When U.S. Foreign Policy Meets Biblical Prophecy

Does the Bible foretell regime change in Iraq? Did God establish Israel's boundaries millennia ago? Is the United Nations a forerunner of a satanic world order?

For millions of Americans, the answer to all those questions is a resounding yes. For many believers in biblical prophecy, the Bush administration's go-it-alone foreign policy, hands-off attitude toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and proposed war on Iraq are not simply actions in the national self-interest or an extension of the war on terrorism, but part of an unfolding divine plan.

Evangelical Christians have long complained that "people of faith" do not get sufficient respect, and that religious belief is trivialized in our public discourse. So argues Stephen L. Carter, a Yale University law professor and an evangelical Christian, in his 1993 "The Culture of Disbelief." Carter has a point, at least with reference to my own field of American history.

With notable exceptions, cultural historians have long underplayed the importance of religion in the United States, particularly in the modern era. Church historians have produced good work, but somewhat in isolation, cut off from the larger currents of cultural and intellectual history. That is changing, as evidenced by Mark A. Noll's magisterial "America's God: From Jonathan Edwards to Abraham Lincoln" (2002). But, over all, the critics are on target.

However, I would vigorously challenge Carter's related complaint that religious belief plays little role in shaping public policy. In fact, religion has always had an enormous, if indirect and underrecognized, role in policy formation.

And that is especially true today, as is illustrated by the shadowy but vital way that belief in biblical prophecy is helping mold grassroots attitudes toward current U.S. foreign policy. As the nation debates a march toward war in the Middle East, all of us would do well to pay attention to the beliefs of the vast company of Americans who read the headlines and watch the news through a filter of prophetic belief.

Abundant evidence makes clear that millions of Americans -- upwards of 40 percent, according to some widely publicized national polls -- do, indeed, believe that Bible prophecies detail a specific sequence of end-times events. According to the most popular prophetic system, premillennial dispensationalism, formulated by the 19th-century British churchman John Darby, a series of last-day signs will signal the approaching end. Those will include wars, natural disasters, rampant immorality, the rise of a world political and economic order, and the return of the Jews to the land promised by God to Abraham.

In Darby's system, the present "dispensation" will end with the Rapture, when all true believers will join Christ in the air. Next comes the Tribulation, when a charismatic but satanic figure, the Antichrist, will arise in Europe, seize world power, and impose his universal tyranny under the dread sign "666," mentioned in Revelation. After seven years, Christ and the saints will return to vanquish the Antichrist and his armies at Har-Megiddo (the biblical Armageddon), an ancient battle site near Haifa. From a restored Temple in Jerusalem, Christ will then inaugurate a thousand-year reign of peace and justice -- the Millennium.

That scenario, which Darby ingeniously cobbled together from apocalyptic passages throughout the Bible, was popularized in America by expositors like Cyrus Scofield, whose 1909 "Scofield Reference Bible" became a best seller. More recently, dispensationalism has been promulgated by radio evangelists; paperback popularizers; fundamentalist and Pentecostal pastors; and TV luminaries like Jerry Falwell, Jack Van Impe, and John Hagee.

Hal Lindsey's "The Late Great Planet Earth" (1970), a slangy update of Darby's teachings, became the nonfiction best seller in the 1970s. Today's Left Behind series, a multivolume fictional treatment of dispensationalism by Tim LaHaye and Jerry Jenkins, has sold 50 million copies since the first volume appeared, in 1995. Volume 10, The Remnant, topped the The New York Times's bestseller list for several weeks last summer.

During the cold war, Lindsey and other prophecy gurus focused on the Soviet Union, citing a passage in Ezekiel foretelling the destruction of a northern kingdom, Gog, which they interpreted as Russia. Today's popularizers, however, spotlight the Middle East and the rise of a New World Order led by their own "axis of evil": the United Nations and other international bodies; global media conglomerates; and multinational corporations, trading alliances, and financial institutions. This interlocking system, they preach, is laying the groundwork for the Antichrist's prophesied dictatorship.

As for the Middle East, the popularizers view Israel's founding in 1948, and its recapture of Jerusalem's Old City in 1967, as key end-times signs. They also see the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, and a future rebuilding of the Jerusalem Temple on a site sacred to Muslims, as steps in God's unfolding plan. The most hard-line and expansionist groups in Israel today, including Likud Party leaders, have gratefully welcomed this unwavering support. When Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited the United States in 1998, he called first on Falwell, and only then met with President Clinton. (Dispensationalist dogma also foretells the mass slaughter of Jews by the Antichrist and the conversion of the surviving remnant to Christianity, but those themes are played down by most current popularizers.)

On the basis of such beliefs, dispensationalists denounce any proposals for shared governance of Jerusalem. As Hagee writes in "Final Dawn Over Jerusalem" (Thomas Nelson, 1998): "Christians and Jews, let us stand united and indivisible on this issue: There can be no compromise regarding the city of Jerusalem, not now, not ever. We are racing toward the end of time, and Israel lies in the eye of the storm. ... Israel is the only nation created by a sovereign act of God, and He has sworn by His holiness to defend Jerusalem, His Holy City. If God created and defends Israel, those nations that fight against it fight against God." Dispensationalists also oppose any scaling back of Jewish settlements in the West Bank or Gaza, since those areas lie well within God's grant to Abraham, recorded in Genesis 15:18, of all of the land from "the river of Egypt" to the Euphrates.

In this scenario, the Islamic world is allied against God and faces annihilation in the last days. That view is actually a very ancient one in Christian eschatology. Medieval prophecy expounders saw Islam as the demonic force whose doom is foretold in Scripture. As Richard the Lionhearted prepared for the Third Crusade in 1190, the famed prophecy interpreter Joachim of Fiore assured him that the Islamic ruler Saladin, who held Jerusalem, was the Antichrist, and that Richard would defeat him and recapture the Holy City. (Joachim's prophecy failed: Richard returned to Europe in 1192 with Saladin still in power.) Later interpreters cast the Ottoman Empire in the Antichrist role.

That theme faded after 1920, with the Ottoman collapse and the rise of the Soviet Union, but it surged back in the later 20th century, as prophecy popularizers began not only to support the most hard-line groups in Israel, but also to demonize Islam as irredeemably evil and destined for destruction. "The Arab world is an Antichrist-world," wrote Guy Dury in "Escape From the Coming Tribulation" (1975). "God says he will lay the land of the Arabs waste and it will be desolate," Arthur Bloomfield wrote in "Before the Last Battle -- Armageddon," published in 1971 and reprinted in 1999. "This may seem like a severe punishment, but ... the terms of the covenant must be carried out to the letter."

The anti-Islamic rhetoric is at fever pitch today. Last June, the prophecy magazine Midnight Call warmly endorsed a fierce attack on Islam by Franklin Graham (son of Billy) and summed up Graham's case in stark terms: "Islam is an evil religion." In Lindsey's 1996 prophecy novel, "Blood Moon," Israel, in retaliation for a planned nuclear attack by an Arab extremist, launches a massive thermonuclear assault on the entire Arab world. Genocide, in short, becomes the ultimate means of prophetic fulfillment.

Anticipating George W. Bush, prophecy writers in the late 20th century also quickly zeroed in on Saddam Hussein. If not the Antichrist himself, they suggested, Saddam could well be a forerunner of the Evil One. In full-page newspaper advertisements during the Persian Gulf war of 1991, the organization Jews for Jesus declared that Saddam "represents the spirit of Antichrist about which the Bible warns us."

Prophecy believers found particular significance in Saddam's grandiose plan, launched in the 1970s, to rebuild Babylon on its ancient ruins. The fabled city on the Euphrates, south of Baghdad, which included one of the seven wonders of the ancient world, owed its splendor to King Nebuchadnezzar, the same wicked ruler who warred against Israel and destroyed Jerusalem in 586 B.C., for which impiety, according to the Book of Daniel, he went mad and ended his days eating grass in the fields.

In Revelation, Babylon embodies all that is corrupt, "a great whore ... with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication." It stands as the antithesis of Jerusalem, the city of righteousness, and Revelation prophesies its annihilation by fire. Since Babylon cannot be destroyed unless it exists, Saddam's ambitious public-works project is seen as an essential step toward prophetic fulfillment.

Charles Dyer's "The Rise of Babylon: Sign of the End Times" (1991) elaborates the theme. Along with the emergence of modern Israel and the European Union (forerunner of the Antichrist's world system), writes Dyer, Saddam's restoration of Babylon signals the approaching end and offers "thrilling proof that Bible prophecies are infallible." "When Babylon is ultimately destroyed," he continues, "Israel will finally be at peace and will dwell in safety."

That theme resonates powerfully with today's calls for Saddam's overthrow. Indeed, the cover illustration of Dyer's book juxtaposes Saddam and Nebuchadnezzar. Hal Lindsey's Web site recently featured a cartoon of a military aircraft emblazoned with a U.S. flag and a Star of David and carrying a missile with a label targeting "Saddam." The caption quoted the prophet Zechariah: "It shall be that day I will seek to destroy all nations that come against Israel."

All of these themes converge in the Left Behind novels. As the plot unfolds, the Antichrist, Nicolae Carpathia, becomes secretary general of the United Nations. ("I've opposed the United Nations for 50 years," boasts one of the authors, Tim LaHaye, a veteran activist on the religious right.) Carpathia moves the U.N. from New York to a rebuilt Babylon, laying the groundwork for the simultaneous destruction of both the city that in the grammar of dispensationalism represents absolute evil and defiance of God's prophetic plan, and the organization that more than any other prefigures the Antichrist's satanic world order.

To be sure, some current Bush-administration policies trouble prophecy believers. For example, the expansion of Washington's surveillance powers after 9/11 (led, ironically, by Attorney General John Ashcroft, darling of the religious right) strikes some as another step toward the Antichrist's global dictatorship. Counterbalancing that, however, other key administration positions -- its hostility to multinational cooperation and international agreements, its downgrading of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, its muted response to growing Jewish settlement in Palestinian territory, and its unrelenting focus on Saddam Hussein -- strike prophecy believers as perfectly in harmony with God's prophetic plan: a plan that will bring human history to its apocalyptic denouement and usher in the longed-for epoch of righteousness, justice, and peace.

Academics do need to pay more attention to the role of religious belief in American public life, not only in the past, but also today. Without close attention to the prophetic scenario embraced by millions of American citizens, the current political climate in the United States cannot be fully understood.

Leaders have always invoked God's blessing on their wars, and, in this respect, the Bush administration is simply carrying on a familiar tradition. But when our born-again president describes the nation's foreign-policy objective in theological terms as a global struggle against "evildoers," and when, in his recent State of the Union address, he casts Saddam Hussein as a demonic, quasi-supernatural figure who could unleash "a day of horror like none we have ever known," he is not only playing upon our still-raw memories of 9/11. He is also invoking a powerful and ancient apocalyptic vocabulary that for millions of prophecy believers conveys a specific and thrilling message of an approaching end -- not just of Saddam, but of human history as we know it.

By Paul S. Boyer, AlterNet.

Paul S. Boyer, a professor emeritus of history at the University of Wisconsin at Madison and currently a visiting professor of history at the College of William and Mary, is the author of "When Time Shall Be No More: Prophecy Belief in Modern American Culture" (Harvard University Press, 1992).

ARE THESE THE 'LAST' DAYS?

Scripture: Joel 2:1-2, 10-32; Acts 2:16-21

The term The Last Days appears 8 times; 3 in OT. The phrase “In That Day” appears 108 times; and the phrase “The Last Time” appears 3 times. It often connects with the phrase “The Day of the Lord” (found 25 times) or “The Day of God” (used twice) or "The Day of God Almighty” (used once).

IT BEGAN WITH THE POURING OUT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT! Acts 2:1 tells us that it was the Day of Pentecost (Shavuot in Hebrew) when a part of Joel’s prophecy was fulfilled - the part which said that the Holy Spirit would be poured out on all flesh. The “last days” began on the Day of Pentecost, and will continue until the end of The Time of Jacob's Trouble, great Tribulation. Ezekiel 39:29 says; “for I have poured out My Spirit upon the house of Israel, saith the Lord God.” Zechariah 12:10 says, “And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the Spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon Me Whom they have pierced…”

It will involve serious perils that will come 2 Tim. 3: 1-7. It's also described as a period of time known as The Day of the Lord. It will be a day of general deception! Ezk. 13:1-10, 16; Matt. 24: 4-5, 24; 2 Tim. 3:13; 2 Pet. 3:3-4. It will also be a day of gross darkness! Amos 5:18-20; Zep. 1:15; Rev. 8:12

It will be a day of great distress! Joel 2:1-2; Zeph. 1:14-18; Luke 21:25-26. It will be a day of geological disaster! Rev. 6:12-17. It will be a day of global destruction! Isaiah 13:6-13; Zech. 14:1-3; I Thess. 5:1-3. It will be a day of gruesome death! Rev. 6:8; 8:11; 9:14-15, 20; 11:7; 13:7, 15

It will be a day of Godly deliverance! Joel 2:10-14, 27-32; 3:13-2, and it will culminate in the promise of His Second Coming! 2 Peter 3:1-14.

DOES ISRAEL REALLY MATTER?

It is indeed troubling to read frequently these days that obvious apathy and indifference of so-called "evangelicals" to the current situation in the land of Israel. The reasons for this indifference seem to fall into several categories:
1. Replacement Theology - the belief that the Church has replaced Israel is God's prophetic program

2. Preterist Beliefs - that the Book of Revelation was written before 70 AD and has nothing to do with future events beyond the Roman invasion and destruction of Jerusalem and the Second Temple - this view often argues that God has forsaken Israel because they crucified Jesus (which they did NOT do - the Romans did it after being manipulated by a corrupt Jewish leadership who held an illegal trial of Jesus)

3. Fear of Islam - this particular problem is now showing its ugly head - instead of speaking the truth about Islam, its beliefs and goals, certain evangelicals now speak of cooperation and compromise - some stating now that "Allah" is the same God as the Bible teaches! That is false - the name "Allah" was one of 360 pagan deities from pre-Islamic Arab culture. The only true God is the LORD GOD of ISRAEL!

4. Desire for church growth and acceptance by contemporary society - this has become an obsession by many churches - wanting to be "user-friendly" and "comfortable" for non-believers.

5. Lack of Biblical teaching - especially from the Jewish Bible, the Old Testament - there is very little teaching going on in churches today that encourages expositional and exegetical understanding of the Old Testament. The departure from historical/grammatical interpretation of the Bible is also affecting the Biblical understanding of believers.

6. Ignoring of the Jewish roots of our faith - it has become almost non-existent as pastor after pastor has ignored innocently or deliberately the Jewish roots of our faith - there seems to be a growing resentment by many of the growth of the Jewish Messianic congregations. Anything "Jewish" becomes "suspect" and "questionable."

It is time for all true believers in our Lord Yeshua, the Messiah of Israel, to speak up and to speak out and to say what God says in the power of the Holy Spirit! Israel has NEVER been forsaken by God and His covenant with them is EVERLASTING!

By : David Hocking Maranatha!

The History and Meaning of Palestine and 'Palestinians'

"There is no such thing as a Palestinian Arab nation . . . Palestine is a name the Romans gave to Eretz Yisrael with the express purpose of infuriating the Jews . . . . Why should we use the spiteful name meant to humiliate us?
"The British chose to call the land they mandated Palestine, and the Arabs picked it up as their nation's supposed ancient name, though they couldn't even pronounce it correctly and turned it into Falastin a fictional entity."

---- Golda Meir quoted by Sarah Honig, Jerusalem Post, 25 November 1995

Palestine has never existed . . . as an autonomous entity. There is no language known as Palestinian. There is no distinct Palestinian culture. There has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians. Palestinians are Arabs, indistinguishable from Jordanians (another recent invention), Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc.
Keep in mind that the Arabs control 99.9 percent of the Middle East lands. Israel represents one-tenth of one percent of the landmass. But that's too much for the Arabs. They want it all. And that is ultimately what the fighting in Israel is about today . . . No matter how many land concessions the Israelis make, it will never be enough.

-- from "Myths of the Middle East", Joseph Farah, Arab-American editor and journalist, WorldNetDaily, 11 October 2000
From the end of the Jewish state in antiquity to the beginning of British rule, the area now designated by the name Palestine was not a country and had no frontiers, only administrative boundaries . . . .
-- Professor Bernard Lewis, Commentary Magazine, January 1975
Talk and writing about Israel and the Middle East feature the nouns "Palestine" and Palestinian", and the phrases "Palestinian territory" and even "Israeli-occupied Palestinian territory". All too often, these terms are used with regard to their historical or geographical meaning, so that the usage creates illusions rather than clarifies reality.

WHAT DOES "PALESTINE" MEAN?
It has never been the name of a nation or state. It is a geographical term, used to designate the region at those times in history when there is no nation or state there.
The word itself derives from "Peleshet", a name that appears frequently in the Bible and has come into English as "Philistine". The name began to be used in the Thirteenth Century BCE, for a wave of migrant "Sea Peoples" who came from the area of the Aegean Sea and the Greek Islands and settled on the southern coast of the land of Canaan. There they established five independent city-states (including Gaza) on a narrow strip of land known as Philistia. The Greeks and Romans called it "Palastina".

The Philistines were not Arabs, they were not Semites. They had no connection, ethnic, linguistic or historical with Arabia or Arabs. The name "Falastin" that Arabs today use for "Palestine" is not an Arabic name. It is the Arab pronunciation of the Greco-Roman "Palastina" derived from the Peleshet.

HOW DID THE LAND OF ISRAEL BECOME "PALESTINE"?
In the First Century CE, the Romans crushed the independent kingdom of Judea. After the failed rebellion of Bar Kokhba in the Second Century CE, the Roman Emperor Hadrian determined to wipe out the identity of Israel-Judah-Judea. Therefore, he took the name Palastina and imposed it on all the Land of Israel. At the same time, he changed the name of Jerusalem to Aelia Capitolina.
The Romans killed many Jews and sold many more in slavery. Some of those who survived still alive and free left the devastated country, but there was never a complete abandonment of the Land. There was never a time when there were not Jews and Jewish communities, though the size and conditions of those communities fluctuated greatly.

THE HISTORY OF PALESTINE
Thousands of years before the Romans invented "Palastina" the land had been known as "Canaan". The Canaanites had many tiny city-states, each one at times independent and at times a vassal of an Egyptian or Hittite king. The Canaanites never united into a state.
After the Exodus from Egypt probably in the Thirteenth Century BCE but perhaps earlier -- , the Children of Israel settled in the land of Canaan. There they formed first a tribal confederation, and then the biblical kingdoms of Israel and Judah, and the post-biblical kingdom of Judea. From the beginning of history to this day, Israel-Judah-Judea has the only united, independent, sovereign nation-state that ever existed in "Palestine" west of the Jordan River. (In biblical times, Ammon, Moab and Edom as well as Israel had land east of the Jordan, but they disappeared in antiquity and no other nation took their place until the British invented Trans-Jordan in the 1920s.)

After the Roman conquest of Judea, "Palastina" became a province of the pagan Roman Empire and then of the Christian Byzantine Empire, and very briefly of the Zoroastrian Persian Empire. In 638 CE, an Arab-Muslim Caliph took Palastina away from the Byzantine Empire and made it part of an Arab-Muslim Empire. The Arabs, who had no name of their own for this region, adopted the Greco-Roman name Palastina, that they pronounced "Falastin".

In that period, much of the mixed population of Palastina converted to Islam and adopted the Arabic language. They were subjects of a distant Caliph who ruled them from his capital, that was first in Damascus and later in Baghdad. They did not become a nation or an independent state, or develop a distinct society or culture.

In 1099, Christian Crusaders from Europe conquered Palestina-Falastin. After 1099, it was never again under Arab rule. The Christian Crusader kingdom was politically independent, but never developed a national identity. It remained a military outpost of Christian Europe, and lasted less than 100 years. Thereafter, Palestine was joined to Syria as a subject province first of the Mameluks, ethnically mixed slave-warriors whose center was in Egypt, and then of the Ottoman Turks, whose capital was in Istanbul.

During the First World War, the British took Palestine from the Ottoman Turks. At the end of the war, the Ottoman Empire collapsed and among its subject provinces "Palestine" was assigned to the British, to govern temporarily as a mandate from the League of Nations.

THE JEWISH NATIONAL HOME
Travellers to Palestine from the Western world left records of what they saw there. The theme throughout their reports is dismal:
The land was empty, neglected, abandoned, desolate, fallen into ruins. Nothing there [Jerusalem] to be seen but a little of the old walls which is yet remaining and all the rest is grass, moss and weeds.
-- English pilgrim in 1590
The country is in a considerable degree empty of inhabitants and therefore its greatest need is of a body of population"
-- British consul in 1857
There is not a solitary village throughout its whole extent [valley of Jezreel] -- not for 30 miles in either direction. . . . One may ride 10 miles hereabouts and not see 10 human beings.
For the sort of solitude to make one dreary, come to Galilee... Nazareth is forlorn... Jericho lies a moldering ruin... Bethlehem and Bethany, in their poverty and humiliation... untenanted by any living creature... A desolate country whose soil is rich enough, but is given over wholly to weeds... a silent, mournful expanse... a desolation... We never saw a human being on the whole route... Hardly a tree or shrub anywhere. Even the olive tree and the cactus, those fast friends of a worthless soil, had almost deserted the country... Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes... desolate and unlovely...

-- Mark Twain, The Innocents Abroad, 1867
The restoration of the "desolate and unlovely" land began in the latter half of the Nineteenth Century with the first Jewish pioneers. Their labors created newer and better conditions and opportunities, which in turn attracted migrants from many parts of the Middle East, both Arabs and others. The Balfour Declaration of 1917, confirmed by the League of Nations Mandate, commited the British Government to the principle that "His Majesty's government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish National Home, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object... " It was specified both that this area be open to "close Jewish settlement" and that the rights of all inhabitants already in the country be preserved and protected.

Mandate Palestine originally included all of what is now Jordan, as well as all of what is now Israel, and the territories between them. However, when Great Britain's protégé Emir Abdullah was forced to leave the ancestral Hashemite domain in Arabia, the British created a realm for him that included all of Manfate Palestine east of the Jordan River. There was no traditional or historic Arab name for this land, so it was called after the river: first Trans-Jordan and later Jordan.

By this political act, that violated the conditions of the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate, the British cut more than 75 percent out of the Jewish National Home. No Jew has ever been permitted to reside in Trans-Jordan/Jordan.

Less than 25 percent then remained of Mandate Palestine, and even in this remnant, the British violated the Balfour and Mandate requirements for a "Jewish National Home" and for "close Jewish settlement". They progressively restricted where Jews could buy land, where they could live, build, farm or work.

After the Six-Day War in 1967, Israel was finally able to settle some small part of those lands from which the Jews had been debarred by the British. Successive British governments regularly condemn their settlement as "illegal". In truth, it was the British who had acted illegally in banning Jews from these parts of the Jewish National Home.

WHO IS A PALESTINIAN?
During the period of the Mandate, it was the Jewish population that was known as "Palestinians" including those who served in the British Army in World War II.
British policy was to curtail their numbers and progressively limit Jewish immigration. By 1939, the White Paper virtually put an end to admission of Jews to Palestine. This policy was imposed the most stringently at the very time this Home was most desperately needed -- after the rise of Nazi power in Europe. Jews who might have developed the empty lands of Palestine and left progeny there, instead died in the gas chambers of Europe or in the seas they were trying to cross to the Promised Land.

At the same time that the British slammed the gates on Jews, they permitted or ignored massive illegal immigration into Western Palestine from Arab countries Jordan, Syria, Egypt, North Africa. In 1939, Winston Churchill noted that "So far from being persecuted, the Arabs have crowded into the country and multiplied . . . ." Exact population statistics may be problematic, but it seems that by 1947 the number of Arabs west of the Jordan River was approximately triple of what it had been in 1900.

The current myth is that these Arabs were long established in Palestine, until the Jews came and "displaced" them. The fact is, that recent Arab immigration into Palestine "displaced" the Jews. That the massive increase in Arab population was very recent is attested by the ruling of the United Nations: That any Arab who had lived in Palestine for two years and then left in 1948 qualifies as a "Palestinian refugees".

Casual use of population statistics for Jews and Arabs in Palestine rarely consider how the proportions came to be. One factor was the British policy of keeping out Jews while bringing in Arabs. Another factor was the violence used to kill or drive out Jews even where they had been long established. For one example: The Jewish connection with Hebron goes back to Abraham, and there has been an Israelite/Jewish community there since Joshua long before it was King David's first capital. In 1929, Arab rioters with the passive consent of the British -- killed or drove out virtually the entire Jewish community.

For another example: In 1948, Trans-Jordan seized much of Judea and Samaria (which they called The West Bank) and East Jerusalem and the Old City. They killed or drove out every Jew.

It is now often proposed as a principle of international law and morality that all places that the British and the Arabs rendered Judenrein must forever remain so. In contrast, Israel eventually allotted 17 percent of Mandate Palestine has a large and growing population of Arab citizens.

FROM PALESTINE TO ISRAEL
What was to become of "Palestine" after the Mandate? This question was taken up by various British and international commissions and other bodies, culminating with the United Nations in 1947. During the various deliberations, Arab officials, spokesmen and writers expressed their views on "Palestine".
"There is no such country as Palestine. 'Palestine' is a term the Zionists invented. . . . Our country was for centuries part of Syria. 'Palestine' is alien to us. It is the Zionists who introduced it."
-- Local Arab leader to British Peel Commission, 1937
"There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not"
-- Professor Philip Hitti, Arab historian to Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry, 1946
"It is common knowledge that Palestine is nothing but southern Syria."
-- Ahmed Shukairy, United Nations Security Council, 1956
By 1948, the Arabs had still not yet discovered their ancient nation of Falastin. When they were offered half of Palestine west of the Jordan River for a state, the offer was violently rejected. Six Arab states launched a war of annihilation against the nascent State of Israel. Their purpose was not to establish an independent Falastin. Their aim was to partition western Palestine amongst themselves.

They did not succeed in killing Israel, but Trans-Jordan succeeded in taking Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and East Jerusalem, killing or driving out all the Jews who had lived in those places, and banning Jews of all nations from Jewish holy places. Egypt succeeded in taking the Gaza Strip. These two Arab states held these lands until 1967. Then they launched another war of annihilation against Israel, and in consequence lost the lands they had taken by war in 1948.

During those 19 years, 1948-1967, Jordan and Egypt never offered to surrendar those lands to make up an independent state of Falastin. The "Palestinians" never sought it. Nobody in the world ever suggested it, much less demanded it. Finally, in 1964, the Palestine Liberation Movement was founded. Ahmed Shukairy, who less than 10 years earlier had denied the existence of Palestine, was its first chairman. Its charter proclaimed its sole purpose to be the destruction of Israel. To that end it helped to precipitate the Arab attack on Israel in 1967.

The outcome of that attack then inspired an alteration in public rhetoric. As propaganda, it sounds better to speak of the liberation of Falastin than of the destruction of Israel. Much of the world, governments and media and public opinion, accept virtually without question of serious analysis the new-sprung myth of an Arab nation of Falastin, whose territory is unlawfully occupied by the Jews.

Since the end of World War I, the Arabs of the Middle East and North Africa have been given independent states in 99.5 percent of the land they claimed. Lord Balfour once expressed his hope that when the Arabs had been given so much, they would "not begrudge" the Jews the "little notch" promised to them.


"Pray for the shalom of Jerusalem
— Psalm 122:6a

The Coming False Peace

The patterns of Biblical prophecy continue to emerge daily. Seekers and followers of the Lord Jesus Christ have been bombarded with relevant news stories and headlines from around our globe that point exclusively to the imminent return of our Savior. Those with eyes to see and ears to hear glean much from the current global struggle. Like the birth pangs of a mother in labor with child, the earth is preparing patiently for the return of its originator. The creation is groaning for its Creator.

But before all of this can happen, a false peace must first come... A false peace that will culminate in the war of the ages. A satanically inspired war that will not only bring every man against man, but will ultimately bring the armies of the world against God himself. (Any friendly wagers?) Finally, the haughtiness of mankind will be exposed and debased when man comes face-to-face with his Maker.

I will not attempt to explain the theology of Antichrist in this short commentary (Look for new article next week for detailed examination of this subject), rather my goal is to bring your attention to where we stand according to God's prophetic timepiece.

The Bible indicates the Antichrist will arise in a time of great world crisis. Among his chief priorities will be to bring peace to the troubled Middle East region, especially Jerusalem.

While the identity of the Antichrist is unimportant to today's Christian, grasping the concept of Antichrist is vital. Having just returned from Israel, I can tell you that the Jewish people are tired. Tired of warring with their neighbors, tired of terrorism in their cities, and tired of the destruction of their innocent citizens.

Soon, the Antichrist will offer the Jews what they have desperately longed for: Peace and Security! (Dan 9:27; 1 Thess. 5:3) After this false peace is initiated, the world will enter the time foretold by the prophets and by Jesus himself. The time of Jacob's trouble. The time known as The Great Tribulation. How close are we? Is this the final generation? Will our generation see the return of Jesus? By Jerry Robinson

Israeli anti-RPG Technology Shields US Military

One of the most deadly weapons that America's fighting men and women in Iraq face are rocket propelled grenades - the shoulder-launched missile weapon known as RPGs which are favored by insurgents.

Now, an Israeli-developed technology with a futuristic bent is raising hopes that the RPG threat will become a thing of the past.

Taking a cue from The Incredibles in which teenage daughter Violet is able to create a protective force shield bubble around herself, the Trophy Active Protection System - developed by RAFAEL Armament Development Authority - does something uncannily similar with armored military vehicles.

In live-fire tests conducted by weapons manufacturer General Dynamics Land Systems in Dahlgren, Virginia last week, the Trophy detected, tracked and knocked out an inert RPG fired at a moving Stryker armored car using a small rocket automatically launched from the vehicle.

"Our mission is not to discover the 100 percent solution, but to find the best solution that can meet warfighter needs today," said Marine Corps Col. Wade Hall, in a General Dynamics news release after the test. "Currently, the warfighters' only counter to the RPG threat is armor, more armor and more armor.

"As demonstrated today, the Department of Defense now has at its disposal technology that allows US Forces to defeat both the archer and the arrow."

According to Didi Ben Yoash, Business Development Manager of RAFAEL's Active Protection Systems division, the Trophy was developed as a result of the changing nature of urban conflict, as exemplified by the US presence in Iraq.

"The whole concept of warfare has changed drastically. Traditional protection has been passive - which means armor. But armor has a number of deficiencies. For one, armor makes many vehicles too heavy," Ben Yoash told ISRAEL21c. "Moreover, armor doesn't protect 360 degrees around the vehicle."

"With conventional warfare, we knew more or less where the enemy was - which was right in front of you. With today's low intensity conflicts, threats are coming from all around - from every direction, and we need the protection to be all around as well. To protect against weapons like the RPG, you need active protection, and the Trophy is a result of that," he added.


The Trophy system is a miniaturized version of the anti-ballistic missile system that automatically detects an incoming threat and launches an interceptor rocket that homes in on the missile and destroys it at a safe distance. Designed to mounted on a fighting vehicle and provide a virtual bubble of protection, it includes rockets that are launched vertically and knock down the RPG round as it streaks toward the vehicle.

The Trophy is based on a system designed by an Israeli industry consortium headed by RAFAEL, including Israel Military Industries, and Israel Aircraft Industries/ELTA. After evaluating several systems available in the world market, General Dynamics entered into the agreement with the consortium and selected the system to offer to the US Army and other customers. GD plans to introduce the system with every new and existing combat vehicle it produces, including Stryker, M-1A2 and FCS.

Ben Yoash explained that the Trophy consists of three major operational steps - detection, tracking and interception.

"First the threat is detected by radar which covers 360 degrees around the vehicle via four antennas.

In addition to detecting, the radar classifies and tracks the threat and determines if the threat is about to hit the vehicle," he said.

Once an incoming threat is detected identified and verified, a 'countermeasure assembly' is opened, which Ben Yoash calls "the hard kill mechanism." The hard kill mechanism is positioned in the direction where it can effectively intercept the threat. Then, it is launched automatically into a ballistic trajectory to intercept the incoming threat at a relatively long distance.

According to Defense Weekly, the Trophy is design to form a 'beam' of fragments, which will intercept any incoming heat threat, including RPG rockets at a range of 10-30 meters from the protected platform. Trophy was designed to effectively operate in a dense urban environment, where armored vehicles operate closely with integrated infantry forces. Therefore, direction, formation and energy of the fragments are designed to ensure effective target kill with low collateral damage, and low risk to nearby troops.

"This counter measure hits the threat directly - it doesn't explode around the threat - so the collateral damage is minimal," said Ben Yoash.

According to Ben Yoash, the concept of the Trophy was first developed over ten years ago, with the idea of incorporating it into the Merkava tanks used by the Israel Defense Forces.

"While the feasibility of the system was proven seven years ago, turning it into a full time project took several years.

The goal is have the Trophy be operational on the Merkava Mach 4 sometime next year. It's actually ready for production and deployment, but it's an issue of budget at this point," said Ben Yoash.

Last year, General Dynamics and RAFAEL entered into a teaming agreement to introduce Trophy for possible integration on US ground vehicle fleets in Iraq. The system was brought to the US as part of the Pentagon's Project Sheriff - an initiative to improve the safety of US vehicles operating in Iraq. The program is run by the Defense Department's Office of Force Transition.

"RPGs are a threat to any army fighting an elevated conflict. If the Trophy has been successful in its tests, as they say it has, then it's great news," military expert Alon Ben-David told ISRAEL21c.

While there are many companies developing anti-RPG technology, the success of the Trophy tests have put RAFAEL ahead of the competition, according to Ben-David, military correspondent for Jane's Defense Weekly.

"They're in very good shape, and in the advanced stages of developing this system."

Ben Yoash confirmed that while last week's test was the first one conducted in the US, there have been hundreds of lives tests in Israel.

"The goal of the Office of Force Transition is to get this operational as soon as possible," he said. "They aim for the first Sheriff vehicles equipped with the Trophy to go to Iraq by the end of the year, or early in 2007."

Israel 21st Century

The Gospel of Judas: A Betrayal of the Truth

The Right Frame of Mind
By Rev. Mark H. Creech


AgapePress - It's being hailed as the greatest archaeological find in the last 60 years. Some are saying the "Gospel of Judas," a Gnostic text that dates back to the second century, could force a completely different understanding of Christianity, more specifically of Judas and Jesus. But as Collin Hansen of Christianity Today writes: "This is no Christian text .... This new text tells us nothing more about Jesus' relationship with Judas than does Jesus Christ Superstar."

The text was originally discovered in Egypt during the 1970s, then circulated among antiquities dealers and ultimately found its way to a safe deposit box in Long Island, New York, where it languished and deteriorated for 16 years. Eventually, it was acquired by a Swiss foundation that formed a joint venture with National Geographic to reconstruct, transcribe, and translate it. National Geographic has now acquired the rights to the document and recently unveiled it for the public.

The Gospel of Judas tells an entirely different story than the one recorded in the canonical gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. In this writing, Judas is the hero and not the betrayer of Christ. Instead, he is depicted as Christ's best friend -- the only one who really understands Jesus -- the one who turns Jesus over to the authorities for crucifixion at His behest -- helping Him shed his fleshly body and return to the spirit world.

The teachings of The Gospel of Judas are Gnostic in origin. The Gnostics were a sect that believed only a select group of people was privy to a secret knowledge. The material world to them was a trap -- something from which to escape to enter into the spirit world. As Hanson notes, the teachings of the "Cainite Gnostics," the group responsible for the Gospel of Judas, were characteristic for "rehabilitating disgraced biblical figures, including Cain, the Sodomites, and Judas." Although Gnostics appeared to be Christian, there is nothing about their teachings that resembled what the apostles actually taught and passed down to the Church.

Despite the fact scholars have always known about the Gospel of Judas and that the early Church rejected it as heresy, Southern Baptist Theological Seminary president Albert Mohler, Jr., notes one of the more significant reasons why many people are making such a big deal of it:

"The resurgence of interest in Gnostic texts such as ... the gospel of Judas is driven by an effort, at least on the part of some figures, to argue that early Christianity had no essential core. Instead, scholars such as Elaine Pagels of Princeton University want to argue that, 'These discoveries are exploding the myth of a monolithic religion, and demonstrating how diverse -- and fascinating -- the early Christian movement really was.' What Pagels and many other figures argue is that early Christianity was a cauldron of competing theologies, and that ideological and political factors explain why an 'orthodox' tradition eventually won, suppressing all competing theologies. Accordingly, these same figures argue that today's Christians should be open to these variant teachings that had long been suppressed and hidden from view."

The fact of the matter is, however, that from the earliest times the Church had a functional canon that was authoritative in matters of faith and practice. In his book You Can Trust the Bible, Dr. Erwin Lutzer, senior pastor of Moody Church in Chicago, Illinois, explains how the development of the New Testament Canon actually took place:

Letters from the apostles were written and received in the churches; copies were made and circulated.
A growing group of books developed that were recognized as inspired Scripture. An important question for their acceptance was: Was the book either written by an apostle or by someone who knew the apostles, and thus had the stamp of apostolic authority?
By the end of the first century all 27 books in our present canon were written and received by the churches. Though some of the canonical lists were incomplete, this is not to be interpreted as the rejection of some books but often simply means that some books were unknown in certain areas.
To show both agreement and the widespread acceptance of the New Testament books, we should note that by a generation following the end of the apostolic age, every book of the New Testament had been cited as authoritative by some church father.
Remaining doubts or debates over certain books continued into the fourth century. As far as historians know, the first time the list of our 27 books appears is in an Easter letter written by Athansius, an outstanding leader of the church in A.D. 367. Obviously, the books were regarded by most churches as authoritative more than 200 years prior to that time.
The 27 books of our New Testament were ratified by the Council of Hippo (A.D. 393) and the Council of Carthage (A.D. 397).
Lutzer rightly adds: "These councils neither added nor subtracted books, but simply approved the list of twenty-seven which had already been recognized by the early church. Given the geographical distances, the limitations of communication, and the diverse backgrounds of the churches, such agreement is remarkable."

Indeed, it was remarkable accord -- quite contrary to the argument that genuine early Christianity was "a cauldron of competing theologies, and that ideological and political factors explain why an 'orthodox' tradition eventually won, suppressing all competing theologies."

This also clearly explains why writings like the Gospel of Judas were never recognized as divinely inspired. Such documents were simply too young to have apostolic authority. Moreover, they were inconsistent with the fundamental teachings of the Christian religion.

It is no coincidence that in the last chapter of the last book of the New Testament there is a dire warning. Although the text was intended primarily to refer to the book of Revelation, it nonetheless has a wider application for the Bible as a whole. It reads: "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book" (Rev. 22:18-19).

Without question, the canon is closed and all the information needed to know God and live as He requires is contained therein. Those who either promote or embrace some extra-biblical revelation such as the Gospel of Judas betray the truth, even as the real Judas Himself did, and crucify the Son of God afresh.

© 2006 AgapePress all rights reserved

Is America in Bible Prophecy?

Michael D. Evans is an evangelist, writer, and founder of the Jerusalem Prayer Team, whose mission is "to guard, defend and protect the Jewish people...until the redeemer comes to Zion." Among its supporters are televangelist Pat Robertson, and Tim LaHaye, author of the best-selling "Left Behind" novels.

Two weeks ago, Evans published a book, The American Prophecies: Ancient Scriptures Reveal Our Nation's Future, in which he theorizes that biblical prophets predicted America is doomed unless it stops accommodating the Arab world in exchange for its oil. He believes Americans are risking God's wrath by not supporting what he believes is God's biblical mandate that Israel have full control of the West Bank and Gaza. Evans also theorizes that many of America's problems--including September 11--are evidence of God's fury that America doesn't fully support Israel.

Why do you say that America’s story is contained within biblical prophecies?
America stepped into the eye of a prophetic storm when it took covenant with both Ishmael and Isaac, the sons of Abraham, the Arab and the Jew. With one of them, Isaac and the Jews, American carries guilt over the death of six million Jews. That’s because Franklin Roosevelt for eight years refused to acknowledge Hitler was killing Jews because Roosevelt was trying to appease Stalin, Mussolini and King Saud so they would join him in the war.

The second one, Ishmael and the Muslims, America used for political expediency—for oil. America stepped into the middle of a prophetic storm because of cutting its covenant with two brothers which are part of prophecy. Most of the Bible talks about this battle between these two brothers, and we’re right in the middle of that.

On Sept. 23, 1979, the founder of Israeli intelligence over dinner told me that America was developing a tolerance for terror. The gentleman’s name was Isser Harel, the founder of Mossad Israeli intelligence—he ran it from 1947 to 1963. He told me that America had developed an alliance between two countries, Israel and Saudi Arabia, and that the alliance with Saudi Arabia was dangerous and would develop a tolerance for terror among Americans. He said if the tolerance continued that Islamic fundamentalists would ultimately strike America. I said “Where?” He said, “In Islamic theology, the phallic symbol is very important. Your biggest phallic symbol is New York City and your tallest building will be the phallic symbol they will hit.” Isser Harel prophesied that the tallest building in New York would be the first building hit by Islamic fundamentalists 21 years ago.

So extrapolating from the scenarios of the Bible, what do you believe is our nation’s future, based on prophecy?

The story of prophecy that has to do with the Jews goes all the way through to the end of the Book of Revelation. Jesus prophesied in Matthew 24. The disciples said, “What shall be the signs of the coming of the ends of the age?” And he said, “The first sign would be deception.” Now, there’s never been greater deception then what happened on September 11, 2001. In the 1990s, New Age relativism redefined a terrorist as just an “extremist.” Bill Clinton and his moral relativism wanted [a Middle East peace agreement] because he was trying to get a postage stamp of himself over Monica’s face. By doing that, he sent a signal to the Islamic fundamentalist world that was already in a rage, that America would embrace terrorism.

In the 1990s, Jews were being blown up almost weekly, and we would not acknowledge it as terror. We called it a “cycle of violence.” We would not define morality, and we allowed the disintegration of our moral values to affect not only the private life of a president, but also the domestic policy in America and also our foreign policy.

What does your theory mean for the coming presidential election?

Number one, we’re in a horrendous battle between darkness and light. We began with a distraction of our moral principles We saw it through the 1960s and the 1970s. We saw it through abortion and prayer in school and all these other issues. We saw it in the White House through Clinton. Then we saw that it translated into our foreign policy--not just our domestic policy. It spread like the Ebola virus.

And now we realize that the holy grail of understanding is that 9/11 was the most apocalyptic day in American history. And we woke up from our innocence to realize that we cannot put our heads in the sand any longer. We’ve got to stand up to the New Agers who believe that a terrorist is not a terrorist.

What do you mean when you say that 9/11 was America’s most apocalyptic day?

No American who saw those buildings fall and that black smoke could think of anything but the horrors of the Book of Revelation. No Hollywood producer could have described something so awful.

But this did not have to happen. We had redefined terrorism and terrorist. Now the dilemma is, terrorism was rationalized as a valid response to its root cause, namely repression and desperation. In the 1990s, the New Agers said, “The reason terrorists happen is because they’re repressed and they need to be appeased. These are really just people that are homeless and hungry.”

Well, when you believe that, you empower them. The people in India do not commit terrorism and they’re very poor, much poorer than those in the Middle East. Once we gave the terrorists the justification for terror, it empowered them to unify to do more of it because they got political concessions from it. Case in point: We offered Yasir Arafat $30 billion plus East Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria, even though he’s committed 2,300 acts of terrorism. What were we saying? We’re saying crime pays.

I want to get back to the presidential election. You support President Bush. What happens if Kerry wins?

If Kerry wins, we get Clinton all over again because Kerry has already brought in most of Clinton’s holdovers. We’ll get New Age liberals who will have the same Middle East policies that Clinton had, which is no Middle East policy. We’ll go back to more peace conferences, we’ll go back to getting the Jews to give up more land, putting more pressure on Israel. It will be the liberal, New Age, kumbaya mantra that will wreck this country.

But in a prophetic sense what does that mean?

We’ll get two Sauls in a row. King Saul was rejected by God. We’ll have gone from a Clinton Saul to a Kerry Saul.

Do you envision an apocalyptic scenario as a result?

I think it will open the floodgates for more terror. Because the only things terrorists understand is power. This is a battle between two books, two kingdoms and two spirits.

One of the things we need to be prayerful about is the issue of Saudi oil. Saudi oil is being used as a weapon to try to influence the U.S. elections. Right now, the Saudis are pushing the price of oil up, they’re going toward $50 a barrel. The U.S. economy has been completely ravaged through oil… I believe the Saudis are willfully and intentionally decreasing oil production, because they desperately want George Bush to lose.

I don’t understand that, because the Saudis have said they would add more oil production.

In the world of the Middle East it means nothing. These are just words. [Radical cleric] Muqtada al-Sadr, who right now is killing American troops and has been for the last six months, has said he was going to stop doing it. Arafat has said he denounced terrorism more than 10,000 times. The Saudis, of course, are going to say that because it’s politically correct--but [in the fall], you’ll see oil prices higher than they are even now.

The Saudis are terrified of Bush. Bush believes in moral absolutes and democracy. If a democracy comes to Saudi Arabia, then their family-owned corporation collapses.

But how does it help them if Kerry is elected?

Kerry is going to be a New Ager. He’s going to be a One World boy. He’s going to unify France and Germany and a lot of the countries that the Saudis kiss up to. So the Saudis are going to feel like, “Happy days are here again,”--like they were under Bill Clinton. George Bush believes that a war is going on, and that the Saudis are helping fund it. Kerry doesn’t feel that way. Kerry is going to be kinder and gentler to the Saudis, and he’ll talk to them. Bush will probably continue fighting the war on terrorism, whereas Kerry will try to find a way of redefining the war on terrorism as good terrorists vs. bad terrorists or good terrorist states vs. bad terrorist states.

You’ve compared the 1990s and the 1930s. What do you mean by that?

In the 1930s, Franklin Delano Roosevelt met with his political advisers, his military planners. He was told that America might have to go to war, and if it does have to go to war, it needs to support Stalin in Russia, Mussolini in Italy, and King Saud in the Arabian Peninsula. And they also told him that all three of those were bigots, that they were Jew haters. And that in order for him to get their support, he must not show any favoritism to the Jews--so for eight years, FDR completely hardened his heart to the Jewish question. He sent the St. Louis ship back to Germany with 925 passengers on board. They tried to land four times--he wouldn’t allow Jews into America. He passed anti-immigration acts. Adolph Eichmann held negotiations for a deal called Blood for Trucks, in which they were going to barter a million Jews for 20,000 trucks--and FDR said no. It got so bad that the Allied pilots were begging to allow them to bomb railroad tracks in Germany because they saw the Jews going to Auschwitz--and he wouldn’t even allow them to bomb because he wanted to keep appeasing the anti-Semites who were supporting him. [For an opposing view, click here.]

We did that in the 1990s. We appeased bigots who called Jews “monkeys” and “pigs” and cut their heads off for being Jews--like Daniel Pearl who was killed in Pakistan and Nicholas Berg who was beheaded in Iraq. We refused to acknowledge a terrorist as a terrorist. They were considered revolutionaries, freedom fighters. While the Jews were being blown up, we forgot that in the 1930s they first started killing Jews--then they killed Christians in the 1940s.

During World War II, we found out that the same Hitler who despised Jews turned and vented his spleen on Christians. Dietrich Bonhoeffer was the champion who understood that Christians were being slaughtered only because they were standing up for righteousness.

Is there an analogue to today?

We have a battle that can only be won by the church, because the church has moral clarity. When we tolerate 100 million fundamentalists intimidating us and threatening us and using oil to do it, then we face a dilemma. We got into this crisis because of America’s foreign policy with Saudi Arabia, like we did before World War II. We have appeased a bigoted regime, a racist regime. We got into this crisis because we refuse to acknowledge racism or bigotry as something that’s lethal that can kill you. And we got into this crisis because we refused to acknowledge that this is a religious war—that the 100 million Islamic fundamentalists are religious.


You have a dramatic family story. Will you tell us about it?

My mother’s grandfather was burned to death in his synagogue in Minsk Russia. The Russian Orthodox Church members boarded it up and burned the whole congregation alive and wrote “Christ-killers” on the walls as they burned it to death. Her aunts and uncles were burned to death in Auschwitz and called “Christ-killers” during that period of time. My mother survived and moved to America, but as a child, I pushed her grocery cart to the grocery store. Catholics and others would drive by in their cars and throw rocks at me and my mother, calling her a “kike” a “Jew witch,” a “Christ-killer.”

This was in the 1950s in Massachusetts. I was beat up for being a Jew. I was told as a little child, “You murdered Christ.” I heard that over and over, by Christians who were anti-Semites.

My father would go get drunk every Friday night at the Twilight Café, and he’d come home and beat up my mother and accuse her of being a whore. She’d wear sunglasses a lot because she’d have black eyes. And then he’d go to church Sunday and sing “Amazing Grace.” And haul us to church. And beat us with extension chords if we didn’t have devotions. Now six of my brothers and sisters will not enter a church because of this. My mother hardened her heart to the Gospel of Jesus Christ because of this.

One night, my father had strangled me and left me for dead in my dried vomit. I was eleven years old. Later that week, I woke up and heard my mother crying. I stood at the top of the stairs, and I desperately wanted to help her and didn’t know what to do. I was afraid, I was a skinny little kid, and I was scared he would kill me for sure because he almost did. I heard him say, “You are a whore, and that bastard upstairs is the reason I’m beating you.” I realized that my poor mother was suffering because of me. That he believed I was illegitimate, that my mother had an affair and that I was illegitimate--so not only was I despised and rejected by my father, but my mother was suffering horribly because of me. I ran into my room crying. I did not believe in Jesus Christ. As a matter of fact, I despised his name.

Given all of that, how could you convert to Christianity?

I was in a terrible state because number one, I had a speech impediment, I had a stomach ulcer, I had hundreds of fears because of the abuse. I had been beat hysterically until I wet my pants and thrown in a canning cellar for eight, 10 hours at a time as a little kid. He had abused me unbelievably. And that week I had gone to school and they said, “What do you want to be when you grow up?” And I said, “20.” Now, everybody laughed, but I said 20 because I though he’d kill me before I was 20.

But that night when I ran in my room crying, I prayed my first prayer. And I’ll never forget, I put my hands over my eyes and I cried and I said, “God, why was I born?” And when I prayed that prayer, all of a sudden with my hands over my face, 11 years old, the room lit up like snow. I was afraid to look because I thought it was my father turning the light on, fixing to beat me, and I was getting ready to dive under the bed--but I peeked through my fingers, and as I did I saw two nail-scarred hands stretched out toward me, and it frightened me half to death because I did not believe in Jesus Christ. Then I looked up, and for the first time, I saw a man’s eyes smiling. The eyes were not blue or brown, every color in the rainbow was in the eyes. Jesus was standing before me smiling. I could see rivers and angels through the eyes. He looked at me, and then said three things that transformed my life. The first is a word I had never heard. He said, “Son.” The first person to call me “son” was Jesus. Second, he said, “I love you.” And the third thing he said was, “I have a great plan for your life.” And he left.

That night, without knowing what it was to be born again, I was gloriously born again. Without even praying the traditional sinner prayer, I knew I was gloriously saved and I believed in Jesus. I was delivered of all my fears. The stomach ulcer was gone in the morning, and the speech impediment was gone. I didn’t tell a human being on the planet this story until I was 32 years of age. I got married at 22 and didn’t even tell my wife because it was too holy, too precious, and I didn’t tell her about the abuse because that was too painful. So I kept all of this in me until I was 32, and then realized that I needed to tell it. I ultimately ended up leading my father to Christ.

No kidding.

Yeah. I went to him and I got on my knees and I said, “I want you to put your hands on my head and pray for me.” And he said, “I can’t pray for you.” And I knew he couldn’t, but I humbled myself and out of my humbling myself, he started crying and he said, “I’ll go to hell. I can never be a Christian for what I did to you.” And I said, “Christ has forgiven you of your sins and he’s forgiven me of mine.” And he wept, and I led him to the Lord.

Do you think your mission now has to do with the fact that you are Jewish?

One-hundred percent. I am a product of my mother’s suffering. All of my divine purposes lead toward the Jewish people, because Christ’s great plan for my life had to do with the nation of Israel, its prime ministers, its leaders, its destiny. It has to do with the issue of bigotry and racism. That’s why I chair the Corrie ten Boom house and that’s why I chair the Jerusalem Prayer Team.

Why do think your book has become so popular?

I think Christians are rallying. They did it during the film, “The Passion,” and they realized they had enormous force and power. It looked like the film was going to crash and burn, and it didn’t crash and burn at all.

Is the book’s success partly a function of talk radio?

This is a grassroots movement. The book is becoming a banner for Christians to rally around because the secular world has completely rejected what we believe

Even so come Messiah Yeshua!


Pray for the United States of America
Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem

Terrorism fought everywhere but Palestine

One doesn't have to be terribly smart to appreciate why the war on terrorism is not going so well: Believing that Iraq is the main front, the war planners have dedicated a major portion of their resources to fight the insurgency in Iraq and have ignored the other power centers of the Islamist terror like Palestinian Authority Territories. This gross miscalculation on the part of the coalition strategists has enabled the other terrorist groups like Hamas not only to continue with their atrocities but has also allowed them a very valuable opportunity to learn from their partner's experiences in Iraq.

The United States of America that launched this campaign and took upon itself to mobilize and lead the international community against the Islamist scourge has to bear the responsibility for this failure. It is treating the enemy as if it has only one face -- Al Qaeda -- and one front - Iraq. Bush, who has repeatedly said that Iraq is ?our main front in our war against terror," is also seems to be convinced that the war on radical Islam will be won just by defeating Al-Qaeda in Iraq.

This simple-hearted approach has helped the enemy tremendously: The Arab terrorist group, Hamas, in the Jewish Palestine, Taliban in Afghanistan and fascists like Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran have emerged as the immediate beneficiary of the U.S.'s misguided policies in the Middle East. Radical Islamists using their strongholds in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Pakistan, Syria and PA territories have cast the U.S. campaign in Iraq as a crusade. That helped Hamas and Iran's President Ahmadinejad in winning their elections. They have not only won the elections but have also renewed their call for the destruction of the Jewish State.

Failure to fathom the true nature and reach of the Islamist threat by Washington prevented it from adopting a uniformed policy against all the different heads of a unified and universally connected Hydra. Even the post-September 11, 2001 awareness could not pull the only super power out of its pre-September 11, 2001 slumber. It remained selective in identifying the enemy and ignored some vital terrorist bases like Palestinian Authority territories, from where the terrorists operate with impunity.

The world has to understand that Hamas' agenda of destroying the Jewish State is part of the same Islamist ideology that has an unalterable objective to enslave the whole world. It has many faces and many fronts. And all of these faces and fronts are equally important in this war on terrorism. They have to be attacked simultaneously and with equal force. Just cutting off one head of the Islamist serpent and letting others to grow unimpeded will only result in the eventual victory for the enemy. Bush has to realize that in this war, saving Israel is as important as saving Iraq: Insurgency in Iraq and Afghanistan is strategically and tactically linked with Hamas' terrorism in the Jewish lands of Palestine.

This doesn't surprise the observers that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad of Iran finds it appropriate to call for the annihilation of a member state of the United Nations. They also understand why Hamas continues to call for the destruction of the Jewish State. U.S. policies have created an international environment in which it is O.K. to be openly anti-American and anti-Semitic: Washington was quick in convicting Taliban and Al-Qaeda for the attacks on the U.S. interests but it didn't move with the same conviction against Hamas, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah and Martyrs' Brigade who have been murdering Israelis for a long time. It also did not do anything against countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and Syria who have been funding the terrorist groups and homicide bombers as an article of their state policy.

The freedoms with which Islamists and Arabs have been allowed to carry-on their anti-Semitic activities inside the U.S. have also contributed in the increased confidence of organizations like Hamas. U.S. reluctance to move against the Arab terrorist fronts within the U.S. gives the impression that Washington doesn't find Arab anti-Semitic activities to be illegitimate. There is no effort to investigate the real objectives of various Islamist groups who have setup their shops in the U.S. as Islamic civil right groups. Despite the warnings by various patriotic organizations, these groups have been allowed to collect funds for the terrorists in the Jewish lands of Palestine.

Nobody realizes that all these so-called groups who present themselves as anti-Zionists are basically anti-Americans. The leaders of these so called Islamic civil right groups, who are inherently and intrinsically anti-Semitic and anti-American, thanks to the Arab money that is generously invested in financing various political candidates, do not encounter any difficulty in being invited by the U.S. Congressmen, Senators and even the White House. The visible presence of anti-Semitic groups on the hill and the U.S. failure to move with force against Arab terrorism in the Jewish lands of Palestine gives the impression that as far as Washington is concerned, the terrorism against the Jewish people is not terrorism.

The manner in which Islamist terrorism is being discussed and dealt with by the U.S. gives the sense as if it came into being only on September 11. 2001. No body wants to acknowledge that what happened on that black Tuesday in New York and Washington D.C. was the direct result of ignoring the Islamist terrorism in Israel. Arab terrorism in the Jewish lands of Palestine is still being considered as just an Israeli problem.

Homicide bombings in Israel, world support for the terrorist state of Palestine Authority and sponsorship of terrorist groups like Hamas by the world powers like European Union, Russia and China is a prove that the world is still susceptible to the anti-Semitic influences.

One has to understand that the real cause of the Islamist terrorism is anti-Semiticism. And no war on terror can be won without eliminating this ancient affliction. Washington will have to understand that the U.S. policy of imposing peace in the Middle East at the cost of Israel's security will harm the U.S. interests in the region in the long run. Awarding a state to Hamas will only empower the Islamists and U.S. demands for an end to the -- Israeli settlement activity in the occupied territories -- will only embolden the enemies of our freedoms.

The latest homicide bombing in Tel Aviv has reconfirmed that the Palestinian State will always be a terrorist state. The creation of another Palestinian State will undo everything that has been achieved by demolishing Taliban's government. Al-Qaeda will gain in Palestine what it has lost in Afghanistan. Iran will have another base and Syria's influence will be further extended. That is why Iran and Syria are harboring and financing Hamas and Lebanon's Hezbollah group.

The most recent developments in the Middle East and the West Asia provide ample evidence that Washington's policies of appeasing Arab governments have created a very dangerous situation for the U.S. and its allies. The world has to understand that September 11 happened only because the world failed to realize that what Israel is up against is not just Israel's problem but a global problem. And without strengthening Israel's hand against Arab terrorism in the Jewish lands of Palestine no war on Islamist terror can be won.

Israeli Insider

Spirits In The Sky:

Could Aliens Be Our Ancestors?
The Australian Advertizer
By Tori Shepherd

Across Australia, people are looking to the skies for a saviour. Many people have seen objects in the sky that they could not identify, and many believe that we are not alone in the universe. There are also people who have built spiritual belief systems around the idea that aliens once came to Earth, and will return one day to take them away to a better place.*1

The Raelians, who had their "annual awakening seminar" earlier this month in Queensland, are a prominent group in Australia that believe aliens created them and will return. These are most commonly referred to as UFO cults, the most infamous of which is Heaven's Gate, whose 39 members committed suicide in 1997 in the hope that their souls would catch a ride to the Kingdom of Heaven on a passing spaceship.

But Monash University sociology professor, Gary Bouma, said religions based on UFOs are an "exceedingly tiny fraction" of religious groups. Professor Bouma, an expert on religion and society, said they were "one of the absolute fringes of spirituality." "It's simply a tiny little group pursuing an esoteric idea. Life has been full of them, they've come and gone," he said. "They never stand up against the mainstream, for a whole variety of reasons."

Ever since space travel began in the 1950s, the idea of extraterrestrials has taken hold of people's imaginations. Films like Close Encounters of the Third Kind and television series like The X-Files have made aliens and UFOs a part of popular culture.
There is even a predominant image of an alien - a small, grey creature with big, dark eyes.

And with new technology such as the internet, small groups can have a large and enduring presence. The Raelians are one group that has used the internet to become a worldwide phenomenon. They have an international headquarters in Switzerland, and offices all over the world, from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe.

They claim there are up to 70,000 Raelians worldwide, with about 500 in Australia. A registered non-profit organisation, their main aim is "to create peace on Earth."The group was founded in 1973 by Rael, a French journalist formerly known as Claude Vorilhon. He said he had met extraterrestrials who told him to build an embassy to await their return to Earth.

He claimed they had created humanity, and would return to elevate them to a higher evolutionary plane sometime before 2035. But members of many groups deny that the word "cult" applies to them, and would prefer to be called religions, if anything.

This is a complicated idea. The High Court of Australia defines religion as "a complex of beliefs and practices which point to a set of values and an understanding of the meaning of existence." By this definition, most groups with any organised spirituality should be referred to as religions.

The proliferation of magazines, books, and internet sites on the subjects suggests most groups referred to as "cults" are not just brainwashed followers of charismatic leaders, but diverse groups of people looking for spiritual guidance.

The Raelians gained media exposure through their claims to have cloned humans, and they have also weighed into the Intelligent Design debate with their version of the origin of life. Roy Tyrrell is a "guide" with the Raelians - a position which he likens to being a priest.

He said the Raelians believe "that life . . . was a scientific creation".
"We believe that beings, whom we call the Elohim (which translates as 'those who come from the sky') came to the planet, and with the synthesis of DNA they were able to create life." "They created man after their likeness, so we look like the Elohim," he said.

This theory of the origins of humanity is common in UFO cults and is often referred to as the Ancient Astronaut theory. Its most famous proponent was Erich Von Daniken, whose 1969 book Chariots of the Gods? Was God an Astronaut? was a bestseller.

Von Daniken argued that aliens were a hidden force behind the history of humankind, responsible for ancient civilisations. He suggests that, once upon a time, there was a war between two worlds, and the defeated race concealed themselves on Earth. These astronaut refugees then contacted the "feeble hominids" (our ancestors) and decided to help them. So they mated with the hunter-gatherers and produced a superior race of human beings.

VON Daniken offered proof of his theory in the form of cave drawings that he claimed looked like astronauts, complete with helmets and spacesuits. Mr Tyrrell said Von Daniken has "provided evidence of the existence of extraterrestrials doing things on the planet in the past."

He said this supported the Raelians claim that the Elohim had been here. Professor Bauma said that these extraterrestrial theories of the origins of life are "an interesting but trivial phenomenon," although for some people they are "a way of making sense of the world around them."

"Von Daniken said if you look at certain things a certain way they look a bit like astronauts," he said. "I can't imagine that he has any current credibility." He said that some people "seem to be vulnerable to some kinds of charismatic leaders", and that people should be wary of people trying to convert them to unconventional religions.

Editor's End Note:

*1. Those who are left behind after the Body of Christ is Caught Up, Raptured, will put for this explanation as to why they disappeared.

Even so come Messiah Yeshua!

Terror - Islam

Since September 11, there has been a concerted effort to present a new and improved Islam to the world. The moderate Muslim activists in the West avoid referring to teachings that may offend the Western citizen, such as the Islamic code of punishment.

They stress that they believe in Moses and Jesus. They refrain from calling Jews and Christians "infidels", "Zionists" or "Crusaders."

They use the term "Sunday School" in place of "Friday Class," and they end their speeches with the Christian expression "may God bless you."

Islam has two streams of theological thought; those based on Mohammed's sayings in Mecca and those penned from Medina. Both eventually were brought together in the Koran, but reflect two entirely different worldviews.

The Meccan view is the 'universalist' view that holds that Islam, Christianity and Judaism all worship the same Deity and that we are all "People of the Book."

The Medina view is the warlike, conquering Islam that is reflected in the Koran by verses such as, "O you who believe! do not take the Jews and the Christians for friends; they are friends of each other; and whoever amongst you takes them for a friend, then surely he is one of them; surely Allah does not guide the unjust people." [Sura 5.51]

Historians agree that there is a big difference between Mohammed's religious teachings from Mecca and his teachings after his migration to Medina.

In Mecca Mohammed was weak, struggling to be accepted, often mocked at and ridiculed. He tried to appeal to the people of Mecca by being compassionate and loving. His teachings condemned violence, injustice, neglect of the poor.

However, after he moved to Medina and his followers grew in strength and number, he became a relentless warrior, intent on spreading his religion by the sword.

This change in Mohammed's personality becomes apparent by comparing the Meccan and the Medinan suras. The following are some additional examples:

In Sura 73:10 God tells Mohammed to be patient with his opponents "Be patient with what they say, and part from them courteously."

In Sura 2:191 God orders him to kill his opponents "Kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from wherever they drove you out..."

In Sura 2:256 Allah, the Moon God, tells Mohammed not to impose Islam by force "There is no compulsion in religion."

In verse 193 God tells him to kill whoever rejects Islam "Fight (kill) them until there is no persecution and the religion is Allah's."

In Sura 29:46 Allah tells Mohammed to speak nicely to people of the Book (Christians and Jews) "Argue with people of the Book, other then evil doers, only by means of what are better! and say, we believe in what has been sent down to us and sent down to you. Our God is the same as your God, and we are surrendered to him."

Then in Sura 9:29 Allah tells him to fight the people of the Book, "Fight those who do not believe in God and the last day...and fight People of the Book, who do not accept the religion of truth (Islam) until they pay tribute by hand, being inferior."

To justify this sudden change in the Koran's mood from peaceful to militant, conciliatory to confrontational, Mohammed claimed that it was Allah who told him so.

History demonstrates that what actually happened was that Mohammed grew strong in Medina -- strong enough to move from being conciliatory in his religious approach to jihad.

Those who claim to be moderate followers of Islam are those who follow the Meccan Mohammed. The militants follow the Mohammed of Medina.

Islam teaches love, temperance and moderation. It's easy enough to prove. Just read the Koran. However, since few ever will, the American face of moderate Islam will read it to you, as is evidently the case with the Bush administration.

But the same Koran teaches jihad, death and destruction out of the same pages, and while the American face of moderate Islam will never read those to you, the militant Islamist reads them every single day.

Verses like the following:

Men are superior to women (Sura 2:228).

Women have half the rights of men: in court witness (Sura 2:282) and in inheritance (Sura 4:11).

A man may punish his wife by beating her (Sura 4:34).

A man may marry up to four wives at the same time (Sura 4:3).

A wife is a sex object for her husband (Sura 2:223).

Muslims must fight until their opponents submit to Islam (Sura 9:29).

A Muslim must not take a Jew or a a Christian for a friend (Sura 5:51).

A Muslim apostate must be killed (Sura 9:12).

Stealing is punished by the amputation of the hands (Sura 5:38).

Adultery is punished by public flogging (Sura 24:2).

Resisting Islam is punished by death, crucifixion or the cutting off of the hands and feet (Sura 5:33).

Fate decides everyone's eternal destination (Sura 17:13).

Every Muslim will pass through Hell (Sura 19:71).

Heaven in Islam is the place where a Muslim will be reclining, eating meats and delicious fruits, drinking exquisite wines, and engaging in sex with virgins (Sura 55:54- 56) & (Sura 52:17,19).

You might notice I didn't include a lot of the 'moderate' verses 'proving' the Koran presents Islam as a religion of peace and love.

That isn't because they aren't there. But they are rendered meaningless by the verses that teach the opposite.

Islamic apologists point to the warlike nature of the Old Testament and the seeming contradiction presented by the Prince of Peace in the New Testament.

But the Koran isn't two separate religions based on two separate Dispensations of God, clearly divided by 400 years of silence followed by the fulfillment of the Old Testament in the life of Jesus Christ.

One has to be an Islamic scholar to separate the Meccan verses from the Medinan verses to know whether Allah wants them to be friends with Christians and Jews or to crucify them.

It is that split personality within Islam that separates the moderates from the militants. We are told that the moderates are in the majority, but all the evidence seems to indicate the exact opposite.

In any case, there are approaching two billion Muslims in the world -- that is two thousand million, to put it more descriptively. If even ten percent of Islam follows the Mohammed of Medina, that's 100 million militant Muslims.

That's a lot, no matter how you interpret it.

By Jack Kinsella
Omega Letter Editor

Pray for the United States of America
Pray for the Peace of Jerusalem

Even so come Messiah Yeshua!