Is Israel the Fig Tree?

Dispensationalists try to tell us that the fig tree in Jesus’ Parable of the Fig Tree (Matthew 24:32-35) refers to the nation of Israel! When you see it bud, i.e. when it became a nation in 1948, that would be the beginning of the countdown to the coming of the Lord. That would be the…

Dispensationalists try to tell us that the fig tree in Jesus’ Parable of the Fig Tree (Matthew 24:32-35) refers to the nation of Israel! When you see it bud, i.e. when it became a nation in 1948, that would be the beginning of the countdown to the coming of the Lord. That would be the beginning of “the generation” to which Jesus referred in Matthew 24:34. It amazes me to see the lengths people will go, the hoops they will seek to jump through and the obstacles they will try to leap over in order to keep from admitting error.

A generation, according to the Mosaic Law was 38-40 years (Numbers 32:13; Deuteronomy 2:14). So a generation has come and gone since modern Israel became a nation. Yet, dispensationalists refuse to admit error. They merely edit their best selling myths and put out a revised edition without ever admitting they were wrong in the previous edition.

“Carefully putting all this together, we now recognize this strategic generation. It is the generation that ‘sees’ the four-part sign of verse 7 [in Matthew 24], or the people who saw the First World War. We must be careful here not to become dogmatic, but it would seem that these people are witnesses to the events, not necessarily participants in them. That would suggest they were old enough to understand the events of 1914-1918, not necessarily old enough to go to war.” (Tim LaHaye – Beginning of the End; p.165; Tyndale House Publishers; 1972)

“Carefully putting all this together, we now recognize this strategic generation. It is the generation that ‘sees’ the events of 1948. We must be careful here not to become dogmatic, but it would seem that these people are witnesses to the events, not necessarily participants in them.” (Tim LaHaye – Beginning of the End; Revised and Expanded Edition; p.193; Tyndale House Publishers; 1991).[1]

One problem with LeHaye’s premise is that Jesus used the demonstrative pronoun indicating the generation of which he spoke was that generation in which he lived. Notice how I used the demonstrative pronoun ‘that’ to indicate a generation far removed from me. It is not near; it is far away. Jesus used the pronoun, houtos (G3778), to indicate ‘this’ generation, which was the generation in which he lived. Had he really meant a generation far away he could have used the pronoun ekeinos (G1565) to indicate a generation far removed from him, as was the case for the writer of Hebrews when he pointed to the generation living in Moses time (Hebrews 3:10).

Another dispensationalist who favors modern Israel as a sign of the end is Hal Lindsey. He, too, believed that Matthew 24:32-34 indicated that Jesus’ coming would occur within one generation of the birth of modern Israel. Moreover, he indicated in his book, “The Late Great Planet Earth,” that a generation in the Bible is 40 years. Many folks looked for the rapture to occur no later than 1988, but, as we already know, that didn’t happen. Later, in his book, “The 1980s: Countdown to Armageddon, Lindsey wrote, “the decade of the 1980s could very well be the last decade of history as we know it.”[2] Nevertheless, as I have demonstrated above, Jesus use of the pronoun, houtos (G3778) debunks the premise of Lindsey’s conclusions. The Parable of the Fig Tree simply cannot be used as an indicator of modern Israel.

Even if one believes the argument of the pronoun cannot jettison LaHaye’s or Lindsey’s arguments (despite they were wrong about the 1980s being the decade Jesus would return), the context of the Olivet Discourse, also leaves them without a firm basis for their argument that Israel is the fig tree in Jesus’ parable. Jesus pointed to these things (Matthew 24:33), clearly indicating the three signs he mentioned in verses 4 through 28. These things (G5023) is not only the accusative plural of houtos (G3778), but being plural, it cannot indicate the single event of the rebirth of Israel in 1948. So, the context is wrong for that premise.

Finally, Luke’s version of the Olivet discourse is slightly different from Matthew’s version. Luke’s Parable of the Fig Tree has it, “Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand” (Luke 21:29-30; emphasis mine). Thus, the scriptures clearly indicate that Jesus is simply referring to the rebirth in the spring is a certain indicator that summer is near, and he uses that premise to indicate the nearness of his coming and the end of the age when his Apostles see the three signs he mentioned in Matthew 24:14-29.

_________________________________________

[1] See Tim LaHaye – “Out With the Old Prophecy, In With the New

[2] See The Late, Great Planet Earth.

2 responses to “Is Israel the Fig Tree?”

  1. Here’s a new one from a forum, written by the website founder… ” I used to reckon it from the establishment of Israel, but the more I study it it looks like the “this generation” are the Jews alive on the earth after the Rapture of the Church.”

    Enjoying the series! Peace!

    Bill

  2. Greetings Bill, I’m glad you are enjoying the studies. Lord bless you.