In Defense of Isralestine: The Errors of Dr. Thomas Ice in "Consistent Biblical Futurism (Part 10)"

8 September 2013: I'm taking a very brief time-out from the Global SITREP series in order to properly address what I consider to be an important issue among dispensationalists. Very recently I came across Part 10 of the "Consistent Biblical Futurism" series published by Dr. Thomas Ice of the Pre-Trib Research Center. As postulated in Part I, this multi-part series of articles by Dr. Ice was predicated upon his identifying and discussing the various but significant differences in the literal prophetic interpretation strictly among fellow dispensationalists of the historicist and futurist views, as well as Dr. Ice's personal suggestions on which of these interpretations are correct and why certain individuals within the whole of literalist dispensationalism hold to viewpoints different from his own viewpoint. Dr. Ice also made clear in his introduction that both Psalm 83 and Isaiah 17 would be dealt with relative to their potential fulfillment either prior to or within the final 7 years of the 70th Week.

Consistent with Dr. Ice' request that these issues be subjected to the peer review process of public discussion and based upon what I found within his "Consistent Biblical Futurism (Part 10)" I find it necessary to respond with my own views on what Dr. Ice has written. 

Firstly, whether a particular interpretation can be labeled as "historicist' or "futurist" is very subjective in my view because ALL unfulfilled Bible prophecy is clearly in the future from the here and now, irregardless of that fulfillment is prior to the 70th Week, during it and afterwards during the Millennium of Christ's rule on Earth. 

Secondly, I must point out that Dr. Ice makes it abundantly clear that he regards the views of others as "speculation" instead of their being a specific prophetic interpretation worthy of truly brotherly discussion. It is this apparently ego-driven and unwarranted adoption of an interpretive superiority over the views of his brothers-in-Christ which constitutes an appalling error on the part of Dr. Ice right from the get-go.

To the case-in-point, the essence of Part 10 is the 2008 book Isralestine by author Bill Salus, the crux of which is a study of Psalm 83. I will leave the gross distortions of what Dr. Ice has written concerning the views expressed in Isralestine by Bill Salus for others to address should they so desire. I am going to focus on two items: the manner in which Dr. Ice discusses this issue, and the fact that Dr. Ice has made what I believe is a very significant Scripture-based error in his argument against Isralestine.

The first item is the manner in which Dr. Ice treats Bill Salus' work in Isralestine has the distinct intonation of a direct personal attack upon the author in that he casts serious accusations on the manner in which Bill Salus' mind operates, thereby impugning the mental well-being of Bill Salus. Here are the specifically offensive phraseology used by Dr. Ice: "...this scenario is merely manufactured from the speculative mind of Bill Salus... his thinking on this matter... is merely a speculative belief."  This is not how one brother discusses the work of another brother. It is rude, condescending, arrogant in the extreme and unbecoming of a brother-in-Christ in my opinion.

The Scripture-based error made by Dr. Ice is with respect to his identification of the Philistines per Psalm 83:7. Dr. Ice writes: (emphasis is mine) "The first problem with this view is that "Early Palestine was dominated by white Caucasians from the eastern Mediterranean area."

Dr. Ice continued with: "By the time of the intertestamental period, the Philistines disappear from history. Why is this important? This is important since it is legitimate to trace a modern people group from their ancient ancestors mentioned in the Bible if that people group remains the same over the years. The fact that the Philistines have totally vanished from history, while the Palestinians, who take the name from the ancient Philistines are ethnically unrelated to them. Since there is not ethnic relationship, this disqualifies one from identifying them as the same people group today. Modern Palestinians are generally made up of Arabs from all of the surrounding counties that have immigrated to Israel over the years."

Dr. Ice got his cited "facts" wrong here, and that leads to the greater error of his conclusion of who exactly the Philistines were and are to this day.

In Genesis 10 the Lord instructs us very clearly that the Philistines did not come from the line of Noah through Japheth (the so-called white northern peoples, a/k/a Caucasians).

Genesis 10:6 and 13-14 instructs us that the Philistines came from the line of Noah through his son Ham who begat Mizaim who begat Casluhim -- whence went forth the Philistines.

The Philistines are the same stock, the same ethnic peoples, the same relative family of people as are the rest of the Hamites, such as Cush, Mizraim, Put and Canaan!  White Caucasians? Absolutely not!

6 And the sons of Ham: Cush, and Mizraim, and Put, and Canaan.
13 And Mizraim begot Ludim, and Anamim, and Lehabim, and Naphtuhim,
14 and Pathrusim, and Casluhim--whence went forth the Philistines--and Caphtorim.

Then turn to Exodus 13, verses 17-18 where God instructs:

"Then it came to pass, when Pharaoh had let the people go, that God did not lead them by way of the land of the Philistines, although that was near; for God said, “Lest perhaps the people change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt.” So God led the people around by way of the wilderness of the Red Sea."

The Philistines lived in that coastal strip of eastern Mediterranean land through the time of when Israel was being ruled by her Judges (the Book of Judges) and by her Kings (the Books of Kings) and they continued to live here until the Assyrian conquest. Then the Philistines gradually intermingled back into the same genetic stock of the Hamite-Mizraimite family of this same region from which they originated.

The Philistines haven't gone anywhere, they have not disappeared from history, they still live in the same place where their ancestors lived, and have intermingled even further since the Islamic conquest of the region in the 7th century AD. There are even greater details that I could cite  from the text of Moses in Genesis and of Asaph in Psalm 83, but this should serve to make the point I have made sufficiently.

Now, to be clear, I have assumed Dr. Thomas Ice actually wrote and is therefore responsible for the whole of "Consistent Biblical Futurism (Part 10)" and the errors I have cited here; that Part 10 wasn't just some cut and pasted work done by an intern within his ministry. Nevertheless, the error is a significant one in my opinion, and should preclude Dr, Ice's from publishing and widely distributing a personal attack and Scripturally-incorrect article like his "Consistent Biblical Futurism (Part 10)" has turned out to be. This is something I ordinarily would never have expected to see published on the Pre-Trib Research Center's website, and that is truly just a crying shame.