"I tremble for my country when I recall that God is just; and that His justice will not sleep forever."
Thomas Jefferson
A question that seems to be on many Christians' minds lately concerns the possibility that God is displeased with America, and that we are beginning to see signs of His judgment appearing. So what makes people think God may be displeased with America? Could it be the obvious decline in our moral standards? The fact that every day we can read somewhere about sexual sin such as public figures having extra-marital affairs, living together without being married, teachers having sexual contact with their students, or even "sexting" the new term for students that take sexually provocative pictures of themselves and send them to others over their cell phones.
Or maybe it may be that we see the country electing leaders on the basis of what they believe about abortion, the environment, global warming, or gay rights, instead of what they believe about God and the fact this country was founded on the principles taught in the Bible? Instead of standing on the moral absolutes God has revealed in His word, we elect leaders that preach tolerance, and acceptance of alternative lifestyles, and make promises that feed the attitude of greed that fueled the economic crisis we find ourselves in today.
"If God doesn't judge America He will have to apologize to Sodom and Gomorrah."
Rev. Billy Graham
So what does God have to say about this? Can we find something in the Bible that addresses the question we have asked? Actually, I think the answer is very clear if we begin by looking at Paul's letter to the Romans. In the very first chapter, verses 18-32 I think we can see exactly what is happening in our country today because Paul explains what happens when we turn our eyes away from God, and let us not forget that the direction of our country is determined by the collective will of the people. If the majority turn their eyes from God and elect leaders that agree with their beliefs and priorities, the path we will follow has only one end.
The key to the problem is found in verses 18-20 where Paul tells us that all men have the knowledge of God because what is "known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them." He then backs that up by saying that the attributes of God can be "clearly seen" through His creation. So we have two statements here; God has given every man the awareness of His existence within ourselves, and we can also see God in the creation around us as physical evidence to support that. In spite of that, a problem arises which is that certain people choose to ignore the evidence and instead "speculate" about alternative explanations which results in their "foolish heart" being darkened. God says it best in verse 22 where He tells us that "professing to be wise, they became fools."
So what is the result of this choice to not honor God as the creator, and rely on His truth as revealed in scripture? Paul tells us in verses 24 through 32 that there are three results or evidences of people making this choice. The first is listed in verse 25 where we find that people begin to worship the creation rather than the creator. The second is found in verses 26-27 which tells us that sexual sin becomes commonplace. The third is explained in detail in from verse 28 to the end of the chapter where we are told that people develop such a perverse spirit that their personality changes into the complete opposite of what God intended. In verses 30-31 God uses words like "insolent, arrogant, boastful, inventors of evil, disobedient to parents, without understanding, untrustworthy, unloving, unmerciful;". The saddest commentary of all is found in verse 32 where we are told that even though they know what God says, and know that God's judgment for this is death, they not only continue to do it, they encourage others to do it as well.
So lets see here. If I'm not mistaken, in this chapter God tells us through Paul that those who choose to reject Him will end up worshipping(making it your priority) the creation, engaging in sexual sin, develop a personality that doesn't reflect the fruits of the spirit while encouraging others to do the same. Is it just me or does that sound like what we see in America today? Unless I'm wrong, America just elected a president that said his priorities were the environment, toleration, and fixing the economy so we can resume the same spending habits that produced the problem with the economy in the first place? Somehow I think the answer to our original question is pretty evident.
So why hasn't God's judgment occurred yet? I believe the key may be Genesis 12:2-3 where we are told those who bless Israel will themselves be blessed. America has long supported Israel and their right to exist, and I'm sure in no small part this is the reason we may have escaped national judgment so far. Many are saying, however, our new president intends to change many of our long standing policies with regards to Israel. How do you think that decision might be received in Heaven?
We might shortly find out.
Sunday, January 25, 2009
Sunday, January 18, 2009
More Labor Pains?
When Jesus began to teach His disciples about the end times, one of the more well known illustrations He used was of a woman in labor. While I know that not all who read this blog may have personally experienced the ups and downs of a pregnancy, all are probably familiar with the process and how it works. Most should realize too, that labor pains don't begin until it's time for the birth to occur. So when Jesus tells His disciples to watch for the labor pains, He basically is saying that if you see the pains, the time is very very near.
Many have written of the "birth pains" the world is experiencing even now, and making the point that we are living in the end times that Jesus described. Obviously I have done that as well, but I always am watching for another sign as I have no idea how many pains, or how long the labor will last until the church is delivered. That brings me to what I want to share with you today. I did, in fact, have another blog ready for today but this news came across the wires just this morning, so bear with me as I try to explain what I see here on short notice, and without a lot of polish.
If you have followed the news at all in Europe, you may be familiar with the troubles between the former Soviet Union, Ukraine, and the European Union in regards to the transport of natural gas. The major pipeline to Europe goes through the Ukraine, and the relationship between Russia and it's former state is tenuous at best. For many reasons, mostly political but described as economic, Russia is refusing to sell natural gas to the Ukraine. This means as that the gas which would pass through the pipeline and on to Europe is stopped as well. So far this winter there are reports of numerous deaths in Europe due to the shortage of natural gas for heating, and this has naturally produced outrage by the European Union towards Russia. They did in fact threaten unspecified sanctions against Russia and the Ukraine if the gas did not begin to flow tomorrow, (January 19). This is not the first time Russia has shut off the gas to the Ukraine and Europe, so one must wonder if there is an ulterior motive behind the actions of Russia.
It is estimated that Russia holds 38% of the natural gas reserves in the world. They also are the worlds second leading exporter of crude oil with approximately 25% of the worlds market. Their economy is heavily dependent on the sales and export of both natural gas and oil. As such, why then would they play games with what they are so deeply dependent on? If you consider that the European states must import at least 30% of their natural gas needs, the possibility arises that Russia is using their natural gas exports as a tool to remind the European Union that they need what Russia has, and Russia has the power to shut it off. At this point in time there is nowhere else Europe can turn to get the natural gas it needs. Here is where we begin to see what Russia may be up to.
The Middle East is the next largest supplier of natural gas, with approximately 35% of the world's reserves. They are also the worlds largest supplier of crude oil providing approximately 45% of the world's consumption. So why is this relevant to the birth pains we have been talking about? If you consider the degree to which Russia has been cultivating their political agreements with countries in the Middle East over the past few years, and add up the combined percentage of oil and gas exports between these countries, you see that in effect the alliance between Russia and the Middle East results in control of 3/4 of the worlds oil and natural gas. Now ask yourself how much power over the rest of the world Russia and it's allies in the Middle East would have if they so chose? Consider then that the war of Ezekiel 38 mentions that Russia and these countries are allied to invade Israel. This obviously is more than coincidence, but the question remains, why invade Israel? Maybe that question can be answered by the news from Israel today.
According to the Jerusalem Post in an article posted today, January 18, a natural gas reservoir was discovered off the Israel coast that was described as being of "historic proportions". Though still too early to know the extent of the reserves, it goes without saying that this is a very strategic asset that changes the landscape of Israels' natural resources. This fact, however, may be a sign of the approaching apocalypse many have looked for. If you read the account of the attempted invasion that is soon to occur in Ezekiel 38, you find an interesting detail God gives us in verse 13. In that verse the countries which choose not to participate ask a question of those who do, led by Russia and Iran. That question is; "do you come to capture spoil"? It seems to say that the invasion will not necessarily be political, but a simple robbery of Israels natural resources. If that is the case, has this news from Israel today given Russia and Iran the excuse they have been looking for? Look as well at verses 10 through 13 where God says that "thoughts" will come to their minds to "devise an evil plan".
I can't help but feel that this discovery, though great for Israel, may in fact be the "spoil" Russia and Iran will be interested in. It may also prove to be another "labor pain" pointing to the imminent delivery we have been expecting.
Many have written of the "birth pains" the world is experiencing even now, and making the point that we are living in the end times that Jesus described. Obviously I have done that as well, but I always am watching for another sign as I have no idea how many pains, or how long the labor will last until the church is delivered. That brings me to what I want to share with you today. I did, in fact, have another blog ready for today but this news came across the wires just this morning, so bear with me as I try to explain what I see here on short notice, and without a lot of polish.
If you have followed the news at all in Europe, you may be familiar with the troubles between the former Soviet Union, Ukraine, and the European Union in regards to the transport of natural gas. The major pipeline to Europe goes through the Ukraine, and the relationship between Russia and it's former state is tenuous at best. For many reasons, mostly political but described as economic, Russia is refusing to sell natural gas to the Ukraine. This means as that the gas which would pass through the pipeline and on to Europe is stopped as well. So far this winter there are reports of numerous deaths in Europe due to the shortage of natural gas for heating, and this has naturally produced outrage by the European Union towards Russia. They did in fact threaten unspecified sanctions against Russia and the Ukraine if the gas did not begin to flow tomorrow, (January 19). This is not the first time Russia has shut off the gas to the Ukraine and Europe, so one must wonder if there is an ulterior motive behind the actions of Russia.
It is estimated that Russia holds 38% of the natural gas reserves in the world. They also are the worlds second leading exporter of crude oil with approximately 25% of the worlds market. Their economy is heavily dependent on the sales and export of both natural gas and oil. As such, why then would they play games with what they are so deeply dependent on? If you consider that the European states must import at least 30% of their natural gas needs, the possibility arises that Russia is using their natural gas exports as a tool to remind the European Union that they need what Russia has, and Russia has the power to shut it off. At this point in time there is nowhere else Europe can turn to get the natural gas it needs. Here is where we begin to see what Russia may be up to.
The Middle East is the next largest supplier of natural gas, with approximately 35% of the world's reserves. They are also the worlds largest supplier of crude oil providing approximately 45% of the world's consumption. So why is this relevant to the birth pains we have been talking about? If you consider the degree to which Russia has been cultivating their political agreements with countries in the Middle East over the past few years, and add up the combined percentage of oil and gas exports between these countries, you see that in effect the alliance between Russia and the Middle East results in control of 3/4 of the worlds oil and natural gas. Now ask yourself how much power over the rest of the world Russia and it's allies in the Middle East would have if they so chose? Consider then that the war of Ezekiel 38 mentions that Russia and these countries are allied to invade Israel. This obviously is more than coincidence, but the question remains, why invade Israel? Maybe that question can be answered by the news from Israel today.
According to the Jerusalem Post in an article posted today, January 18, a natural gas reservoir was discovered off the Israel coast that was described as being of "historic proportions". Though still too early to know the extent of the reserves, it goes without saying that this is a very strategic asset that changes the landscape of Israels' natural resources. This fact, however, may be a sign of the approaching apocalypse many have looked for. If you read the account of the attempted invasion that is soon to occur in Ezekiel 38, you find an interesting detail God gives us in verse 13. In that verse the countries which choose not to participate ask a question of those who do, led by Russia and Iran. That question is; "do you come to capture spoil"? It seems to say that the invasion will not necessarily be political, but a simple robbery of Israels natural resources. If that is the case, has this news from Israel today given Russia and Iran the excuse they have been looking for? Look as well at verses 10 through 13 where God says that "thoughts" will come to their minds to "devise an evil plan".
I can't help but feel that this discovery, though great for Israel, may in fact be the "spoil" Russia and Iran will be interested in. It may also prove to be another "labor pain" pointing to the imminent delivery we have been expecting.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
Disproportionate Force
DIS.PRO.POR.TION.ATE [dis-pruh-pawr-shuh-nit] Adjective: Not proportionate; out of proportion, as in size or number.
If you have been following the events in Israel lately, you should probably have come across this word somewhere in the media descriptions of Israel's response to the rocket attacks from the terrorist organization Hamas. It has, in fact, seemingly been reserved solely for use against Israel and not for any other nation in recent times. So allow me to attempt to explain what is happening here, and what the world is attempting to do by use of this word.
In the more than three years that have passed since Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip and allowed the Palestinian people to self-rule, they have had to endure over 6000 rocket attacks on it's own territory by the terrorist organization Hamas. So point number one is; who in the world, or what other nation in this world has the patience to wait that long to respond to attacks of this nature? Three years? History is full of examples of nations responding immediately to provocations of a lesser degree, and yet Israel chose to wait an almost inordinate period of time before responding. Yet who has the media and the Arab world chosen to label as the "aggressor"? That's right; Israel.
Secondly, since Israel has chosen to attempt to end these attacks by using their military capabilities, which obviously exceed the capabilities of Hamas, the world chooses to describe their response using the term "disproportionate force". Now I am sure I am probably mistaken here, but somehow during the years of my life I came to the conclusion that whenever a situation results in a fight, the preferable outcome is to be the winner and not the loser. Now don't get me wrong, I firmly believe in turning the other cheek, but if you are going to fight isn't the object to win? And yet the world seems to want to insist that Israel try not to win, rather somehow fight in such a way as to virtually guarantee this fight goes on forever.
Another favorite tactic of the media, as well as Hamas itself, is to focus on the civilian casualties that are occurring and to label them as "atrocities". What isn't reported though is how Hamas chooses to fight. You see, their favorite tactic is to dress as civilians, fight from peoples homes using civilians as human shields, place their weapons in hospitals and churches and schools, all in an attempt to make Israel look bad in the eyes of the world. What doesn't get reported though is the extent to which Israel goes in order to minimize civilian casualties.
The best description I can give you was reported this week in the New York Post by columnist Ralph Peters. Rather than try to summarize, I will simply quote his words exactly from the part of his column that deals with this subject.
"From earlier briefings in Israel, I know the IDF takes an almost absurd degree of care in it's targeting. The questioning doesn't stop with "Is that the right building?" it then asks "What should be our angle of attack to ensure any rubble falls into the street, not atop the primary school next door?" ( Hamas consistently embeds terror facilities among innocent civilians.)
Hitting a terrorist hideout in an apartment building, for example, an F-16 would be armed with the smallest warhead that could do the job. If the terrorists are tucked into rooms on the fourth floor, targeting officers evaluate which window the guided missile should go through to kill the terrorists, while minimizing harm to civilians living below.
Any military veteran can tell that the Israelis are taking enormous care to spare civilians. Given the number of airstrikes thus far and the hundreds of tons of bombs dropped, it remains remarkable that so few innocents have been injured in such a dense urban environment."
So why is the world media so slanted against the nation of Israel in it's reporting? Why does the UN attempt to pass resolutions condemning Israels' "aggression" without once mentioning the terrorist attacks by Hamas which provoke the response? Let's not forget that the Bible predicts a worldwide hatred of the Jews in the end times. Even the antichrist, who brokers a peace to begin the seven year tribulation, breaks that peace at the mid-point and begins a campaign to completely destroy the Jews. What we are seeing here is simply the beginning of the move towards that end. It matters little what Israel chooses to do in this, or any other conflict. World opinion of the nation of Israel and the Jewish people will continue to become more hostile in nature until that great day when the Messiah will return to Israel the second time to save His people and establish His throne forever.
That day is on the horizon friends. Please pray for the peace of Israel, and God's protection of His people today.
If you have been following the events in Israel lately, you should probably have come across this word somewhere in the media descriptions of Israel's response to the rocket attacks from the terrorist organization Hamas. It has, in fact, seemingly been reserved solely for use against Israel and not for any other nation in recent times. So allow me to attempt to explain what is happening here, and what the world is attempting to do by use of this word.
In the more than three years that have passed since Israel withdrew from the Gaza strip and allowed the Palestinian people to self-rule, they have had to endure over 6000 rocket attacks on it's own territory by the terrorist organization Hamas. So point number one is; who in the world, or what other nation in this world has the patience to wait that long to respond to attacks of this nature? Three years? History is full of examples of nations responding immediately to provocations of a lesser degree, and yet Israel chose to wait an almost inordinate period of time before responding. Yet who has the media and the Arab world chosen to label as the "aggressor"? That's right; Israel.
Secondly, since Israel has chosen to attempt to end these attacks by using their military capabilities, which obviously exceed the capabilities of Hamas, the world chooses to describe their response using the term "disproportionate force". Now I am sure I am probably mistaken here, but somehow during the years of my life I came to the conclusion that whenever a situation results in a fight, the preferable outcome is to be the winner and not the loser. Now don't get me wrong, I firmly believe in turning the other cheek, but if you are going to fight isn't the object to win? And yet the world seems to want to insist that Israel try not to win, rather somehow fight in such a way as to virtually guarantee this fight goes on forever.
Another favorite tactic of the media, as well as Hamas itself, is to focus on the civilian casualties that are occurring and to label them as "atrocities". What isn't reported though is how Hamas chooses to fight. You see, their favorite tactic is to dress as civilians, fight from peoples homes using civilians as human shields, place their weapons in hospitals and churches and schools, all in an attempt to make Israel look bad in the eyes of the world. What doesn't get reported though is the extent to which Israel goes in order to minimize civilian casualties.
The best description I can give you was reported this week in the New York Post by columnist Ralph Peters. Rather than try to summarize, I will simply quote his words exactly from the part of his column that deals with this subject.
"From earlier briefings in Israel, I know the IDF takes an almost absurd degree of care in it's targeting. The questioning doesn't stop with "Is that the right building?" it then asks "What should be our angle of attack to ensure any rubble falls into the street, not atop the primary school next door?" ( Hamas consistently embeds terror facilities among innocent civilians.)
Hitting a terrorist hideout in an apartment building, for example, an F-16 would be armed with the smallest warhead that could do the job. If the terrorists are tucked into rooms on the fourth floor, targeting officers evaluate which window the guided missile should go through to kill the terrorists, while minimizing harm to civilians living below.
Any military veteran can tell that the Israelis are taking enormous care to spare civilians. Given the number of airstrikes thus far and the hundreds of tons of bombs dropped, it remains remarkable that so few innocents have been injured in such a dense urban environment."
So why is the world media so slanted against the nation of Israel in it's reporting? Why does the UN attempt to pass resolutions condemning Israels' "aggression" without once mentioning the terrorist attacks by Hamas which provoke the response? Let's not forget that the Bible predicts a worldwide hatred of the Jews in the end times. Even the antichrist, who brokers a peace to begin the seven year tribulation, breaks that peace at the mid-point and begins a campaign to completely destroy the Jews. What we are seeing here is simply the beginning of the move towards that end. It matters little what Israel chooses to do in this, or any other conflict. World opinion of the nation of Israel and the Jewish people will continue to become more hostile in nature until that great day when the Messiah will return to Israel the second time to save His people and establish His throne forever.
That day is on the horizon friends. Please pray for the peace of Israel, and God's protection of His people today.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Middle East Update
Much has happened in Israel in the past week, and I will try to summarize what has occurred, what is happening now, and where I feel this may go in the next week. As I hope you know by now, Israeli forces began to attack Hamas missile launching sites in the Gaza strip last week. Using the Israeli Air Force, precision bombs targeted these launching sites to great effect. They then began targeting the Hamas infrastructure by attacking government office buildings, police stations, and even the homes of the Hamas leaders. This was followed by attacks on known bomb and rocket stockpiles, as well as the tunnels used to smuggle these arms into Gaza from Egypt. These attacks have been successful in severely crippling the ability of Hamas to attack Israel, but unfortunately it has come with an unfortunate price.
It has always been the habit of Hamas to hide themselves among the general population in order to attempt to keep Israel from directly attacking them. It is their standard operating procedure to operate from schools, hospitals, mosques, even orphanages in an attempt to escape retaliation for their attacks on Israel. Although Israel has made every attempt to warn the civilian population to flee and not allow Hamas to use them as shields, civilian casualties are mounting as Hamas forces these unfortunate people to stay.
The good news from the Israeli side is that their attacks are severely crippling Hamas, and most of their forces under the age of 25 or so have deserted and refused to fight. The rest have retreated to tunnels in an attempt to hide from the Israeli attacks. This is why on Saturday morning the Israeli army began a ground incursion into the Gaza Strip in an attempt to once and for all root out the remaining Hamas forces, and find the remaining armament stockpiles and destroy them. As of this morning the good news is that there have been no Israeli casualties reported, and only two severely wounded soldiers.
There have been, however, developments that bode ill towards Israel that may in fact relate to the prophecy of Isaiah 17 that I believe is the next prophecy regarding Israel that the Bible tells us will occur. On Tuesday of this last week Hamas launched Grad type rockets at the town of Beersheva, located in the south of Israel. Two important points need to be recognized here. One, these rockets came from Iran, smuggled through tunnels from Egypt, and also on freighters to the coast of Gaza. Two, these are not the only rockets Hamas has from Iran. They have also been given Fajr-3 rockets which have a much longer range. Why is this important? Simply because Israels' nuclear installation at Dimona is only 20 miles east of Beersheva, and I hope you know by now that the prophecy of Isaiah 17 refers to the area of Dimona coming under attack. The only question left unanswered is will Hamas decide to use these rockets to attack Dimona?
As this week progresses and Israels' forces begin to squeeze the Gaza Strip to flush out the remaining resistance Hamas is faced with a serious dilemma. If they do not launch these missiles two things will likely happen. One, obviously, they will lose them to Israel who will most assuredly destroy them. Two, if they allow that to happen, Iran would probably decide to never give them any more, and Hamas would lose not only their ability to attack Israel, but lose face with other terrorist organizations in the Middle East as well as their own supporters.
I believe this week will go a long way in deciding the immediate future of the Middle East and Israels' relationship with the Arab world. Those organizations that oppose Israel find themselves in a very awkward position. If they remain on the sidelines and allow Hamas to fail, they lose their credibility and most likely a good portion of their support. It sends the message that if you want to attack Israel, you are on your own. I truly believe that Iran and Syria will not remain neutral much longer. Yesterday Saeed Jalili, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council arrived in Syria for talks with Bashar Assad, president of Syria. Reports are that what was discussed was an attack by Hizbullah as a result of the ground incursion of Gaza. If Israel is attacked by Hizbullah in the north, and Hamas from the west, to what degree will it respond? Especially if the decision to attack Israels' nuclear capability is made? It appears that all the pieces are beginning to fall into place concerning much of what the Bible has to say about the last days.
As we watch the events in the Middle East unfold, please remember to pray for the people affected by this conflict, and to pray for the peace that only God can bring to this part of the world. Keep watching.
It has always been the habit of Hamas to hide themselves among the general population in order to attempt to keep Israel from directly attacking them. It is their standard operating procedure to operate from schools, hospitals, mosques, even orphanages in an attempt to escape retaliation for their attacks on Israel. Although Israel has made every attempt to warn the civilian population to flee and not allow Hamas to use them as shields, civilian casualties are mounting as Hamas forces these unfortunate people to stay.
The good news from the Israeli side is that their attacks are severely crippling Hamas, and most of their forces under the age of 25 or so have deserted and refused to fight. The rest have retreated to tunnels in an attempt to hide from the Israeli attacks. This is why on Saturday morning the Israeli army began a ground incursion into the Gaza Strip in an attempt to once and for all root out the remaining Hamas forces, and find the remaining armament stockpiles and destroy them. As of this morning the good news is that there have been no Israeli casualties reported, and only two severely wounded soldiers.
There have been, however, developments that bode ill towards Israel that may in fact relate to the prophecy of Isaiah 17 that I believe is the next prophecy regarding Israel that the Bible tells us will occur. On Tuesday of this last week Hamas launched Grad type rockets at the town of Beersheva, located in the south of Israel. Two important points need to be recognized here. One, these rockets came from Iran, smuggled through tunnels from Egypt, and also on freighters to the coast of Gaza. Two, these are not the only rockets Hamas has from Iran. They have also been given Fajr-3 rockets which have a much longer range. Why is this important? Simply because Israels' nuclear installation at Dimona is only 20 miles east of Beersheva, and I hope you know by now that the prophecy of Isaiah 17 refers to the area of Dimona coming under attack. The only question left unanswered is will Hamas decide to use these rockets to attack Dimona?
As this week progresses and Israels' forces begin to squeeze the Gaza Strip to flush out the remaining resistance Hamas is faced with a serious dilemma. If they do not launch these missiles two things will likely happen. One, obviously, they will lose them to Israel who will most assuredly destroy them. Two, if they allow that to happen, Iran would probably decide to never give them any more, and Hamas would lose not only their ability to attack Israel, but lose face with other terrorist organizations in the Middle East as well as their own supporters.
I believe this week will go a long way in deciding the immediate future of the Middle East and Israels' relationship with the Arab world. Those organizations that oppose Israel find themselves in a very awkward position. If they remain on the sidelines and allow Hamas to fail, they lose their credibility and most likely a good portion of their support. It sends the message that if you want to attack Israel, you are on your own. I truly believe that Iran and Syria will not remain neutral much longer. Yesterday Saeed Jalili, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council arrived in Syria for talks with Bashar Assad, president of Syria. Reports are that what was discussed was an attack by Hizbullah as a result of the ground incursion of Gaza. If Israel is attacked by Hizbullah in the north, and Hamas from the west, to what degree will it respond? Especially if the decision to attack Israels' nuclear capability is made? It appears that all the pieces are beginning to fall into place concerning much of what the Bible has to say about the last days.
As we watch the events in the Middle East unfold, please remember to pray for the people affected by this conflict, and to pray for the peace that only God can bring to this part of the world. Keep watching.
Sunday, December 28, 2008
Is This It?
I'm sure by now most of you have become aware of the conflict that has begun in the Middle East between Israel and the militant government Hamas located in the Gaza Strip. It also should come as no surprise that, because of the nature of what I teach, I have begun to get questions asking if this is the beginning of the conflict that gives rise to the Antichrist and ushers in the period of time we know as the tribulation? So I will devote this blog to try to explain what is happening now, and what I think may happen in the future, in order to make some sense about what is going on in that part of the world.
On November 29, 1947, the United Nations passed General Assembly Resolution 181 which in effect, created the nation of Israel with defined borders in the area then known as Palestine. This resolution was accepted by the Jews, but rejected out of hand by the Arab states, and the Arabs living in Palestine. When negotiations appeared doomed to failure, on May 14, 1948, the members of the leadership representing the new nation passed a declaration of independence citing the boundaries given in the UN resolution and in essence created the nation of Israel. It should come as no surprise that on May 15, 1948, Israel was invaded by the armies of Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria in what has become known as the War of Independence. Israel won that war, but has been subjected to many conflicts with it's Arab neighbors ever since, with only temporary ceasefires or peace agreements that never seem to last very long.
The conflict in the Middle East right now is between Israel and the ruling government in the Gaza strip called Hamas. In August of 2005 Israel, which had up to that time been occupying Gaza in an effort to keep the peace, decided to remove all it's troops and give the authority to self-rule to the Palestinians who lived there. Hamas is the political party which rules in Gaza, and is considered by most of the world's governments to be a terrorist organization. Until last week they had a ceasefire agreement with Israel which had for the most part resulted in a relative peace between both parties. That agreement expired, and instead of renewing it, Hamas began to fire rockets into Israel cities. After enduring almost a week of rocket fire, Israel decided to respond and began to bomb Hamas government buildings, police stations, and known warehouses which stored arms for use against the Jewish state.
As of this morning, close to 300 people have died, and it would appear that Israel is moving troops to the border in what many believe will result in a ground incursion to attempt to remove or seriously cripple the capability to launch rockets into Israel's cities. The problem as I see it is not what Israel can expect from Hamas, because I believe Israel is well aware of the military capabilities they possess, but rather the response from other Arab states which support the Hamas cause. Most troubling to Israel should be the question of whether or not Hizbullah, another radical group which occupies Lebanon to the north, decides to join in and attack from the north.
In 2006 Israel and Hizbullah fought a war that lasted a little more than a month and resulted in losses for both sides in what many believe was a war with no winner.
The conflict ended with the acceptance by both sides of UN Resolution 1701, which called for the retreat of both sides, and the disarmament of Hizbullah. Unfortunately for Israel, almost immediately Hizbullah began stockpiling new weapons with an even greater capability and range than they previously possessed. These weapons have come from Iran by way of Syria, two countries who have made no secret of their hatred of the nation of Israel, as well as their stated desire that Israel cease to exist.
The question before us is twofold; will Hizbullah join in this conflict and attack from the north, and if so, will Israel decide not only to respond to Hizballah, but to respond by attacking the two countries which support and arm them? If you are familiar with my book, and the prophecy of Isaiah 17, you can see where this question may in fact have apocalyptic implications. Remember, I believe the progression of events leading up to the tribulation and the emergence of the so called Antichrist is this; Isaiah 17 where Israel uses a nuclear device on Syria, Ezekiel 38 where the world responds with an futile invasion of Israel where God directly intervenes on Israels' behalf, and Daniel 9 where an individual we know as the Antichrist brokers/enforces an agreement between Israel and it's enemies for a period of 7 years.
So where are we? I believe we need to watch closely what Hizbullah, Syria and Iran do about this conflict Israel is having with Hamas in Gaza. Early this morning, (Sunday 12/28), reports from Lebanon are that Hassan Nazrallah, leader of Hizbullah, appeared in public (which he has hardly ever done since the Lebanon War) and stated that "Northern Israel will burn as Gaza is burning". Also Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called on all Muslims to oppose Israel's actions and any Muslim killed as a result would be considered a "martyr". Are these signs of what is to come? Keep watching.
On November 29, 1947, the United Nations passed General Assembly Resolution 181 which in effect, created the nation of Israel with defined borders in the area then known as Palestine. This resolution was accepted by the Jews, but rejected out of hand by the Arab states, and the Arabs living in Palestine. When negotiations appeared doomed to failure, on May 14, 1948, the members of the leadership representing the new nation passed a declaration of independence citing the boundaries given in the UN resolution and in essence created the nation of Israel. It should come as no surprise that on May 15, 1948, Israel was invaded by the armies of Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria in what has become known as the War of Independence. Israel won that war, but has been subjected to many conflicts with it's Arab neighbors ever since, with only temporary ceasefires or peace agreements that never seem to last very long.
The conflict in the Middle East right now is between Israel and the ruling government in the Gaza strip called Hamas. In August of 2005 Israel, which had up to that time been occupying Gaza in an effort to keep the peace, decided to remove all it's troops and give the authority to self-rule to the Palestinians who lived there. Hamas is the political party which rules in Gaza, and is considered by most of the world's governments to be a terrorist organization. Until last week they had a ceasefire agreement with Israel which had for the most part resulted in a relative peace between both parties. That agreement expired, and instead of renewing it, Hamas began to fire rockets into Israel cities. After enduring almost a week of rocket fire, Israel decided to respond and began to bomb Hamas government buildings, police stations, and known warehouses which stored arms for use against the Jewish state.
As of this morning, close to 300 people have died, and it would appear that Israel is moving troops to the border in what many believe will result in a ground incursion to attempt to remove or seriously cripple the capability to launch rockets into Israel's cities. The problem as I see it is not what Israel can expect from Hamas, because I believe Israel is well aware of the military capabilities they possess, but rather the response from other Arab states which support the Hamas cause. Most troubling to Israel should be the question of whether or not Hizbullah, another radical group which occupies Lebanon to the north, decides to join in and attack from the north.
In 2006 Israel and Hizbullah fought a war that lasted a little more than a month and resulted in losses for both sides in what many believe was a war with no winner.
The conflict ended with the acceptance by both sides of UN Resolution 1701, which called for the retreat of both sides, and the disarmament of Hizbullah. Unfortunately for Israel, almost immediately Hizbullah began stockpiling new weapons with an even greater capability and range than they previously possessed. These weapons have come from Iran by way of Syria, two countries who have made no secret of their hatred of the nation of Israel, as well as their stated desire that Israel cease to exist.
The question before us is twofold; will Hizbullah join in this conflict and attack from the north, and if so, will Israel decide not only to respond to Hizballah, but to respond by attacking the two countries which support and arm them? If you are familiar with my book, and the prophecy of Isaiah 17, you can see where this question may in fact have apocalyptic implications. Remember, I believe the progression of events leading up to the tribulation and the emergence of the so called Antichrist is this; Isaiah 17 where Israel uses a nuclear device on Syria, Ezekiel 38 where the world responds with an futile invasion of Israel where God directly intervenes on Israels' behalf, and Daniel 9 where an individual we know as the Antichrist brokers/enforces an agreement between Israel and it's enemies for a period of 7 years.
So where are we? I believe we need to watch closely what Hizbullah, Syria and Iran do about this conflict Israel is having with Hamas in Gaza. Early this morning, (Sunday 12/28), reports from Lebanon are that Hassan Nazrallah, leader of Hizbullah, appeared in public (which he has hardly ever done since the Lebanon War) and stated that "Northern Israel will burn as Gaza is burning". Also Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, called on all Muslims to oppose Israel's actions and any Muslim killed as a result would be considered a "martyr". Are these signs of what is to come? Keep watching.
Sunday, December 21, 2008
The Origin of Christmas
If Jesus wasn't born on December 25, why do we celebrate it at that particular time? There are no records of the early church even celebrating Jesus' birth, so a logical question would be why and when did the world begin to do so?
The first mention of December 25 was in the Calendar of Philocalus in 354 A.D. In it Jesus' birthday was assumed to be December 25, 1 A.D. This calendar was compiled sometime after Emperor Constantine's "Edict of Milan" in A.D. 313. This edict in essence ended the persecution of Christians which had previously been the hallmark of the previous governments in Rome, and allowed Christians to practice their faith publicly without fear of persecution. But why choose the date of December 25th to celebrate Christ's birth when there was sufficient evidence to support a September birth?
The answer to that question may be found in an understanding of the times in which the edict of Constantine was made. Up until this time, the world, with the exception of believers of Christianity, could best be described as pagan. As such, it should not be a surprise to find that the pagan world had it's celebrations and holidays as well. When the emperor Constantine published his edict, the church was faced with the problem of a calendar which would include holidays from both Christianity and paganism. It would appear then that their answer in resolving that dilemma was to substitute the Christian holiday for the pagan celebration. If that answer seems strange to you let's take a moment to look at the origins of what we celebrate during this season of the year.
The date of December 25 was officially set by the church in 440 A.D. in an apparent attempt to replace the existing Roman holiday called Saturnalia. Most pagan religions throughout history have worshipped the sun in one form or another as the provider of warmth and light. The winter solstice, the shortest day of the year, occurs at this time of the year in the northern hemisphere. It was at this time in the month of December that pagan celebrations were created in an attempt to please the sun gods so the days would again become long and the sun would begin to stay in the sky longer.
Genesis 10:8-10 introduces us to Nimrod, founder of Babylon, a city which has become synonymous with rebellion against God. Isaiah 47 clearly tells us that the occultic traditions and practices we know about had their origins in Babylon. Nimrod and his queen Semiramis had a son called Tammuz who was thought to have died during the winter solstice. The tradition arose that his death would be memorialized by burning a log in the fire. The Chaldean word for infant is Yule, and this seems to be the origin of the tradition of burning the "Yule Log". The next day, after the yule log had burned, it was replaced by a decorated tree. Is this story starting to sound familiar?
The Romans also worshipped the god Saturn. His celebration occured on December 17, at which time the people would decorate their homes with evergreen boughs and give presents to one another. The roman emperor Aurelian, 270-275 A.D., combined the solstice celebrations of the pagan gods Apollo, Attis, Baal, Dionysus, Helios, Hercules, Horus, Mithra, Osiris, and Thseus into one celebration called the "Birthday of the Unconquered Sun" on December 25 as well.
So is it hard to understand why the church fathers would choose to proclaim December 25 as the official date of Jesus' birth? By doing so, they tried to replace the pagan celebrations with what they considered to be one of the most important reasons the world has to celebrate, the birth of our Savior and Lord.
As such, the obvious question that comes to mind is what can we do as believers to see that Christmas remains a celebration of the birth of Christ, and not the commercial event it has become?
Possibly one way would be to truly study the story of Jesus' birth to find the things that make it unique, and obviously divine in nature. One of my favorites is found in the presents brought to the child Jesus by the wise men. I'm sure most, if not all of you can tell me the names of those three gifts; gold, frankincense, and myrrh. But my question to you is what is the significance of those particular gifts? You see, at that time the gift of gold would signify His deity; it was a gift given to a king. The frankincense would by symbolic of His purity; in Jesus' case obviously His sinlessness. However, what was the meaning of the gift of myrrh? The truth is, myrrh was a spice used in embalming bodies after death, so what sort of gift is that to give to a child? Well in hindsight, we can argue these gifts were prophetic in that they celebrated not only Jesus' deity and purity, but His coming death as a sacrifice for all men. How so? Look at Isaiah 60:6 where we are told of the gifts brought to Jesus after He comes again the second time. Notice they bring gold and frankincense, but no myrrh? The reason for that is that He only had to die once, and that has already been accomplished for us as the greatest gift we could ever receive.
As we prepare to celebrate the birth of our Savior, I hope we can all remember that we as believers need, especially at this time of year, to remind those around us that we are not wishing Happy Holidays but Merry Christmas, remembering the greatest gift of all.
Remember, as believers we need to keep Christ in Christmas, because if we don't, who will?
The first mention of December 25 was in the Calendar of Philocalus in 354 A.D. In it Jesus' birthday was assumed to be December 25, 1 A.D. This calendar was compiled sometime after Emperor Constantine's "Edict of Milan" in A.D. 313. This edict in essence ended the persecution of Christians which had previously been the hallmark of the previous governments in Rome, and allowed Christians to practice their faith publicly without fear of persecution. But why choose the date of December 25th to celebrate Christ's birth when there was sufficient evidence to support a September birth?
The answer to that question may be found in an understanding of the times in which the edict of Constantine was made. Up until this time, the world, with the exception of believers of Christianity, could best be described as pagan. As such, it should not be a surprise to find that the pagan world had it's celebrations and holidays as well. When the emperor Constantine published his edict, the church was faced with the problem of a calendar which would include holidays from both Christianity and paganism. It would appear then that their answer in resolving that dilemma was to substitute the Christian holiday for the pagan celebration. If that answer seems strange to you let's take a moment to look at the origins of what we celebrate during this season of the year.
The date of December 25 was officially set by the church in 440 A.D. in an apparent attempt to replace the existing Roman holiday called Saturnalia. Most pagan religions throughout history have worshipped the sun in one form or another as the provider of warmth and light. The winter solstice, the shortest day of the year, occurs at this time of the year in the northern hemisphere. It was at this time in the month of December that pagan celebrations were created in an attempt to please the sun gods so the days would again become long and the sun would begin to stay in the sky longer.
Genesis 10:8-10 introduces us to Nimrod, founder of Babylon, a city which has become synonymous with rebellion against God. Isaiah 47 clearly tells us that the occultic traditions and practices we know about had their origins in Babylon. Nimrod and his queen Semiramis had a son called Tammuz who was thought to have died during the winter solstice. The tradition arose that his death would be memorialized by burning a log in the fire. The Chaldean word for infant is Yule, and this seems to be the origin of the tradition of burning the "Yule Log". The next day, after the yule log had burned, it was replaced by a decorated tree. Is this story starting to sound familiar?
The Romans also worshipped the god Saturn. His celebration occured on December 17, at which time the people would decorate their homes with evergreen boughs and give presents to one another. The roman emperor Aurelian, 270-275 A.D., combined the solstice celebrations of the pagan gods Apollo, Attis, Baal, Dionysus, Helios, Hercules, Horus, Mithra, Osiris, and Thseus into one celebration called the "Birthday of the Unconquered Sun" on December 25 as well.
So is it hard to understand why the church fathers would choose to proclaim December 25 as the official date of Jesus' birth? By doing so, they tried to replace the pagan celebrations with what they considered to be one of the most important reasons the world has to celebrate, the birth of our Savior and Lord.
As such, the obvious question that comes to mind is what can we do as believers to see that Christmas remains a celebration of the birth of Christ, and not the commercial event it has become?
Possibly one way would be to truly study the story of Jesus' birth to find the things that make it unique, and obviously divine in nature. One of my favorites is found in the presents brought to the child Jesus by the wise men. I'm sure most, if not all of you can tell me the names of those three gifts; gold, frankincense, and myrrh. But my question to you is what is the significance of those particular gifts? You see, at that time the gift of gold would signify His deity; it was a gift given to a king. The frankincense would by symbolic of His purity; in Jesus' case obviously His sinlessness. However, what was the meaning of the gift of myrrh? The truth is, myrrh was a spice used in embalming bodies after death, so what sort of gift is that to give to a child? Well in hindsight, we can argue these gifts were prophetic in that they celebrated not only Jesus' deity and purity, but His coming death as a sacrifice for all men. How so? Look at Isaiah 60:6 where we are told of the gifts brought to Jesus after He comes again the second time. Notice they bring gold and frankincense, but no myrrh? The reason for that is that He only had to die once, and that has already been accomplished for us as the greatest gift we could ever receive.
As we prepare to celebrate the birth of our Savior, I hope we can all remember that we as believers need, especially at this time of year, to remind those around us that we are not wishing Happy Holidays but Merry Christmas, remembering the greatest gift of all.
Remember, as believers we need to keep Christ in Christmas, because if we don't, who will?
Sunday, December 14, 2008
Christmas in September?
As we find ourselves approaching Christmas, I thought I would share with you a question I have been asked many times, especially at this time of year, and that is, "was Jesus really born on December 25"? Well, to answer that we need only to look closely at the story of His birth told to us in the gospel of Luke and carefully consider what is said there.
First we should look at the description given as to what the shepherds were doing when Jesus was born. In Luke 2:8 we find that the shepherds were in the fields tending their flock at night. Not an uncommon occurrence when in season, but certainly not around December 25 when it's winter in Israel and the lows at night are in the 30-40 degree range. Shepherds in Israel would usually stop taking their flocks out in mid-October and not resume until the spring, so that could be our first clue that a December date is inaccurate.
The second thing we can look at is related to the winter as well. In Luke 2:1-3 we see that a decree was given by Caesar that the whole world should be taxed. As a result, everyone was to return to their "own city" for the purpose of registering their payment. How logical would it be for Rome to ask everyone they wanted to tax to travel, (understanding the main mode of transportation was walking), in the winter when not only was it cold, but snow was possible at any time? Somehow it just doesn't seem likely this would happen. After all, remember Rome was after money, so why make it hard to collect?
The best indication, however, of just when Jesus was born can be found in the first chapter of Luke when we are told of the conception and birth of Jesus' cousin John the Baptist. When we are introduced to Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, we are told in verse 5 of chapter 1 that he was a priest "of the course of Abia", or Abijah. It says also that he was beginning his service in the temple when he was told by the angel Gabriel that he was about to become a father. We know from
1 Chronicles 24:10 that the course of Abijah was the eighth course to serve in the temple. This would mean his service would have ended around the month of July. Assuming a normal term of pregnancy, John would have likely been born around April of the next year.
Why is this important to our question of when Jesus was born? If we look at Luke 1:36 we see that when Gabriel visited Mary to tell her about what was about to happen to her, he also said that Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist and Marys' cousin, was in her 6th month of pregnancy. This means that Jesus was to be born approximately 6 months after John the Baptist. Look at John being born around April, and you end up with Jesus being born around September. Is it possible that Jesus was actually born in September rather than in December as we celebrate it?
I think if we accept what the Bible tells us as being accurate, it would be hard for us not to. But if we assume this to be correct, I want to throw out one more thing to consider. By now most should realize the importance of events in Israels' history occuring on their Holy Feast days. If you have heard me teach at all I know you are familiar with this subject. After the Israelites were delivered out of the bondage in Egypt, while in the desert, God told Moses that there were to be seven feasts celebrated throughout the year. Three occur in the spring, one in the summer, and three more in the fall. If we assume a normal 280 day pregnancy, and then place Johns' birth in April and Jesus' birth in September we find it is not only possible, but probable that John was born on the Feast of Passover, and Jesus was born on the Feast of Tabernacles, also known as Sukkot. I'm sure this is just coincidence right? You might want to also think about this. Why was Bethlehem so crowded that Joseph and Mary could not find any room? How about the fact it was The Feast of Tabernacles, one of the three feast days that all Jewish men were required to attend in Jerusalem, and everyone who could possibly make the trip was there to celebrate?
Am I trying to ruin your Christmas here? Of course not. I think Jesus appreciates His children celebrating His birth even if we got the day wrong. However I do think the very best gift we can give Him is to not only remember the reason for the season, but to celebrate it exactly as He would want. Let's all be sure to remember God's gift to us in the person of Jesus, and to give to others before we think of ourselves and what we might want.
God gave us the ultimate gift. What are we giving, and to whom?
First we should look at the description given as to what the shepherds were doing when Jesus was born. In Luke 2:8 we find that the shepherds were in the fields tending their flock at night. Not an uncommon occurrence when in season, but certainly not around December 25 when it's winter in Israel and the lows at night are in the 30-40 degree range. Shepherds in Israel would usually stop taking their flocks out in mid-October and not resume until the spring, so that could be our first clue that a December date is inaccurate.
The second thing we can look at is related to the winter as well. In Luke 2:1-3 we see that a decree was given by Caesar that the whole world should be taxed. As a result, everyone was to return to their "own city" for the purpose of registering their payment. How logical would it be for Rome to ask everyone they wanted to tax to travel, (understanding the main mode of transportation was walking), in the winter when not only was it cold, but snow was possible at any time? Somehow it just doesn't seem likely this would happen. After all, remember Rome was after money, so why make it hard to collect?
The best indication, however, of just when Jesus was born can be found in the first chapter of Luke when we are told of the conception and birth of Jesus' cousin John the Baptist. When we are introduced to Zacharias, the father of John the Baptist, we are told in verse 5 of chapter 1 that he was a priest "of the course of Abia", or Abijah. It says also that he was beginning his service in the temple when he was told by the angel Gabriel that he was about to become a father. We know from
1 Chronicles 24:10 that the course of Abijah was the eighth course to serve in the temple. This would mean his service would have ended around the month of July. Assuming a normal term of pregnancy, John would have likely been born around April of the next year.
Why is this important to our question of when Jesus was born? If we look at Luke 1:36 we see that when Gabriel visited Mary to tell her about what was about to happen to her, he also said that Elizabeth, the mother of John the Baptist and Marys' cousin, was in her 6th month of pregnancy. This means that Jesus was to be born approximately 6 months after John the Baptist. Look at John being born around April, and you end up with Jesus being born around September. Is it possible that Jesus was actually born in September rather than in December as we celebrate it?
I think if we accept what the Bible tells us as being accurate, it would be hard for us not to. But if we assume this to be correct, I want to throw out one more thing to consider. By now most should realize the importance of events in Israels' history occuring on their Holy Feast days. If you have heard me teach at all I know you are familiar with this subject. After the Israelites were delivered out of the bondage in Egypt, while in the desert, God told Moses that there were to be seven feasts celebrated throughout the year. Three occur in the spring, one in the summer, and three more in the fall. If we assume a normal 280 day pregnancy, and then place Johns' birth in April and Jesus' birth in September we find it is not only possible, but probable that John was born on the Feast of Passover, and Jesus was born on the Feast of Tabernacles, also known as Sukkot. I'm sure this is just coincidence right? You might want to also think about this. Why was Bethlehem so crowded that Joseph and Mary could not find any room? How about the fact it was The Feast of Tabernacles, one of the three feast days that all Jewish men were required to attend in Jerusalem, and everyone who could possibly make the trip was there to celebrate?
Am I trying to ruin your Christmas here? Of course not. I think Jesus appreciates His children celebrating His birth even if we got the day wrong. However I do think the very best gift we can give Him is to not only remember the reason for the season, but to celebrate it exactly as He would want. Let's all be sure to remember God's gift to us in the person of Jesus, and to give to others before we think of ourselves and what we might want.
God gave us the ultimate gift. What are we giving, and to whom?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)