You'll have to wait a little longer, I'm afraid. Thanks to jude24, my head is swelled up so huge that I'm having trouble reaching the keyboard!
But seriously, I was specifically alluding to certain proponents of dispensationalism (IIRC Hagee being one) who intentionally avoid evangelizing to the Jews in order to "bless Israel" in some other way, and alluding to a larger group of proponents (Lindsey among others) who IMHO act as if modern-day Israel is accountable to any ethical/Biblical standards, even Old Covenant ones.
My view is that Jews - like every other unbelieving people on Earth - need to fall at Christ's feet and acknowledged Him as Lord, and need to repent of their sins. There is no salvific benefit for them in being racially Jewish, except in the knowledge available to them via their (prior) covenantal history and experiences with their Maker. They will have to repent and bow to Christ in the same way as we all have to repent and bow to Christ. Keeping the old customs has no merit for them. In fact, by keeping the traditions and laws while still denying their Lord, their own culture IMO serves as a covenantal witness against them. Meanwhile, (some) dispensationalists teach that by keeping the OT laws, they are not required to bend the knee to Christ like the rest of us. And that is the dual-redemptive plan that I was speaking against earlier.
That should have read "IMHO act as if modern-day Israel is isn't accountable to any ethical/Biblical standards, even Old Covenant ones." Sorry for the error.
Hm. First, I don't follow Hagee, so I'd enjoy seeing an example of what he's said or done that makes you think that he isn't interested in "evangelizing" Jews per se--I know many who are, but who take a soft approach and show love and blessings to the Jewish people to bring down the old walls that keep the Jewish people from seeing the Cross clearly. You know, as opposed to trying to convince Jews that they hate God, because that works so well.
. . . who IMHO act as if modern-day Israel is[n't] accountable to any ethical/Biblical standards, even Old Covenant ones.
Which standards are those which you think they are consistantly violating as a body?
My view is that Jews - like every other unbelieving people on Earth - need to fall at Christ's feet and acknowledged Him as Lord, and need to repent of their sins.
That is in fact the Dispensational, Historical Premillennial, and Messianic view as well, so I'm still not sure where your dispute is.
There is no salvific benefit for them in being racially Jewish, except in the knowledge available to them via their (prior) covenantal history and experiences with their Maker.
Unfortunately for you, the Apostle Sha'ul disagrees (Rom. 11:25ff). And now that I've said that and gotten your hackles up, let me clarify it.
Clearly, each individual Jew is individually reponsible for putting his trust in the Messiah. (I'm going to leave aside for the purposes of this discussion whether rejecting a false, anti-semetic image of Jesus is the same as rejecting the real Messiah--suffice to say I don't think so. I'm just putting this caveat in so that people won't accuse me of being inconsistant with the last thread.) And those who remain irrepentant can be "cut off from his people," to use the Torah's phrase.
However, there is still a promise to the body of Israel as a whole that "all Israel" will be saved. Now obviously, the whole nation cannot be saved while the great majority are not obediant to their rightful King--therefore, Premill, Dispy and otherwise, recognizes that at some point near or at the time of the Second Coming and/or Rapture, something spectacular has to happen to take the blinders off and bring the whole nation of Israel, not just the remnant that God has reserved for now, to repentence.
"All Israel" does not mean that 100% of those of Jewish lineage through all history will be saved, nor does it mean even that 100% of those of Jewish lineage at the time of the Second Coming will be. Indeed, there are a number of passages that indicate that God will save "all Israel" by removing the dross via persecution, so that 100% of those brought through the fire will be saved. And I believe that when they see the Second Coming, see Yeshua coming on the clouds of heaven to gather the elect, they will mourn (Rev. 1:7, Zec. 12:10ff), and that they will be cleansed (Zec. 13:1ff), and they will be brought into the New Covenant the same way we are--by faith in Yeshua HaMashiach.
Lest anyone pervert that statement into a grotesque parody where I look forward to Jews being killed in the End Times, I will point out that I am neither a Dispensationalist nor a pretrib rapturist. I believe that the Church will be having its dross removed at the same time in the same way, the tares being bundled to be burnt before the wheat is carried into the barn.
Of course, even Dispen acknowledges the existence of Gentile "tribulation saints" after the Rapture who will have to undergo the Great Tribulation with Israel, so its a grotesque bit of slander to pretend that they are eager for another Holocaust as well.
That, of course, is a very, very brief overview of my eschatology. The major difference between my view and Dispensationalism is on the matter of the timing of the Rapture and that I would quibble on the distinctions Dispen draws between the Church and Israel.
Meanwhile, (some) dispensationalists teach that by keeping the OT laws, they are not required to bend the knee to Christ like the rest of us. And that is the dual-redemptive plan that I was speaking against earlier.
So because "some" Dispys hold to a form of dual-covenantism, you're going to claim that the system as a whole teaches that? Interesting. Does that mean because the father of the Reformation advocated burning synagogues and killing rabbis that I should claim that all Reform theology makes this claim? Or do you agree that we should not judge a theological system by its abuses?