On February 13, Kalon Mitchell and Michael Link will give split sermons, titled, respectively, “Fear” and “Honor.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

As a child of God, how well do we represent our Father? How do those around us view our actions?

When we are going about our daily activities, do we let our light shine in such a way that we mirror what God has revealed to us? When others see the way that we act in various situations, is it the way a true Christian would act?

God has taught and aided us through many devices. He has revealed His Way, The Truth, and given us all that we need to be a “good child” and not a child of the world. He has and will continue to do His part perfectly.

Our job can be seen in 1 John 3:10, which states: “In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, nor is he who does not love his brother.”  It is incumbent upon us to practice righteousness and to love our brethren, so that when society observes us, they catch a glimpse of our Father in the reflection.

In this edition, we focus primarily on events pertaining to and affecting Europe. We begin with an article about Britain, showing how interest groups and political maneuvering are trying to keep a party and a leadership in power which have–by all objective standards–shown themselves to be politically bankrupt.

We then address the present difficulties that European unification is facing. It is being proposed that because of European disarray, America’s President has no need to even listen to or meet with Europeans. The duplicity of European and other nations in dealing with Iran is now being matched by Iranian duplicity in its dealings with Europe and others.

Realizing the sad state of European affairs, especially German politicians are now pleading for a unifying European army–realizing that Britain will probably not have a part in such a project. At the same time, frictions between Europe and America continue.

We conclude with a lengthy report on Germany’s Catholic sexual abuse scandal, which is casting a very dark and disturbing light on the very “image and system” of the Catholic church itself.

Britain’s Corrupt Political System

The Daily Express wrote on February 8:

“Britain’s standing in the world has fallen dramatically while our debts have soared. Our democracy has been corrupted, our economy shattered, our freedoms removed and our national identity weakened.

“Yet in the face of these disasters, support for the Labour Party [Democrats] remains remarkably strong. The bulk of the blame for Labour’s resilience is being heaped on Tory [Conservative] leader David Cameron, who is accused of being over-cautious and indecisive. There is some justification in these charges. The Conservatives seem to have neither a clear economic plan, nor any robustness on crime, immigration or Europe. But the weakness of the Tories’ prospects is not entirely Cameron’s fault. Even if he were a cross between Winston Churchill and Benjamin Disraeli, the Conservatives would still be struggling to make headway. For the truth is that for decades the entire political system has been outrageously biased in favour of Labour…

“In recent opinion polls, Labour’s support has consistently hovered at 30 per cent, no matter what the depth of the recession, the splits in the Cabinet, the expenses abuses of ministers or the politically correct idiocies of the Government. To some critics this seems utterly bizarre, a sign that the British public has taken leave of its senses. But in truth, the 30 per cent conundrum is easily explained. The fact is that Labour has developed three large voting blocs which guarantee that its vote will not fall much below a third of the electorate, no matter how dismally the government performs.

“These three blocs comprise public sector employees, immigrants and welfare claimants, all of whom are dependent on the state either for their living or their residency here. It is no coincidence that each of these three groups has massively expanded during the past 13 years of Labour rule, with crude party advantage playing a vital role in this policy.

“The public sector has grown by at least one million people since 1997, not counting all the staff in quasitate positions like contractors or GPs. Moreover, workers on the state payroll have enjoyed higher pay [raises], better pensions, shorter hours, longer holidays and greater job security than their counterparts in the private  sector. In many Labour strongholds, the public sector is now by far the largest employer.

“Similarly, mass immigration has significantly helped Labour’s cause, especially since the Government is radically extending the franchise by dishing out more than 200,000 British passports a year. According to authoritative studies, around 80 per cent of migrants and ethnic minorities back Labour, while the pressure group operation Black vote claims that at least 70 marginal seats at the coming election will be decided by the ethnic minority vote.

“The full cynicism of Labour’s eagerness to exploit immigration for electoral ends was laid bare in the diaries of former minister Chris Mullin, who at one point privately bewailed the Government’s reluctance to tackle misogynistic abuses in Asian culture… But then added, ‘At least 20 seats, including Jack Straw’s, depend on Asian votes.’

“The third great bloc is made up of benefits claimants, on whom over £180billion a year is now spent. Thanks to remorseless expansion of the welfare system under Brown, there are more than five million people of working age living on social security. They are hardly likely to vote for a tougher regime under the Tories.”

Politics all over the world is dirty business. Political parties and politicians come to power and stay in power, not necessarily because of achievements and competence, but far too often because of political maneuvering, sickening compromise and the “buying” of necessary votes. This is true–not just in our political systems–but everywhere where a candidate for whatever office or position is dependent on the votes of others.

Europe’s Voice Does Not Move Anyone

Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 9:

“The relationship between the US and the European Union is cooling. By declining to come to Spain for a trans-Atlantic summit, President Barack Obama made it clear that Brussels is far down on his priority list… The message, though, couldn’t have been any clearer. The president has plenty of time in his schedule to visit Australia and Indonesia in March… but the European Union has slipped far down on his priority list. The Europeans are none too pleased. Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Zapatero defiantly told a confidant that the US shouldn’t forget that Europe is ‘an economic power and an important political actor’…

“All too often, Europe gets lost in diplomatic protocol… At the Madrid summit, the unassuming Belgian Herman van Rompuy, who has been president of the European Council since December, was insistent that he be the first to greet Obama. But advisers to Zapatero, the Spanish host, refused. After all, the Spanish prime minister also currently holds the position of ‘president of the European Council.’ The EU, as it happens, is still holding on to its tradition of bestowing a rotating ‘presidency’ on a different EU member state every six months…

“A compromise was eventually found. Zapatero would get to say the first ‘hi,’ Rompuy would then be able to sit to the right of Obama at dinner. But soon enough, other EU top brass voiced complaints. The seat planned for Rompuy was actually a privilege reserved for European Commission President Manuel José Barroso, who is in third place on the current scale of most important people in Brussels…

“And what about Catherine Ashton, the EU’s new ‘high representative for foreign and security policy’? Her role at the summit hadn’t even been addressed. The skirmishing does little to dispel the unfavorable impression Americans have about Europe’s foreign policy…

“Europe seems intent on using etiquette to compensate for its diminishing role on the world stage. No one wants to admit what everyone can see: Europe’s voice doesn’t move anyone at the moment — neither future major powers, like India and Brazil, nor leaders in Washington, Moscow or Beijing. And how could it? The EU may be a successful economic community, but it is just as deeply divided on questions of foreign and security policy as it is on issues like climate change and inner security.

“When it comes to foreign policy, each member state is looking out for its own interests. This is particularly clear when it comes to relations with the United States. The Brits continue to guard over their ‘special relationship,’ French President Nicolas Sarkozy always tries to edge his way to Obama’s side in group photos — and then the Spaniards wanted to use the US-EU summit to bask in the spotlight.

“Now officials are searching for a substitute date for the EU-US summit — possibly in the autumn, when Obama plans to fly to Portugal for a NATO summit. But the more important question is whether European leaders have really listened to the ‘wake-up call for Europe’ that many EU observers are speaking of following this American affront.”

Europe is realizing that it is becoming irrelevant on the world scene. Strong forces within the EU will try to change that development.

As the next articles show, the ongoing European duplicity of its member states can clearly be seen in their dealings with Iran. And now, Europe is beginning to reap what it has been sowing.

Iran’s Duplicity

AFP wrote on February 7:

“Iran will begin enriching uranium to 20 percent from Tuesday, the Islamic republic’s atomic chief announced on Sunday just hours after being told to do so by hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. The decision raises the stakes in a dispute with the West less than a week after Iran had appeared to accept a UN-drafted nuclear deal on the supply of fuel for a research nuclear reactor in Tehran. Ahmadinejad’s move drew fire from Britain and the United States, and analysts said it was a bid to exert pressure on Washington and drive a wedge between the six powers over attempts to impose new sanctions on Tehran…

“Britain and the United States condemned the declaration… US Defence Secretary Robert Gates called for mounting ‘international pressure’ on Iran… A Western analyst who asked not to be named said Iranian declarations such as Ahmadinejad’s on Sunday were attempts to ‘delay potential sanctions by dividing the six world powers without backing down on the nuclear programme.'”

Iran a Nuclear State

On February 11, Mail-On-Line reported:

“Iran is now a ‘nuclear state’, President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad announced this morning. As Gordon Brown warned that the world’s patience is wearing thin, Ahmadinejad told scores of cheering Iranians that the Islamic Republic is capable of producing weapons-grade uranium.

“He spoke as tens of thousands of people took to the streets in Tehran to mark the 31st anniversary of the Islamic revolution. Despite fears of violence, opposition supporters found themselves largely overwhelmed by the clerical regime and pro-government demonstrators.

“The massive security clampdown appeared to succeed in preventing protesters from converging into a cohesive demonstrations.”

Iran’s Chess Game With the World’s “Super Powers”

Deutsche Welle wrote on February 8:

“Since 2004, the European Union has publicly claimed the united position that the row over Iran’s nuclear program should be resolved diplomatically, but has reserved the right to back United Nations Security Council sanctions if Iran does not comply to international demands. Yet, consistently since that time, individual nations have indicated a willingness to establish independent relationships with Iran, both political and economic, which seemingly ignore Brussels’ position. Europe claims to be united, but a closer examination shows that this unity is an illusion.

“For instance, Germany has developed deep business ties with Iran, with more than 50 German companies basing their offices there. Trade volume between the two has increased steadily over the last decade despite UN sanctions, with Germany having the largest share of Iran’s export market. Italy also has developed a strong relationship, both political and economic, with Iran. Last year Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini met with his Iranian counterpart Manouchehr Mottaki in Tehran to discuss a host of matters from the Italian, not EU, perspective. Italian companies also have frequently done business with Tehran, selling them goods and services that could have both military and civilian uses.

“These relationships have helped Iran to sustain and continue its nuclear program. As of Tuesday, Tehran plans to enrich uranium at a higher level than previously, prompting the United States to renew its call for heavy sanctions against Iran…

“The EU’s public front masks internal disagreement and double-speak. Charting a course for allies to have a united front will be difficult, let alone getting countries like China and Russia, reluctant  to punish Iran, to back stronger sanctions. And as the international community dithers over what action to take, Israel is looking to Europe to take the lead. The prospect of unilateral Israeli action looms…

“US President Barack Obama has followed through on his promise to diplomatically engage Iran, taking a much different approach than predecessor George W. Bush. But no progress has been made, despite promising talks last fall in which Iran appeared to agree to a deal to move nuclear fuel out of the country. Yet the deal was abandoned by the Iranians at the last moment…

“This lack of faith, combined with Iran’s insistence that it would not retreat from what it deems its right to develop a nuclear program, has led to a recent escalation in tone from Washington. At the end of January, White House officials indicated that they would  increase missile defenses in the Middle East to protect Gulf state allies against Tehran. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has publicly pressed China for tougher sanctions.

“The United States also has begun to pressure European allies to lessen business ties with Iran. It seems to have had an affect; last week, German manufacturer Siemens announced that it would cut future trade ties with Iran. Italian companies have yet to do the same, but Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi indicated last week that a nuclear Iran was not acceptable.

“France holds the UN Security Council’s presidency this month and is widely expected to bring a resolution calling for strict sanctions…

“Even with the United States and its allies on the same page, Russia or China still need to support sanctions if they are to succeed. China has close energy relations with Tehran – energy which is needed to sustain China’s economic growth – and is loath to do anything that risks them. Russia, meanwhile, has been Iran’s loudest defender. It has provided Tehran with a number of materials, from weapons to heavy machinery with dual-use nuclear purposes. Moscow has consistently watered down sanctions in the past, and has yet to indicate whether it would be willing to revisit that stance…

“The United States did itself no favors by recently announcing a deal to sell weapons to Taiwan. But other factors in the Middle East might force China’s hand and compel them to acquiese to sanctions supported by the United States and its European allies…

“Israel has used unilateral military force in similar situations in the past, taking out nuclear sites in Iraq and suspected nuclear sites in Syria. Iran presents a more unique challenge, as its nuclear sites are spread around the country and are difficult to target.”

Even though Israel may be looking at Europe to lead in this controversy with Iran, Europe, due to their financial interests, may not be willing to do so. America, on the other hand, might not want to, either. So, Israel may face a situation where it alone might try to act decisively, even including using military force. This might be a fatal development.

As Die Süddeutsche Zeitung wrote on February 8:

“All this is triggering a tragic momentum that will boost all those who favor a military strike against Iran. But we should be careful: before engaging in all the careless talk about military options, the arsenal of alternative options must be exhausted.”

At the same time, the Frankfurter Rundschau pointed out the undesirable results of tough economic sanctions: “… the UN veto powers plus Germany are walking a tightrope. There are no special sanctions that could target just the regime or the Revolutionary Guards. Sanctions only make sense if they really hurt — and that inevitably entails hurting the population. The regime could seize on that as an opportunity to call for the great national struggle against the evil rest of the world and to choke off its domestic opposition…”

Germany For European Army

The EUObserver wrote on February 8:

“German foreign minister Guido Westerwelle has said Berlin supports the long term goal of creating a European army, which will bolster the EU’s role as a global player… Mr Westerwelle, who is just a few months into the job as Germany’s top diplomat as part of a ruling Christian Democrat and liberal coalition, suggested that moving further on common security and defence will be the ‘motor for greater European integration’…

“Under EU rules, member states with certain military capacities and the political will to move in this direction can club together to move forward on common defence. In recent years, the need for an EU army has often been floated in political discussions – politicians in France, the UK and Poland have also spoken favourably of the idea…

“Within the EU’s 27 member states, France and the UK have the greatest defence means. Their co-operation and willingness is seen as essential for any possible development of EU military defence… Britain called for enhanced military action between itself and France… Analysts suggest that the pressure on defence budgets caused by the economic downturn may spur further defence sharing among EU member states.”

Germany is becoming painfully aware of Europe’s present political irrelevancy in world affairs. Voices for a unifying European army are becoming louder, as the next article shows as well.

“The EU ‘Has No Vision of Where We Are Heading'”

On February 9, Der Spiegel Online published an interview with former European Commissioner Günter Verheugen, whose 10 years in office ended Tuesday. We are bringing you the following excerpts from Mr. Verheugen’s comments:

“With the 27 members that it has today, compared to the 15 that it had back then, the EU has obviously changed dramatically… There seems to be no vision within the Union of where we are heading. There is no consensus over where the borders of the EU should lie in the future, and there is no consensus over how we should define our role in the world… The Americans expect more participation in global affairs from our side…

“Take the war in Iraq, which the overwhelming majority of Europeans opposed. It wasn’t possible to bring Europe’s weight to bear and to dissuade the Americans from pursuing this folly. From the very beginning, we Europeans were divided into two irreconcilable camps regarding this issue… I believe that having a global role won’t be possible as long as Europe continues to see itself exclusively as a ‘soft power.’ It’s an illusion to think that you can conduct global politics just with humanitarian assistance and diplomacy. One also needs to have the means to enforce your decisions…

“I believe it’s necessary to have a common EU military force, for reasons of efficiency apart from anything else. Today, Europeans have 2 million soldiers under arms, but they are not even able to deploy 60,000 of them somewhere…

“Probably it could only be those heads of government [to create a defense project] who have both a strong desire to lead and a European vision. But it is precisely those member states who are currently strongest that lack both of those things. Take Britain, for example. Elections are about to be held there, and if the pollsters are right, there’s probably going to be a new government which isn’t particularly pro-Europe and which will therefore be unwilling to push European integration forward.

“[The Franco-German motor is] not running perfectly at the moment. And even if it were, it would no longer be enough. We need at least three countries from the group of the strongest member states which don’t always immediately form a kind of blocking alliance within the EU in order to hinder each and every proposal that is put on the table… We had Britain, but we can’t depend on it anymore. We also don’t need to talk about Italy at the moment. Spain is in a critical economic situation and isn’t able to exercise a leadership role. Poland is heading in that direction, but [it] still got a long way to go…

“Reinvigorating this partnership [between France and Germany] would be a good thing for Europe whatever happens, particularly if France and Germany don’t just revert to pushing their own national interests…”

Europe will build a most powerful unifying army, and it stands to reason, based on biblical prophecies, that Britain will not have a part in it. For more information, please read our free booklets, “Europe in Prophecy” and “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

European Parliament Rejects SWIFT Deal for Sharing Bank Data With US

Deutsche Welle reported on February 11:

“The European Parliament has voted against a controversial deal that would have led the EU and US to share bank transfer data, something Washington has said is crucial for counter-terrorism investigations… The parliamentarians resisted appeals from Washington to continue a nine-month interim agreement allowing US authorities to monitor Europeans’ financial transaction data from SWIFT, an international banking transfer system…

“‘The majority view is that the correct balance between security, on the one hand, and the protection of civil liberties and fundamental rights, on the other, has not been achieved,’ European Parliament head, Jerzy Buzek, said in a statement after the vote… The United States expressed its regret after the vote, calling it a ‘setback for EU-US counter-terror cooperation’…

“A temporary agreement with the US was ratified by EU member countries in November – just one day before the European Parliament would have taken on its additional Lisbon powers. With the Lisbon Treaty now in force, the European Parliament’s rejection of the interim deal can be seen as a drive to ensure that its expanded powers are respected in practice.

“The Lisbon Treaty allows the parliament to decide jointly with EU governments on legal affairs, and the SWIFT vote happened to be the first opportunity for the deputies to demonstrate their new strength… The EU Commission, which was in favor of the deal from the outset, is now faced with the task of re-starting negotiations with the US for a new data sharing agreement, one that completely ensures EU data protection standards.”

The Wall Street Journal wrote on February 11:

“In the runup to the vote, Washington put considerable pressure on the parliament to clear the deal, saying access to the sensitive financial information has been vital for foiling terrorist activity, including a planned attack on a transatlantic flight. Several senior U.S. officials, including Vice-President Joe Biden and the secretaries of state and the Treasury, told numerous EU officials, including parliamentarians, ‘about the importance of this agreement to our mutual security,’ the U.S. mission said in a statement.”

The outcome was unexpected. As Der Spiegel Online commented on February 11:

“The demonstration of European power surprises Washington. [It’s a] slap in the face for Washington.”

Germany’s Catholic Sexual Abuse Scandal

Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 8:

“The Catholic Church in Germany has been shaken in recent days by revelations of a series of sexual abuse cases. Close to 100 priests and members of the laity have been suspected of abuse in recent years. After years of suppression, the wall of silence appears to be crumbling…

“It started when Berlin’s Canisius College, an elite Jesuit high school, recently disclosed the sordid past of a number of members of the order, who had abused students at the school in the 1970s and 1980s. After that, new victims began coming forward on a daily basis. By last Friday, at least 40 of them had accused three Jesuit priests of molesting children and adolescents, first in Berlin and later at the St. Ansgar School in Hamburg, the St. Blasien College in the Black Forest and in several parishes in the northern German state of Lower Saxony…

“For decades, German bishops tried to look the other way when their pastors engaged in sexual abuse, as well as to downplay the problem by characterizing it as isolated incidents. Now they are finally revealing their own figures, though hesitantly. According to a SPIEGEL survey of Germany’s 27 dioceses conducted last week, at least 94 priests and members of the laity in Germany are suspected or have been suspected of abusing countless children and adolescents since 1995…

“A tremor is currently passing through the Catholic Church in Germany. It could be merely the beginning of an earthquake of proportions which have so far only been seen in the American and Irish Church. Tens of thousands of abuse cases were brought to light in both countries. Could Germany be next?

“The scandal is just beginning, and yet it has already made a deep impression: on parents, who expect Catholic schools to provide their children with moral guidance; on the victims, who are now confronting their dark past after living with it half their lives; and on the faithful, who now regard their church with dismay. Their shock stems not only from the fact that there are pedophiles in the church, as there are elsewhere in society. It also comes from the fact that the church systematically protected the perpetrators and ignored the victims, and that it repressed and covered up sexual abuse in its own ranks for decades — and in doing so enabled pedophile priests to leave behind a trail of emotional devastation throughout Germany.

“… the clerics are still a long way from any sort of true self-criticism or far-reaching analysis, because it would require them to examine the Church’s repressed sexual morality that is dictated from above. It would require an honest discussion about celibacy and its consequences, particularly when it comes to the Church’s recruitment practices. In a church that is having trouble attracting men to the priesthood, particularly as a result of the ban on marriage, the number of good candidates has become so small that too many inappropriate candidates get admitted…

“In addition to the Canisius College and the schools in St. Ansgar and St. Blasien, there have now been revelations of abuse at the Jesuits’ Aloisius College in Bonn’s Bad Godesberg neighborhood, where entire generations of children of politicians and diplomats went to school… Many parents in Germany have long regarded Catholic schools as an attractive alternative to poor quality public education… But now cracks are beginning to appear in this carefully cultivated image…

“Whenever rumors surfaced in Catholic schools, parishes, youth groups and children’s homes, or victims overcame their shame and reported the abuse, the church would downplay the cases, characterizing them as isolated, regrettable exceptions or the misconduct of an errant priest. This was the position taken by the Vatican and by German bishops, who were unwilling to accept that the problem could lie in the system itself. But what happens when the number of cases begins to rise, as it did in other countries?

“In the United States, it also began as a problem of individual priests who had molested altar boys or students. Like their German brothers, American Catholic bishops tried for years to protect the priests, downplaying the accusations and ignoring the victims — until US courts, politicians and the public started demanding answers, and forced them to pay compensation. In the state of Delaware and elsewhere, for example, lawmakers lifted the statute of limitations, leading to a flood of new lawsuits. The resulting rulings forced dioceses to open their archives. More and more victims came forward, and in the end the Catholic Church in North America was overrun by the biggest scandal in its history.

“The US bishops concluded that there were credible accusations against around 5,000 priests involving the abuse of about 12,000 children and adolescents since 1950. Several dioceses, including Tucson, Arizona and San Diego, California, had to seek bankruptcy protection when they were unable to pay the financial settlements ordered by the court on hundreds of claims that had been filed. The Archdiocese of Los Angeles alone was ordered to pay more than $660 million (€470 million) in damages, which represented a substantial share of the more than $2 billion paid out by the US Catholic Church as a whole. A series of sex scandals also shook Ireland, where a commission concluded that about 35,000 children were beaten and abused in Catholic children’s homes and orphanages between 1914 and 2000…

“The prevailing view at the Vatican is that the public outcry over abuse cases is used as an excuse to revive old animosities toward the Catholic Church as a whole, as well as to fuel the usual criticism of the pope by secular intellectuals and the disenchanted…

“Celibacy, which has only been a general requirement since 1139, is seen as the main reason for the repressed accumulation of sexual urges, which sometimes erupts in brutal ways, within the clergy. Celibacy and the prohibition of marriage are rigorous standards that not all members of the clergy can live up to. Although surveys and studies have produced a wide range of figures on the sexual behaviors of Catholic priests, they all arrive at the same conclusion: Very often, the sanctimonious show of chastity in the church is at odds with reality. According to a US survey, two-thirds of priests adhere to their vows of chastity, while the rest have sex in all shapes and forms: heterosexual, bisexual, homosexual, monogamous, promiscuous.

“There is widespread agreement that this climate of repressed sexuality promotes sexual molestation of children in schools, homes and parishes. A number of studies in the United States conclude that about 2 percent of all Catholic priests are pedophiles. When applied to Germany, this figure suggests that of a total of 20,000 Catholic clergy, at least 400 could potentially be pedophiles…

“The Vatican’s attitudes toward homosexuality are particularly inhibited, despite the fact that it is somewhat widespread within the church and appears to be relatively tolerated, as long as it is not discussed… many priests who become sex offenders have never learned to develop close and intimate relationships…

“In light of its recruitment problems, the church accepts almost anyone who decides to become a priest. However, few in the official church are willing to admit that the new recruits include more and more young men who find the priesthood so appealing in part because they believe it will allow them to conceal their sexual problems. It is a vicious circle… the official church stubbornly adheres to the vow of celibacy and the prohibition on marriage…”

These terrible scandals turn back the dark curtains from a worldwide church organization which, in order to protect its image and status, has been willing to ignore terrible crimes which were being perpetrated by pedophile priests on helpless young victims. As pointed out in the article above, enforced celibacy and the Catholic church’s dubious and unbiblical stance on the holy institution of marriage are contributing
largely to a culture where priests (and nuns) are trying to find fulfillment in the practice of homosexual conduct. However, the growing criticism of outraged parents and victims, as well as society as a whole, could back-fire. The Catholic church, being pushed more and more into a corner due to appropriate criticism, might respond by attacking its critics, in order to solidify the priesthood and the faithful within its own ranks. Historically, the Roman church has had its terrible episodes of incredible abominable crimes, perpetrated by popes and priests, which were oftentimes accompanied by violent attacks on their critics.

You might also want to read our Q&A in Update 339 for the Week ending April 11th, 2008, addressing the issue of Compulsory Celibacy.

At first glance, it might appear that the accounts of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John gave inconsistent times pertaining to Christ’s crucifixion. However, this is not the case. Apparent inconsistencies are explained when we realize that Matthew, Mark and Luke used the Jewish reckoning of time, while John gave the Roman reckoning.

(1) According to the JEWISH reckoning, a day of 24 hours duration begins at sunset and ends at sunset, and the (approximate) twelve hours of the daylight portion BEGIN WITH SUNRISE, while the (approximate) twelve hours of the night portion BEGIN WITH SUNSET.

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible states [in regard to Mark 15:25] that the Jews “divided the day into four general parts. The first began at sunrise. The second three hours after. The third at mid-day. The fourth three hours after, and continued till sunset.”

Likewise, in passing, Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible also informs us [in regard to Matthew 14:25] that in New Testament times, the Jews divided the night into four watches: “The first watch began at six o’clock in the evening [or sunset], and continued till nine; the second began at nine, and continued till twelve; the third began at twelve, and continued till three next morning; and the fourth began at three, and continued till six [or sunrise].”

(2) According to the ROMAN reckoning, days were counted from MIDNIGHT and from NOON, as we commonly do today. Even though we realize that according to the Hebrew calendar, days begin and end with sunset, we would today give a commonly accepted and understood time when we want to meet someone, by using the Roman reckoning. We would not say, “I’ll meet you three hours from sunrise,” but, “I’ll meet you at 9:00 a.m.” The same is true for the Apostle John’s choice of giving time.

John wrote his account considerably later than Matthew, Mark and Luke. J.H. Blunt, The Annotated Bible, points out: “John was writing long after the destruction of Jerusalem… he used the ordinary Roman method of computing the day.”

At the same time, we need to realize that John did not approve of the Roman reckoning of time; he just used it as a point of reference. He quoted Jesus in John 11:9-10 as saying: “Are there not twelve hours in the day?… but if one walks in the night, he stumbles…” This shows that Jesus accepted and taught the Jewish reckoning, dividing the day-light portion of the day (beginning with sunrise) from the night portion (beginning with sunset).

(3) Our conclusion that John used the Roman reckoning as a point of reference is not undisputed. A case in point is his statement in John 1:39: “They came and saw where He was staying, and remained with Him that day (now it was about the tenth hour).”

Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible states: “The Jews divided their day into twelve equal parts, beginning at sunrise. If John used their mode of computation, this was about four o’clock p.m. The Romans divided time as we do, beginning at midnight. If John used their mode, it was about ten o’clock in the forenoon. It is not certain which he used.”

But as we will see, John clearly used the Roman reckoning when relating the account of Christ’s crucifixion. It would therefore be difficult to see why he would be switching back and forth between the Jewish and the Roman modes of computation.

J.H. Blunt, The Annotated Bible, concurs, stating regarding John 1:39: “‘… for it was about the tenth hour.’ They had been walking for four or five hours in the early morning, and it was now what the Jews would have called the fourth hour, but what… John calls the tenth, because he uses the Roman method of reckoning the time of day, a method exactly similar to our own… Jesus doubtless halted thus early in the day that there might be time for Simon Peter to be sought out by his brother and brought to Him.”

(4) Focusing on the time of Christ’s crucifixion, according to Jewish reckoning, Christ was crucified at the third hour. As mentioned, the accounts of Matthew, Mark and Luke use the Jewish reckoning of time. Mark 15:25 says: “Now it was the third hour, and they crucified Him.” His crucifixion began to take place on the third hour or three hours after sunrise, on a Wednesday morning. According to Roman reckoning and our designation of time today, this would have been Wednesday morning at 9:00 a.m.

Mark 15:33 informs us: “Now when the sixth hour had come, there was darkness over the whole land until the ninth hour” (compare also Luke 23:44 and Matthew 27:45). This darkness occurred, according to our modern reckoning of time, at midday–about noon or 12:00 p.m.– that is, six hours after sunrise. It lasted until the ninth hour, or 3:00 p.m. (that is, nine hours from sunrise according to the Jewish reckoning, or three hours from noon according to the Roman reckoning).

Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible confirms this:

“The darkness began at the sixth hour, about our twelve o’clock at noon, and lasted till the ninth hour, which answered to our three o’clock in the afternoon.”

(5) Confusion might set in when considering a passage in John, which also talks about the “sixth hour” on the crucifixion day of Wednesday, but relates to events PRIOR to the actual crucifixion. We read in John 19:14-16:

“Now it was the Preparation Day of the Passover [i.e., of the First Day of Unleavened Bread, an annual Holy Day, which fell that year on a Thursday, beginning Wednesday evening, at sunset], and about the SIXTH hour. And he [Pilate] said to the Jews, ‘Behold your King!’ But they cried out, ‘Away with Him, away with Him! Crucify Him!’ Pilate said to them, ‘Shall I crucify your King?’ The chief priests answered, ‘We have no king but Caesar!’ So he delivered Him to them to be crucified. So they took Jesus and led Him away.”

It is obvious that this conversation took place BEFORE Christ’s actual crucifixion, but still wrote that it occurred on the “sixth hour.”

Some commentaries state that John simply made a “mistake” in numbers or that he did not mean to be “accurate.” Others suggest that a copying scribe incorrectly wrote “sixth hour” instead of “third hour.” But as mentioned, John was using the Roman reckoning of time, not the Hebrew reckoning, as is also confirmed by Scofield Reference Notes. This means that this event (in John 19:14-16) occurred about six hours past midnight–the time around SUNRISE. The Nelson Study Bible states regarding the reference in John 19:14: “The sixth hour was 6 A.M. according to the Roman system of time.”

(6) Jesus died on the NINTH HOUR according to the HEBREW or Jewish calendar (compare Matthew 27:46; Mark 15:33-37; Luke 23:44-46); that is, about 3:00 p.m. He was buried just before sunset on Wednesday late afternoon, so that His body “should not remain on the cross on the [annual] Sabbath (for that Sabbath was a high day)… Now in the place where He was crucified there was a garden, and in the garden a new tomb in which no one had yet been laid. So there they laid Jesus, because of the Jews’ Preparation Day, for the tomb was nearby” (John 19: 31, 41-42; compare also Luke 23:50-54, stating in verse 54 that the “[annual] Sabbath [of the First Day of Unleavened Bread] drew near”).

Since Jesus said that He would be in the grave for three days and three nights, or for seventy-two hours (Matthew 12:40), He left the grave on Saturday evening, just before sunset.

For more information on the exact timing of Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection, please read our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–A Great Mystery.”

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Two new StandingWatch programs were posted on the Web, “The State of the Union Address and No Solutions…” and “Encouragement in Economic Hardship.”

A new German StandingWatch program, titled, “Wahnsinn–Der Krieg in Afghanistan” (“Insane–The War in Afghanistan”) was posted on YouTube.

A new German sermon, titled, “Die Rolle Kirchlicher Lehrer” [“The Role of Church Teachers”], was posted on the Web.

Here is the link for the video of Norbert Link’s recent message on “Passover Preparations“:

Here is the link for the video of Norbert Link’s recent sermon, “Honor Father and Mother“

On February 6, 2010, Norbert Link will give two messages, discussing Passover Preparations and “Honoring Father and Mother.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

How much importance do we place on belief or believing something? I am not just talking about “believing” anything, but rather things in relationship to God the Father and Jesus Christ and their ability to perform miracles in our life. Some may not think it is that important, while others may feel that it is somewhat important, and then there are those who know that it is very important.

There was a popular song called “Believe,” which was performed by two well-known artists. This song had very interesting lyrics. Here are a few lines from that song: “There can be miracles when you believe. Though hope is frail, it’s hard to kill… Who knows what miracles you can achieve? When you believe, somehow you will. Now you will… when you believe.”

It is amazing how true these words are. Let us consider some of the healings that Christ performed, and let us also review some of the examples when Christ did not do mighty works.

We read in Mark 9 that a father asked Christ to heal his son who was demon-possessed. Christ answered him: “… ‘If you can believe, all things are possible to him who believes.’ Immediately the father of the child cried out and said with tears, ‘Lord, I believe; help my unbelief!’ When Jesus saw that the people came running together, He rebuked the unclean spirit, saying to it, ‘Deaf and dumb spirit, I command you, come out of him and enter him no more!'” (Mark 9:23-25). Then we read that the demon did in fact leave the child.

This man believed but only up to a certain point. He had little faith and asked  for more, and as a result his son was healed. This demonstrates the power of belief or faith.

Another example can be found in the book of Matthew. We read in Matthew 9:27-29: “When Jesus departed from there, two blind men followed Him, crying out and saying, ‘Son of David, have mercy on us!’ And when He had come into the house, the blind men came to Him. And Jesus said to them, ‘Do you believe that I am able to do this?’ They said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord.’ Then He touched their eyes, saying, ‘According to your faith let it be to you.'”

Christ specifically asked them if they believed or had the faith that Christ could heal them, and they replied with YES. After that expression of their conviction, they were healed, according to their faith.

Belief or faith is a living dynamic force which can have positive miraculous results, as demonstrated by the healings performed for those who believed. On the other hand, lack of belief is a strong negative force, which resists or impedes the ability to heal and perform miracles, as shown by the next example, recorded in Matthew 13:53-58:

“Now it came to pass, when Jesus had finished these parables, that He departed from there. When He had come to His own country, He taught them in their synagogue, so that they were astonished and said, ‘Where did this Man get this wisdom and these mighty works? Is this not the carpenter’s son? Is not His mother called Mary? And His brothers James, Joses, Simon, and Judas? And His sisters, are they not all with us? Where then did this Man get all these things?’ So they were offended at Him. But Jesus said to them, ‘A prophet is not without honor except in his own country and in his own house.’ Now He did not do many mighty works there because of their unbelief.”

Christ did not do many mighty works there because of unbelief and because of their rejection of Christ. The parallel passage in Mark 6:5-6 is even more telling: “Now He COULD DO NO mighty work there, except that He laid His hands on a FEW sick people and healed them. And He marveled because of their unbelief…”

Their lack of faith inhibited Christ’s ability to heal MANY people and to perform many MIGHTY miracles. This is really amazing when you think about it, because we are not just talking about an ordinary man here. Christ was God in the flesh, the second member of the God Family, the God of the Old Testament. The Holy Spirit of God the Father dwelled in Him without measure, and it was through the power of THAT Spirit that on some occasions, He healed “all sick people” who were brought to Him and “who were afflicted with various diseases and torments” (Matthew 4:24). However, as we have seen, because of unbelief and the rejection of Christ, He was unable to perform mighty works or miracles on other occasions–showing the negative and restricting consequences of unbelief.

The same kind of rejection of one of God’s true ministers might also prevent the healing of sick persons today. We read in Matthew 10:1 that Christ gave His early apostles power over unclean spirits and to heal “all kinds of sickness and all kinds of disease.” He promised in Mark 16:18 that that same power would be given to all of His true ministers throughout the ages. But as people could not be healed because of their unbelief and their rejection of Christ, so the same may be true for people today who hold grudges against God’s true ministers; who have not really repented of their sins and are unwilling to reconcile with others; and who do not REALLY believe that God can and will heal them (compare James 5:14-16).

It is clearly evident that miracles can be performed if we believe and not waver in faith, and that the ability to heal is stifled, as it were, by unbelief, which causes resistance and barriers for those who are in need of miraculous intervention. Such unbelief can prevent the effectiveness of the healing powers of God.

These are glaring warnings for us today, not to fall into the ditch of unbelief or of rejection of God’s true servants. Do you want to have your prayers answered? Do you want your prayers to be effective?  If you do, then it is imperative that you believe, with true and unwavering faith, and then you can expect miracles. The real question is: “Do you believe in miracles?”

The state of the U.S. economy appears to be hopeless. No recovery is in sight, nor should we expect any substantial improvement. Instead, we are told that the latest U.S. budget is “a recipe for financial disaster” and that America’s debt crisis can be associated with Third World countries.

The recent Afghan conference was a total and complete failure, and it is interesting how everything seems to work against the USA. Brussels is upset with Washington, and Europe is becoming painfully aware that it must do more to achieve influential and powerful unification. Tensions between the USA and Iran are heightening, in spite of empty words and “promises” from the Iranian government, and mixed signals from Washington show an ongoing policy of glaring inconsistencies and indecisiveness.

While Barack Obama’s mentor goes public with his criticism of the President’s performance, Republican challenger Scott Brown continues to make controversial remarks in an effort to distance himself from the Republican GOP, and Germans become increasingly dissatisfied with their current government.

In Haiti, survivors thank their voodoo gods and goddesses for protection, as, according to a Haitian saying, “people here are ’60 per cent Catholic, 40 per cent Protestant and 100 per cent voodoo.” At the same time, the U.S. Air Force “accommodates” cadets by setting aside an outdoor worship area for Pagans, Wiccans, Druids and other Earth-centered believers.

While the pope criticizes British equality rights laws as endorsing homosexual conduct, an ever-widening scandal in Germany and elsewhere sheds a terrible light on Jesuit priests who committed sex crimes against boys.

The government of Catholic France is refusing to grant citizenship to Muslims unwilling to cease wearing burquas, and a jury in Oregon convicts parents who believe in divine healing “of criminally negligent homicide for failing to seek medical care for their 16-year-old son.” We conclude with an excerpt from our free booklet, titled, “Sickness and Healing–What the Bible Tells Us,” addressing parental responsibilities in cases of sick children.

Economy on Road to Recovery?

The Associated Press reported on January 29:

“The economy boomed at the end of 2009, growing at the fastest rate in more than six years. Now if only it could keep it up. The economy expanded at an annual rate of 5.7 percent in the fourth quarter, the second straight quarter of growth. But analysts warn it’s unsustainable.

“Consumer spending, chilled by double-digit unemployment and scant wage gains, remains weak. And the benefits of government aid and higher company output to feed stockpiles will dwindle. Many analysts predict gross domestic product will expand at a rate closer to 2.5 to 3 percent in the current quarter and 2.5 percent or less for the year. That won’t be enough to significantly reduce the unemployment rate, now 10 percent. In fact, most analysts expect the rate to keep rising for months and to remain close to 10 percent through year’s end. To drive down the jobless rate by just 1 percentage point this year, the economy would have to grow by 5 percent for the whole year. No one thinks that will happen…

“Roughly two-thirds of the quarter’s growth came from increased manufacturing as businesses drew down their stockpiles of goods at a slower rate. But companies will eventually let those inventories fall again unless consumers — who account for about 70 percent of the economy — spend more. Unlike past rebounds driven by the spending of ordinary shoppers, this one appears to hinge on spending by businesses, foreigners and — until it runs out — government stimulus.

“History suggests this isn’t the recipe for a strong recovery… Still, the overall news for 2009 wasn’t good. Friday’s report showed economic activity for the year fell by 2.4 percent — the sharpest drop since 1946. It was the first annual decline since 1991… If gains from inventories and exports are taken out, the economy last quarter grew at just a 1.7 percent pace.”

As we warned for a long time, belief in a substantial recovery of the U.S. economy is just wishful thinking. The sad reality is that we are reaping what we have been sowing… and what we are still planning to sow, as the next two articles show.

The U.S. Budget — “Spend-While-You-Can”

The Wall Street Journal wrote on February 2:

“One rule of budget reporting is to watch what the politicians are spending this year, not the frugality they promise down the road. By that measure, the budget that President Obama released yesterday for fiscal 2011 is one of the greatest spend-while-you-can documents in American history… The budget reveals that overall federal outlays will reach $3.72 trillion in fiscal 2010, and keep rising to $3.834 trillion in 2011.

“As a share of the economy, outlays will reach a post-World War II record of 25.4% this year. This is a new modern spending landmark, up from 21% of GDP as recently as fiscal 2008, and far above the 40-year average of 20.7%… All of this spending must be financed, and so deficits and taxes are both scheduled to rise to record levels… But this is a giant tax increase on American companies that operate overseas, and it includes no offsetting cut in the U.S. 35% corporate tax rate, which is among the highest in the world… Even these tax increases won’t be enough to pay for the spending…”

The U.S. Budget — “A Recipe for Financial Disaster”

USA Today wrote on February 2:

“Since taking office last year, President Obama has been preaching fiscal restraint while practicing something else. Nothing shows this more than the budget he released Monday. His administration is planning a deficit for this year of almost $1.6 trillion.

“… the budget plan forecasts an endless flow of red ink that will push the American economy relentlessly toward a perilous economic precipice. This is, of course, Obama’s failing. But it is also testament to years of dysfunction in Washington by both parties.

“To make the mind-boggling budget numbers easier to understand, it helps to subtract eight zeroes. Say you earned $21,000 this year, spent $37,000 and borrowed $16,000 to cover the difference. Maybe you could get away with this for a year or two to get through unusually hard times. Beyond that, though, it’s a recipe for financial disaster. Such is the fate facing the federal government. The recession turned an already yawning budget gap into a chasm…

“What causes the most concern is not that Obama’s budget forecasts three $1 trillion-plus deficits in a row, including the one he inherited from George W. Bush. It is the large deficits projected even when the stimulus will be done and presumably the economy will be in much better shape. The deficits for 2013 through 2015 all run above $700 billion a year…

“Most important, Obama has not laid the groundwork for going after the real problem behind the nation’s grim fiscal outlook… America is on a collision course with the kind of debt crisis associated with Third World countries.”

U.S. Budget Outlook “Bleak”

MoneyNews.com reported on January 29:

“Global equities are “vulnerable to correction” after rallying from their March lows and as governments around the world withdraw stimulus measures, says investor Jim Rogers.

“‘We’re overdue for a correction,’ Rogers says… ‘We have huge amounts of money printed throughout the world. It’s going to cause currency instability. It’s going to cause more inflation. It’s going to cause higher interest rates.’

“The Congressional Budget Office has called the U.S. budget outlook ‘bleak,’ in a forecast that hurts the chances for extending Bush-era tax cuts and raises pressure for fiscal belt-tightening, The Wall Street Journal reports.

“In its annual report, the nonpartisan CBO… said the government will run an aggregate deficit of about $6 trillion during the next decade, a level that many economists worry could lead to currency shock, inflation, crippling interest rates or other economic maladies. By the end of 2020, ‘debt is projected to climb to $15 trillion, or 67 percent of gross domestic product,’ CBO director Doug Elmendorf said on his blog post. ‘With such a large increase in debt…interest payments on the debt are poised to skyrocket.'”

Unemployment on the Rise

The Associated Press wrote on February 4:

“The number of newly laid-off workers filing initial claims for jobless benefits rose unexpectedly last week, evidence that layoffs are continuing and jobs remain scarce. The rise is the fourth in the past five weeks. Most economists hoped that claims would resume a downward trend that was evident in the fall and early winter.”

Huge Bailout for Social Security?

CNNMoney wrote on February 4:

“… another huge bailout is starting, this time for the Social Security system. A report from the Congressional Budget Office shows that for the first time in 25 years, Social Security is taking in less in taxes than it is spending on benefits. Instead of helping to finance the rest of the government, as it has done for decades, our nation’s biggest social program needs help from the Treasury to keep benefit checks from bouncing — in other words, a taxpayer bailout… without the interest income, Social Security will be $28 billion in the hole this fiscal year, which ends Sept. 30…

“Social Security hasn’t been cash-negative since the early 1980s, when it came so close to running out of money that it was making plans to stop sending out benefit checks. That led to the famous Greenspan Commission report, which recommended trimming benefits and raising taxes, which Congress did. Those actions produced hefty cash surpluses, which until this year have helped finance the rest of the government. But even then, it was clear the surpluses would be temporary. Now, years earlier than projected, Social Security is adding to the government’s borrowing needs…

“Social Security currently provides more than half the income for a majority of retirees. Given the declines in stock prices and home values that have whacked millions of people, the program seems likely to become more important in the future as a source of retirement income, rather than less important.

“It would have been a lot simpler to fix the system years ago, when we could have used Social Security’s cash surpluses to buy non-Treasury securities, such as government-backed mortgage bonds or high-grade corporates that would have helped cover future cash shortfalls. Now it’s too late… Until this year, Social Security was a problem for the future. Now it’s a problem for the present.”

The Afghan Conference–Unrealistic and Doomed to Failure

Der Spiegel Online wrote on January 29:

“The Afghanistan conference on Thursday ended with a long list of plans and promises. But how realistic is NATO success in the war-torn country?… Still, will the conference really make much of a difference in Afghanistan? German papers on Friday aren’t so sure.

“The left leaning daily Die Tageszeitung writes:

“‘It is not a new idea to make demands of the Afghan government. However, they have never before been as unrealistic as they are now. Such demands will only succeed if there are consequences should they not be met. NATO is just as dependent on Karzai as he is on NATO: It is inconceivable that Karzai would be dropped just because he failed to meet his targets. After all, the alliance needs a reasonably intact government in order to pull off a face-saving withdrawal. The fact that even a big electoral fraudster is considered good enough for this role shows just how desperate NATO is.’

“Conservative daily Die Welt writes:

“‘… Yesterday, Taliban leaders rejected outright the reconciliation policy of the ‘occupiers.’ The London conference has dodged the question of what to do if the plan does not work out. Any answer to this is not under discussion at the moment. This agreement gives the impression that none of the parties would be responsible should the project fail. If the reconciliation of Taliban sympathizers and civilian society are derailed, the participants of the London conference… would be able to say, to themselves and their voters, that they have tried to improve this situation using all their powers, both military and otherwise’…

“The left-leaning paper Berliner Zeitung writes: ‘… It is an illusion to think that the Afghan police and army will develop into respected forces in the near future. There is not enough time and state wages will not rise enough to make the security forces resist corruption and the temptation to ally themselves with those making money from drugs.'”

The Western world will not win their war against Afghanistan. And especially the USA will have to learn the hard way that without God on their side, everything will turn against them.

The Difficult War in Afghanistan

AFP wrote on January 31:

“To force the Taliban leadership to the negotiating table… US military officials have said there needs to be greater success on the battlefield — and this is where the Marines come in. But the challenges on the ground are immense. Fields are littered with improvised explosive devices (IEDs) responsible for most of the deaths of foreign troops in Afghanistan, which hit a record 520 fatalities last year.

“The Taliban are also entrenched in their strongholds holding sway over the population and setting up shadow governments across the country, meaning they have the local intelligence that the Marines desperately need… Five Marines were killed in southern Afghanistan in two days of January alone in IED blasts and ambushes.

“… the Marines prepare a full-on assault on Marjah in the coming weeks or months. Marjah has a population of at least 60,000. Built in the 1950s with US government help, it was intended to be a model agricultural town with an irrigation system flowing from the Helmand river. But instead of legitimate crops, poor farmers plant opium poppy, the trafficking and sale of which bankrolls the Taliban movement.

“The Marines’ mission is to show US strength, assist in installing government control in Helmand province and let the local population know they have arrived. The challenge however is huge. Taliban militants harass the villagers at night, warning them of trouble if they help US troops. Under the cover of darkness, they also plant IEDs in fields the Marines have to cross.”

Everything Seems to Work Against the USA

The Times wrote on February 1:

“President Karzai announced a timetable for the first round of peace talks with the Taleban yesterday as US troops admitted that they may have bombed an Afghan army base by mistake… Speaking in Kabul for the first time since he returned from last week’s London conference, Mr Karzai called on militants in Pakistan to return home and make peace so that US-led forces could withdraw. The Taleban have called repeatedly for all foreign forces to leave Afghanistan as a precondition of talks.

“… details emerged of an [U.S.] attack south of the capital that left four Afghan soldiers dead and at least seven injured… Afghan troops in a remote outpost mistook the American patrol for insurgents and opened fire. Nato said that the Americans, on a joint patrol with Afghan commandos, returned fire before calling in an airstrike…

“Hours earlier, an interpreter opened fire at a base in the same province, killing two US soldiers before being shot… Afghan authorities confirmed the account, saying that the interpreter had argued with troops over pay.”

Brussels Disgruntled–Obama to Skip EU-US Summit

Deutsche Welle reported on February 2:

“Brussels is disgruntled by US President Barack Obama’s decision not to attend the EU-US summit in May. Washington, however, insists the move is not meant as a snub against Brussels… Obama is increasingly facing challenges implementing his domestic reform agenda and has indicated that in 2010 he will spend more time on home soil. His approval ratings in the US have dropped as the economic recovery has been slow to translate onto the job market…

“US Assistant Secretary of State Philip Gordon on Monday told reporters that it never had been on Obama’s agenda to attend the Spanish summit… Obama’s absence at the summit would likely be regarded as a blow for Brussels. The new president of the European Council, Herman van Rompuy, has yet to formally meet with Obama.”

On February 3, Der Spiegel Online reported on German media reactions to President Obama’s refusal to attend the summit:

“While it is certainly plausible that Obama’s prime motivation is to focus his attention on his difficult domestic agenda, there are some indications of growing frustration in Washington with the EU’s confusing structures. State department spokesman P.J. Crowley told reporters on Tuesday that the EU leadership was part of the problem, indicating that there was a lack of clarity on both sides as to where and how the annual summits would be held…

“‘The very fact that the summit is taking place in Spain, after the establishment of a more permanent presidency and a high representative, is indicative of the fact that the EU is still in institutional limbo,’ Charles A. Kupchan, a senior fellow for European studies at the Council on Foreign Relations, told the Associated Press…

“While Obama’s election was widely welcomed across the Atlantic in 2008 after the often fraught dealings with his predecessor, George W. Bush, relations have not been particularly smooth with the new White House…

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘… It’s understandable that the Americans no longer have any desire to get involved in bizarre intra-European affairs.'”

“The conservative Die Welt writes: ‘… As for Europe, Obama’s refusal of the invitation is a pity…’

“The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes: ‘… The Europeans now have their dream president, and he obviously has better things to do than jet across the Atlantic to spend a few hours chatting with them… But, seriously, does Obama have nothing to discuss with the EU that is important to him and that might be worth the flight over? Or does he not even consider the EU as being all that relevant?… perhaps it will now dawn on the Europeans that they are not the center of this president’s attention.'”

As we have foretold for many years, the relationship between the USA and Europe will deteriorate. In addition, as was pointed out above, Europe is still not totally united–but the Bible says that it will soon become the most powerful bloc on earth. For more information, read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

Tensions Between USA and Iran Heighten Dramatically

The Guardian wrote on January 31:

“Tension between the US and Iran heightened dramatically today with the disclosure that Barack Obama is deploying a missile shield to protect American allies in the Gulf from attack by Tehran. The US is dispatching Patriot defensive missiles to four countries – Qatar, United Arab Emirates, Bahrain and Kuwait – and keeping two ships in the Gulf capable of shooting down Iranian missiles. Washington is also helping Saudi Arabia develop a force to protect its oil installations.

“American officials said the move is aimed at deterring an attack by Iran and reassuring Gulf states fearful that Tehran might react to sanctions by striking at US allies in the region… Washington is also concerned at the threat of action by Israel, which is predicting that Iran will be able to build a nuclear missile within a year, a much faster timetable than assessed by the US, and is warning that it will not let Tehran come close to completion if diplomacy fails…

“Washington is also concerned that if Iran is able to build nuclear weapons, other states in the region will feel the need to follow. Israel is the only country in the Middle East to already have atomic bombs, although it does not officially acknowledge it…”

Washington’s and Iran’s Mixed Signals

The Financial Times wrote on February 2:

“On a day when Washington sought to make sense of favourable comments from Mahmoud Ahmadi-Nejad, president of Iran, about a compromise previously spurned by Tehran, Dennis Blair, US national intelligence director, said the final decision about nuclear arms was Iran’s to make.

“Other US officials were seeking clarification on Mr Ahmadi-Nejad’s remarks about a deal offered by the US and allies last year under which most of Tehran’s low-enriched uranium would be sent abroad to be processed into fuel for a medical research reactor. Mr Ahmadi-Nejad said on Tuesday that Iran would have ‘no problem’ giving the west its low-enriched uranium and taking it back when it was enriched for use in the reactor… Iran had previously balked at the idea of handing over uranium unless fuel was returned straight away…

“‘The real question is, “Are they serious?”‘ said a state department official.”

And the real answer is, of course not. Iran is trying to buy time, as the next article shows, while producing the bomb. And Washington’s attempts to walk away from any responsibility is not helpful.

Washington’s policy towards Iran is one of glaring inconsistencies and indecisiveness. It is truly amazing that such a small country like Iran can hold the USA hostage in such a dramatic way.

Iran Plays Cat and Mouse with the West

The Times wrote on February 4:

“President Ahmadinejad demonstrated yesterday that he has become a master of playing cat and mouse with the West — and this time the mouse was real. Once again, the Iranian leader offered a last-minute concession to head off the West’s drive for new sanctions against the Islamic republic [stating that Iran had “no problem shipping enriched uranium abroad”].

“At the same time, Iran thumbed its nose at UN restrictions on its ballistic missiles programme by sending a rocket into space carrying a mouse, two turtles and some worms…

“Mr Ahmadinejad hailed the launch as a breakthrough that would help to break ‘the global domineering system’ of Western powers. At a ceremony for a new satellite he said that Iran hoped to send astronauts into space soon. Western experts suggested that the space programme provided cover for the development of long-range missiles capable of carrying a nuclear pay-load… A senior Western diplomat acknowledged that Mr Ahmadinejad’s gambit could buy Iran more time.”

Former Mentor Highly Critical of Obama

The Times wrote on February 1:

“President Obama’s self-confidence borders on complacency. He is ill served by senior staff, especially his Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel. He does not appear to be learning on the job as he did when campaigning for the White House. His Administration is too deferential to Congress, too reliant on the President’s personal charm, and as a result is regarded by its enemies as weak and ineffectual.

“As Mr Obama prepared to release his $3.8 trillion (£2.4 trillion) budget today, this assessment of his first year in office came not from one of his established critics on the Right, but from one of his most respected mentors — his former professor at Harvard Law School, Chris Edley… Professor Edley, who worked in the Clinton and Carter Administrations, added: ‘I wouldn’t give [Obama] as high a grade as President as I gave him when he was my student. I know he can do better.’

“He reserved the harshest criticism for Mr Emanuel, the second-most powerful figure in the White House, who has been pilloried by liberals for appearing to undermine Mr Obama’s healthcare reforms since the loss of a crucial Senate seat to the Republicans…

“Mr Edley lamented the failure of the White House to force Congress into line, as President Lyndon Johnson would have done… The professor fears that Mr Obama’s best chance to deliver the change he promised may have been wasted… The Administration’s biggest mistake, he said, has been to pander to Congressional vanities by leaving the two chambers to argue about their own versions of healthcare reform with little concrete guidance from the White House…”

While President Obama is criticized by his former professor at Harvard Law School, Mr. Obama’s strongest challenger, “Republican” Senator Scott Brown, is giving equally confusing signals, as the next article shows.

Brown Backs Abortion Rights

The Associated Press reported on January 31:

“Republican Sen.-elect Scott Brown of Massachusetts says he opposes federal funding for abortions, but thinks women should have the right to choose whether to have one. Brown tells ABC’s ‘This Week’ that he disagrees with his party’s position that the Supreme Court decision legalizing abortion should be overturned.

“Brown says the abortion question is one that’s best handled by a woman, her family and her doctor. He also says more effort needs to go into reducing the number of abortions in the U.S. Brown has said the GOP shouldn’t take his vote for granted on every issue. He says he’s fiscally conservative but more moderate on social issues.

“Brown recently won the Senate seat long held by liberal Democrat Edward M. Kennedy, who died last summer.”

Merkel Isn’t Doing That Good

Der Spiegel Online wrote on February 1:

“Chancellor Angela Merkel’s new center-right coalition has been in office for 100 days this week, and media commentators aren’t impressed with its performance or with Merkel’s leadership.

“Chancellor Angela Merkel’s first 100 days in power at the head of a new center-right government following her re-election in September have been marred by infighting on economic and foreign policy and opposition accusations of cronyism and incompetence.

“Merkel has been accused by members of her Christian Democratic Union of failing to show leadership, and opinion poll ratings for her coalition of conservatives and pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) have been falling ahead of an important regional election in North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany’s most populous state, in May…

“Business daily Financial Times Deutschland writes: ‘The center-right government has agreed [to] just one law in the 100 days since it took office. And now prominent members of the FDP want to reverse a key part of that legislation… That’s more than populism. That is tantamount to dismantling oneself… It shows that the FDP and to some extent the conservatives as well, are stumbling their way through government without a coherent strategy.’

“Center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘… The glow of victory has vanished and members from the parties’ own ranks are opposing the federal government because they’re increasingly panicking about a regional election campaign.’

“Left-wing Die Tageszeitung has a photomontage of a blind Merkel being led by a blind guide dog in the shape of FDP leader Westerwelle. ‘Neither of them has a vision of society, neither has any idea how to make an export-orientated nation like Germany fit for the future. It’s been one major mistake after another… There are no clear policies on financial market regulation, on social or education policy or on a future-oriented energy policy. It’s reckless to think that doing nothing is enough to avoid making mistakes…’

“Conservative Die Welt writes: ‘Angela Merkel faces a dilemma. The leadership style that enabled her to get to the pinnacle of politics is now increasingly becoming a burden and is endangering her power. Her internal critics expect Angela Merkel to exert more authority and decisiveness… But such so-called leadership skills are diametrically opposed to the consensus-seeking, moderating style with which the 55-year-old has so far run her party…'”

It appears that the world is presently lacking decisive leadership. And while we do not expect any strong leader to arise in the USA, the Bible shows that a very powerful political personage will arise in Europe in a very short time. Unfortunately, this will bring the world to the brink of annihilation.

Voodoo in Haiti

The Telegraph wrote on February 1:

“Every evening, Monique Henri offers thanks to the voodoo deity Ogu Feray at a shrine in her home for sparing her family from the earthquake. She used to be a regular worshipper at her local Catholic church. But these days she goes there less often. The disaster has moved voodoo centre-stage in Haiti. Yesterday, 1,000 members of the national convention of voodoo priests met in an emergency session to formulate their response to it. Failure to take decisive action, they warned, could bring down another disaster on the shattered country.

“The devastation in Haiti has led many in the traumatised population to seek solace in faith and mysticism and there has been a move by some to turn back towards the old religion, with a marked rise in the numbers taking part in voodoo ceremonies and rituals.

“… the foreigners have trouble competing with voodoo, the fusion of African religions and Christianity which found its first adherents among the original slave population, and which is now deeply ingrained in the culture of the country. It’s a faith that leaps barriers: as the Haitian saying goes, people here are ’60 per cent Catholic, 40 per cent Protestant and 100 per cent voodoo.'”

The Bible predicts that in the end time, the world will refuse to repent and submit to God and rather continue to worship demons (Revelation 9:20). Haiti is not an exception, as the next article about the U.S. Air Force shows.

U.S. Air Force’s Worship Areas for Pagan Worship

The Associated Press reported on February 1:

“The Air Force Academy has set aside an outdoor worship area for Pagans, Wiccans, Druids and other Earth-centered believers… A double circle of stones atop a hill on the campus near Colorado Springs has been designated for the group, which previously met indoors… Lt. Col. William Ziegler, one of the academy’s chaplains, said designating the space is part of the school’s effort to foster religious tolerance and to defend the constitutional guarantee of religious freedom…

“The school also has worship facilities for Protestant and Catholic Christians, Jews, Muslims and Buddhists… The academy has about 4,000 cadets. The school is one of five U.S. service academies, including West Point and Annapolis. Cadets graduate as second lieutenants.”

Pope Condemns U.K. “Equality Rights” Laws

AFP wrote on February 2:

“Gay-rights campaigners and secularists called on Tuesday for protests during a visit to Britain by Pope Benedict XVI this year after he condemned equality legislation seen as friendly to gays… [The pope said] that ‘the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs. In some respects it actually violates the natural law upon which the equality of all human beings is grounded and by which it is guaranteed.’

“Observers said the pontiff was referring to legislation that took effect on January 1, 2009 preventing adoption agencies — including Catholic ones — from discriminating against gay couples.”

Mail-On-Line wrote on February 2:

“The Pope yesterday hit out at Britain’s equality legislation, claiming Harriet Harman’s attempts to bring in new laws enforced sinful behaviour.

“The National Secular Society (NSS) today said it would mount a protest campaign against the visit made up of gay groups, victims of clerical abuse, feminists, family planning organisations and pro-abortion groups among others.

“His remarks have been interpreted as an attack on the Sexual Orientation Regulations which forced Catholic adoption agencies to consider gay couples as potential adoptive parents. By the time the regulations came into force in January last year, five of the agencies in England and Wales had cut ties with their Roman Catholic dioceses in order to comply with the new laws…

“Despite praising Britain’s ‘firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society’, the world’s most powerful religious leader turned his guns on Miss Harman’s equality agenda, which many in the hierarchy of the Roman Catholic Church say could force them to hire homosexuals or transsexuals.

“The powerful attack from Rome will deepen Miss Harman’s difficulties over her Bill. The criticism, unexpected by ministers since it comes from abroad, follows last week’s emphatic rejection by the House of Lords of clauses Catholic churches feared would force them to hire actively homosexual priests and staff, or force Catholics to allow women to become priests. Miss Harman’s Bill has already provoked deep opposition from the Church of England…

“When he visits the UK the Pope is expected to address MPs and peers on the issue of religious freedom from the spot in Westminster Hall where Sir Thomas More was condemned to death in 1535 for opposing the adultery of Henry VIII.”

While the Roman Catholic Church has been officially condemning homosexuality, Jesuit priests perpetrated despicable sex abuse crimes against boys in Germany and other countries, as the next article reports.

Sex Scandal at German Catholic School

The Local wrote on February 2:

“The scope of a child sex abuse scandal that was uncovered at an elite Berlin Catholic school last week has spread to other parts of Germany and beyond, the provincial superior for the country’s Jesuit order… has revealed.

“In addition to the 20 victims who have come forward at the Canisius College in Berlin, three from Hamburg and another two from the town of St. Blasien in the state of Baden-Württemberg have also said they were abused by the same two priests in the 1970s and 1980s]. There are also indications from Church files that one of the perpetrators… may have also sexually abused children in Chile and Spain up until 1990.

“In a statement addressed to his victims over the weekend, the 65-year-old former sports teacher Wolfgang S., who left the order in 1992, said it was ‘a sad fact that I abused children and young people for years under pseudo-educational pretexts’… Wolfgang S., who currently lives in South America, claimed that he had informed his Jesuit superiors of his dark past in 1991. Jesuit provincial leader Dartmann said over the weekend that the order did know of his crimes, and has hired a lawyer ‘to ascertain what the Jesuits specifically knew at the time, and what steps were taken.’

“According to Dartmann, Wolfgang S. taught between 1975 and 1979 at the Canisius College before moving on to the Saint Ansgar School in Hamburg between 1979 and 1982. Then in 1982 he went the St. Blasien in the Black Forest and stayed until 1984 before moving on to Chile in 1985. He was also reportedly under psychiatric care while he served in Hamburg and St. Blasien.

“The second suspect in the Canisius case, 69-year-old former religion teacher Peter R., taught religion at Canisius College between 1972 and 1981 in Berlin, before he moved on to Göttingen to work with youth between 1982 and 1989. He was suspended between 1989 and 1992, and then left the order in 1995. The church now has no contact with him, Dartmann said.”

No French Citizenship for Burqua-Wearing Muslims

On February 3, Deutsche Welle reported:

“France’s Prime Minister Francois Fillon said Wednesday on Europe 1 radio he would sign a decree sent to him by Immigration Minister Eric Besson refusing citizenship to a Moroccan man. The reason, he said, was that the man stated in his application he would never allow his wife to leave the home without a full veil and that a woman ‘is an inferior being.’ Fillon said the applicant does not respect French values of secularism and equality of the sexes… The applicant’s wife is a French citizen, Fillon said.

“France has made similar citizenship decisions in the past. A veiled Moroccan woman was denied citizenship by a French court two years ago because the court claimed her ‘radical’ practice of Islam was incompatible with French values…

“This most recent case comes as France engages in a heated national debate about what it means to be French and whether the burqa has a place in French society. President Nicolas Sarkozy has said the burqa was ‘not welcome’ in secular France, and last week a parliamentary commission recommended banning burqas in schools, hospitals, government offices and on public transportation. Sarkozy and his government have pushed for some sort of burqa ban.”

These decisions by the French government show the ongoing struggle of a Catholic country against non-Catholic beliefs–especially the Muslim faith. We can expect those controversies to intensify and to become (more) violent in the near future.

Guilty of Homicide for Failing to Seek Medical Help

The Oregonian on February 2:

“A Clackamas County jury found Jeffrey and Marci Beagley guilty today of criminally negligent homicide for failing to seek medical care for their 16-year-old son Neil Beagley [who] died June 17, 2008, of an undiagnosed and untreated urinary tract blockage. Instead of taking their son to a doctor when he became ill, the Beagleys treated him with faith healing – prayer, anointing with oil and laying on of hands.

“The Beagleys will be sentenced Feb. 18. They could face a maximum of 10 years in prison, although the normal sentencing range for people with no criminal history would be 16 to 18 months in prison. They could also be sentenced to probation… The Beagleys are the first parents from the Followers of Christ church in Oregon City to be convicted of homicide in the faith-healing death of a child.

“Legislators cracked down on faith healing in 1999, due in large part to a history of child deaths associated with the members of the church. A change in law eliminated the spiritual treatment defense for cases involving second-degree manslaughter and first- and second-degree criminal mistreatment.”

It is important that Christian parents know of the stance of their government regarding faith healing of children. Note this excerpt from page 36 of our booklet, “Sickness and Healing–What the Bible Tells Us”:

“If, as a parent, your individual conviction prohibits you from consulting doctors or taking medications, then you are not to violate your conviction (compare Romans 14:23). But it is always good to evaluate your conviction based on the Bible, to make sure that it is not the product of human reasoning or pre-conceived notions. In addition, the law in most countries prescribes that, as a parent, you are to seek medical help for your sick child. If you fail to do so, the government might take your child away from you, or, if the child should die, you may face charges of involuntary manslaughter, or worse.

“Additionally, faith is necessary in order to be healed. But what if your child does not have the required faith? God does not transfer your faith to that of the child. The Bible clearly states that God does not apply the righteousness of the parents to the children (Ezekiel 14:19–20). Romans 14:22 asks, ‘Do you have faith? Have it to yourself before God!’

“This is not to say that parents are not to teach their children the necessity of having faith in God when they are sick. They are, in fact, supposed to encourage them to ask God for healing by asking the elders of the church to anoint them with oil and to pray over them. We are only addressing here those parents who, because of conscientious reasons, would refuse to consult and work with doctors and get medical help. Even though parents are to teach their children to place their faith in GOD for healing, they should not withhold medical help from them, if it is due (compare Proverbs 3:27).”

In the context of this verse, the account shows that Jesus was reacting to the rejection of His teaching by the Pharisees (compare verse 14). In Luke 16:13, Jesus concluded a parable with this admonition, “‘…You cannot serve God and mammon’”—a statement that challenged the Pharisaical practices!

Continuing in Luke 16:15-16:

“And He said to them, ‘You are those who justify yourselves before men, but God knows your hearts. For what is highly esteemed among men is an abomination in the sight of God.

“‘The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.’”

Now specifically, in the first part of Luke 16:16, Jesus states, “‘The law and the prophets were until John.’” His comment is about how God was represented to men—especially, to those of Israel, and even more directly to the House of Judah. However, the Jews of that time were not even following the law of God or paying attention to what the prophets of God taught. Jesus continued His teaching with another parable, and note the poignant indictment of this lesson:

“‘But he said to him, “If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rise from the dead”’” (Luke 16:31).

That indeed proved to be the case, for Jesus Christ did rise from the dead, and, still, many of the Jews rejected Him—neither did they repent and turn to God. The proof of this is borne out in the way that the religious Jewish hierarchy fought against the disciples of Jesus who preached of His resurrection (compare Acts 5:22-42 regarding the original Apostles; Acts 7 regarding Stephen; and Acts 13:13-52 regarding the Apostle Paul).

In another account, the story of Jesus restoring life to Lazarus swept throughout the population. Even in the face of a multitude of witnesses to this remarkable miracle, the Pharisees (a dominant religious and political party in Palestine) tried to squelch the truth of the matter!

The people reacted quite differently to this raising of Lazarus from the dead:

“The next day a great multitude that had come to the feast, when they heard that Jesus was coming to Jerusalem, took branches of palm trees and went out to meet Him, and cried out: ‘Hosanna! ‘ “Blessed is He who comes in the name of the Lord!” ‘The King of Israel!’ Then Jesus, when He had found a young donkey, sat on it; as it is written: ‘Fear not, daughter of Zion; Behold, your King is coming, Sitting on a donkey’s colt.’ His disciples did not understand these things at first; but when Jesus was glorified, then they remembered that these things were written about Him and that they had done these things to Him. Therefore the people, who were with Him when He called Lazarus out of his tomb and raised him from the dead, bore witness. For this reason the people also met Him, because they heard that He had done this sign” (John 12:12-18)

Note the bitter jealously with which the Pharisees reacted to this event.

“The Pharisees therefore said among themselves, ‘You see that you are accomplishing nothing. Look, the world has gone after Him!’” (John 12:19).

Because of their intransigent attitude, Jesus rebuked those who withstood His preaching of the Gospel:

“‘But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you shut up the kingdom of heaven against men; for you neither go in yourselves, nor do you allow those who are entering to go in’” (Matthew 23:13).

On the one hand, we see that there was a great resistance to what was being preached since the time of John the Baptist, but we also find that many began to turn to God and to believe the message of both John the Baptist and Jesus Christ:

“‘For John came to you in the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him; but tax collectors and harlots believed him; and when you saw it, you did not afterward relent and believe him’” (Matthew 21:32).

Also, John himself testified against those who tried to falsely respond to his preaching:

“Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins. But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees coming to his baptism, he said to them, ‘Brood of vipers! Who warned you to flee from the wrath to come? Therefore bear fruits worthy of repentance…’” (Matthew 3:5-7).

Following His healing of a leper, Jesus warned the man to discreetly appear before the priest along with an appropriate offering; but this isn’t what he did:

“However, he went out and began to proclaim it freely, and to spread the matter, so that Jesus could no longer openly enter the city, but was outside in deserted places; and they came to Him from every direction” (Mark 1:45).

After another miraculous event in which Jesus fed a large number of people, notice what followed:

“Therefore when Jesus perceived that they were about to come and take Him by force to make Him king, He departed again to the mountain by Himself alone” (John 6:15).

Even following His resurrection, His own closest disciples anticipated the immediate establishment of God’s Kingdom: “…they asked Him, saying, ‘Lord, will You at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’” (Acts 1:6).

So we see that while the entrenched religious factions of the time fought against what both John the Baptist and Jesus Christ preached—that is, the Gospel of the Kingdom of God (compare Matthew 3:1-2; 4:17)—many people were “pressing into it.” Some did it for purely political or chauvinistic reasons, and their intentions did not find fulfillment. Others heard the message and understood that they had to “bear fruits worthy of repentance.” That kind of approach was magnified surrounding the events of the Day of Pentecost, when the Holy Spirit was given. The apostles preached the same message as that of John the Baptist and Jesus Christ—one that pointed to the future establishment of God’s Kingdom on the earth.

Here is what Peter preached to those in Jerusalem as the Church of God became established:

“‘But those things which God foretold by the mouth of all His prophets, that the Christ would suffer, He has thus fulfilled. Repent therefore and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, so that times of refreshing may come from the presence of the Lord, and that He may send Jesus Christ, who was preached to you before, whom heaven must receive until the times of restoration of all things, which God has spoken by the mouth of all His holy prophets since the world began’” (Acts 3:18-21).

In spite of opposition or even the ill-founded desires of those who sought God’s Kingdom for materialistic and selfish reasons, access is only possible through the door that God has opened—a door which no one can open on their own or shut (compare Revelation 3:7-8). Jesus reveals this important key:

“Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, ‘If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed. And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free’” (John 8:31-32).

And this:

“Then Jesus said to them again, ‘Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture’” (John 10:7-9).

The lesson for Christians is to make certain that we legitimately seek God’s Kingdom according to the instructions left for us. We have this warning from Jesus:

“‘Not everyone who says to Me, “Lord, Lord,” shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven. Many will say to Me in that day, “Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in Your name, cast out demons in Your name, and done many wonders in Your name?” And then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from Me, you who practice lawlessness!’ (Matthew 7:21-23).

Today, many, in a sense, are still “pressing into” the Kingdom of God, but as the statement from Matthew 7 reveals, they are going about it the wrong way! They have yet to repent of their sins against God, and they have to OBEY God!

Notice what we said in a previous Q&A: “Christ also refers to the fact in Matthew 11:12 that some would try to ‘press into’ the Kingdom of heaven in the wrong way–thinking that they do not have to keep God’s law anymore (compare Luke 16:16-17).”

Please also note what was written in our booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God,” on page 24:

“Consider now this passage in Luke 16:16: ‘The law and the prophets were until John. Since that time the Kingdom of God has been preached, and everyone is pressing into it.’ Until the prophet John came, only the Old Testament scriptures—the law and the prophets—were known. In Luke 24:44, the entire Old Testament is summarized as the ‘Law of Moses, and the Prophets, and the Psalms.’ The Kingdom of God had already been preached in the Old Testament, but not with such magnitude and clarity as Christ came to preach. NOW was the real possibility to enter it—since Christ had already qualified as King of that Kingdom, so that He could, with authority, proclaim the Kingdom of God as a future certainty for mankind. NOW it had become NEAR.

“And because of Christ’s preaching, many responded by trying to get into the Kingdom. But unless they were called, they would still not know HOW. Remember, Christ told us in Luke 13:24 that many would TRY to enter it, but would not be able to. Christ warned those of His time, as well as us today, that not everyone who would just say ‘Lord, Lord’ to Christ, would enter the Kingdom of God, but only the person ‘who does the will of My Father in heaven.’ (Matt. 7:21)

“This same thought is expressed in Luke 16:16: Everyone wants to desperately enter the Kingdom of God. But what does Christ tell us in verse 17: ‘And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for one tittle of the law to fail.’ In other words, if you want to enter into eternal life, keep the commandments. Only those who do the will of the Father, which is, to keep the commandments of God, will enter the Kingdom of God. And now Christ continues to give us an example of such a commandment to be kept, in verse 18: ‘Whoever divorces his wife and marries another commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced from her husband commits adultery.’

“’You shall not commit adultery’ is one of the commandments that we are to keep. And divorcing someone for any other than Biblical reasons and then marrying again, is a violation of the law against adultery. In order to enter the Kingdom of God, in order to be part of the Kingdom of God, we must keep God’s Law. It is the SAME Law, as we are told in Luke 16:16, that had already been preached up until the time of John the Baptist. It is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than for the Law to fail.”

Also consider the truth that Paul wrote about, when he stated: “Now this I say, brethren, that flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God; nor does corruption inherit incorruption” (1 Corinthians 15:50). As he explains throughout this chapter, physical must be changed to spiritual, and that can only be accomplished through our belief in and obedience to our Savior, Jesus Christ!

Finally, let us be reminded of exactly who will inherit the Kingdom of God–those who are truly able to be “pressing into it”:

“Listen, my beloved brethren: Has God not chosen the poor of this world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him?” (James 2:5).

Lead Writer: Dave Harris

A new StandingWatch program was posted on the Web. It is titled, “The State of the Union Address and No Solutions…”

In the program, Norbert Link points out that we do NOT experience a recovery of the U.S. economy. Sales of homes are down; unemployment is up; and the economic activity in 2009 showed the sharpest drop since 1946. USA Today commented: “The U.S. is broke.” Hope in U.S. leadership is at an all-time low, as the national and international reactions to the President’s State of the Union address demonstrated. Two quarters of Americans believe that their federal government is not working. The Telegraph wrote: “Barack Obama gets an F for world leadership.” Nobody seems to present workable solutions. Aren’t there any?

A German sermon, titled, “Ehre Vater und Mutter” [“Honor Father and Mother”], was posted on the Web.

A German sermon, titled, “Das Neue Jerusalem” [“The New Jerusalem”], was posted on the Web.