mashiyach.
Here is another popular passage of scripture that incorporates the Hebrew word mashiyach
Saying, Touch not mine anointed (mashiyach), and do my prophets no harm.
this case the word referred to Abraham as the patriarch of the Hebrew
people. So you can see that the word Messiah as it is used in scripture
does not mean simply "the expected king who delivers from oppressors".
Nor does it follow that a Messiah must be one who rules and reigns over a
specific geographic region or people in the natural earthly sense.
Now let's look at the two places where the word mashiyach is translated as Messiah.
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the
commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah
(mashiyach) the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and
two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in
And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah (mashiyach) be cut off,
but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall
destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a
flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
avoiding the use of these scriptures Hagee is engaging in open deceit.
These prophetic scriptures from the great Hebrew prophet Daniel refer
specifically to the coming prince, the Messiah, and the only person who
could possibly have filled this role is Jesus of Nazareth. Hagee is
aware of this because he teaches this very prophecy as it relates to the
tribulation period. The prophecy tells us not only the timing of the
tribulation period but it also foretold the coming of the Messiah. The
religious leaders of Jesus day knew this prophecy and should have known
that Jesus was the fulfillment of it.
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the
commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the
Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street
shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
weeks prophesied here are not literal weeks but weeks of years. From the
time the command was given by Cyrus to rebuild Jerusalem (see Ezra 1)
until the time of Christ's (Messiah the Prince) crucifixion was exactly
483 years. [Seven weeks (7x7 = 49 years) and threescore (60x7 =
420 years) and two weeks (7x2 = 14 years)]
And after the threescore and two weeks shall the anointed one (mashiyach) be cut off, and shall have nothing……..: Dan 9:26 ASV
This prophecy can point to one person and one person only and that is Jesus Christ and it clearly states that He is Messiah
What about the New testament use of the term Messias?
One of the two which heard John speak, and followed him, was Andrew,
Simon Peter's brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith
unto him, We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the
scripture alone should put an end to Hagee's obfuscation since it
clearly says that Andrew and Peter had found the Messiah and that the
interpretation of the word messias in Christ.
(but not all) of the Jews of Jesus day refused to acknowledge Him as
Messiah because they were looking for an earthly king to free them from
the bondage of Rome and establish a Jewish hegemony over the nations of
the world. The fact that they mis-interpreted scripture as many of them
still do today does not preclude the fact that Jesus did come as Messiah
and as such He established a kingdom upon the earth.
Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of
this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered
to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence. Pilate therefore
said unto him, Art thou a king then? Jesus answered, Thou sayest that I
am a king. To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the
world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. Every one that is of
the truth heareth my voice.
kingdom Jesus established was not the kingdom the Jews were looking for.
His kingdom is in this world but it is not of this world. He is in fact
Messiah over that kingdom.
Fact: Jesus claimed to be Savior several times in the Bible. He never claimed to be Messiah to the Jewish people.
In John 4 Jesus told the woman at the well, a Gentile, who He was,
knowing the Jews and Samaritans had nothing to do with each other.
I go into this in great detail in my latest book, "In Defense of
Hagee refers to another clear proof that Jesus was Messiah but then
interprets the passage thought the prism of his own heretical ideas.
The woman saith unto him, I know that Messias cometh, which is called
Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things. Jesus saith unto
her, I that speak unto thee am he.
much clearer could that be? Jesus said plainly that He was the promised
Messiah. What Hagee is trying to do here is claim that Jesus revealed
His messiah-ship to this woman because she was not Jewish but a
Samaritan. The absurdity of this position is mind boggling. Hagee wants
you to believe that Jesus is Messiah to the gentile world but not to the
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).
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. Again, you must
live to be Messiah. You cannot be both Messiah and
Hagee, if you believe that to be true why do you refuse to evangelize
the Jewish people? Is Jesus the savior of all the people of the
world or just those who don't happen to have Jewish blood?
is the crux of the matter right here. Hagee claims not to teach a dual
covenant theology but he practices a dual covenant belief system by his
actions toward the Jews. His statement that Jesus cannot be both Messiah
and savior is simply false as we have already proven from Daniels
Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost
thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ (anointed one), tell us
plainly. Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works
that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
that clear enough for you Mr. Hagee? The Jews asked Jesus if he was the
anointed one (messiah) and he said yes he was. How about Jesus answer to
And Jesus stood before the governor: and the governor asked him, saying,
Art thou the King of the Jews? And Jesus said unto him, Thou sayest.
The disciples certainly claimed that Jesus was Messiah.
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made
that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ (anointed
Now, let's continue to deconstruct Hagee's false arguments in defense of Talmudic Judaism.
people confuse the role of "Messiah" and "Savior." To be Messiah
you must live. To rule and reign you must live. Jesus came
to die and be the Savior of every person on earth.
John, it seems only you and your Jewish friends have confused the role
of savior and Messiah. The fact is that Jesus does live and he does
reign in the kingdom He established. If you were a true disciple of
Christ you would know that and you would have no problem understanding
His Messianic rulership over that kingdom.
Bible proof that Jesus did not come to be Messiah is found in Matthew
26:26-30 where Jesus, a Jewish Rabbi, was celebrating Passover with His
12 Disciples in what Christians call "The Lord's Supper."
the Passover there are five cups of wine that Jesus and His Disciples
would drink together. These five cups have been and still are
celebrated by observant Jews who keep the Passover.
fifth cup is the Messiah's Cup. Luke 26:28 [sic], Jesus claims to
be the Savior of the world by saying, "For this is my blood of the new
covenant, which is shed for many for the remission of sin."
the next verse, Luke 26:29 [sic], Jesus rejects the Messiah's Cup
saying, "But I say unto you, I will not drink of this fruit of the vine
from now on until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father's
rejected the Messiah's Cup because He knew He was about to die.
He promised His Disciples that He would drink the Messiah's Cup when He
returns to earth the second time as King of Kings and Lord of
this section Hagee uses another deceitful tactic to confuse undiscerning
Christians. He mixes the word of God with the traditions of men just as
his pharisaical predecessors did (see Mark 7:13). The idea of five cups
(most Passover Seders use 4 cups) is not "Bible proof" at all but
a Jewish tradition that is found nowhere in scripture. This idea
comes from the Jewish Talmud (oral history and decrees from Jewish
Rabbi's) which observant Jews place on par with the written word of God.
It is simply a man made tradition and should in no way be used to prove
that Jesus rejected his role as Messiah.
Again, lets allow scripture interpret scripture rather than adding to it the traditions of men.
(I will assume that Hagee's citation of Luke 26:28-29 is a simple
transcription error since Luke contains only 24 books. It is clear that
the passage he intends is found in Matthew 26:28-29.)
And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it
in scripture is there any reference to 5 cups in the Passover. Every
scriptural reference to this event (Mat 26:28, Mark 14:23, and Luke
22:20) uses the term the cup. The passage in Luke seems to indicate two
separate acts since the first occurs during the supper (Luke 22:17) and
then another after the supper (Luke 22:20). Even with this however it is
a stretch, and adding to scripture to say that there were 5 cups and
the one that Jesus refused was the "Messiah" cup.
why did Jesus refuse the cup? There is no scriptural basis to believe
that Jesus declined to drink of the cup because he was refusing to be
the Messiah. There is a scriptural basis however for believing that his
refusal was based on the fact that he need all his physical senses to
sustain him in the ordeal He was about to endure.
after the Passover, Jesus and His disciples went to the Garden of
Gethsemane to pray. Do you remember what happened there?
Mark 14:32 & 37
And they came to a place which was named Gethsemane: and he saith to his
disciples, Sit ye here, while I shall pray. ............And he cometh,
and findeth them sleeping, and saith unto Peter, Simon, sleepest thou?
couldest not thou watch one hour?
knew he had a job to do. In order to fulfill his destiny he needed all
his faculties. As He prayed, the others, after a full meal and a little
wine, fell asleep. Jesus, although he was fully God was also fully
human. As such he would have known that wine would have made him sleepy
just like the others. Here was a case where Jesus denied a desire of his
flesh in order to carry out God's perfect will.
is further confirmed when, on the cross, Jesus was offered a mixture of
wine and gall (or myrrh) to drink (Mat 27:34). This concoction was
offered to the condemned as a way to dull the excruciating pain of
crucifixion. Jesus refused it, again because he needed to have complete
use of his senses in order to endure what His Father had set before Him.
attempting to explain his heretical stance John Hagee has only dug
himself a deeper hole. His explanation clarifies the fact that his book
In Defense of Israel should be titled In Defense of Talmudic Judaism. In
writing this book, John Hagee has put himself outside orthodox
Christianity and has aligned himself with those who deny the Lord Jesus
Christ. The words of Paul to Titus are as true today as they were when
he wrote them
Titus 1:10-11 & 13-14
For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they
of the circumcision: Whose mouths must be stopped, who subvert whole
houses, teaching things which they ought not, for filthy lucre's sake
witness is true. Wherefore rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound
in the faith; Not giving heed to Jewish fables, and commandments of men,
that turn from the truth.
Steve Lumbley 2007
This article may be reproduced and distributed free of charge as long as it remains in its original form.