On December 12, 2009, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “Answered Prayers.”

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.

Catastrophic occurrences usually happen very quickly. People are seemingly never prepared for the worst!

No measure can apply to the things that will most certainly begin to happen in the near future. The provable truth of this statement is borne out by what Jesus Christ said: “‘For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be'” (Matthew 24:21).

Jesus also describes the state of mind of the people who will face this incomparable cataclysm: “‘For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered the ark, and did not know until the flood came and took them all away, so also will the coming of the Son of Man be'” (Matthew 24:38-39).

Noah was the exception in his day, and his actions are recounted for us: “By faith Noah, being divinely warned of things not yet seen, moved with godly fear, prepared an ark for the saving of his household, by which he condemned the world and became heir of the righteousness which is according to faith” (Hebrews 11:7).

We, the elect of God, have been warned, and that means we have been made aware in advance of actual or potential harm, danger, or evil! Jesus emphasized this when He said: “‘See, I have told you beforehand'” (Matthew 24:25).

Along with preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of God, true Christians have anticipated the end of the age that prophecies graphically reveal. In point of fact, the Church is strictly warned that as we see the Day  approaching, we are to lift our voices by strong, stirring argument, admonition, advice, and appeal–that is, to exhort one another (compare Hebrews 10:19-25)!

This is our time to heed, to prepare, to be ready with all fervency–for what is coming will come, and when it does take place, it will happen all too suddenly!

We begin with a selection of articles on Europe–including an alarming report on Europe’s secret nuclear weapons; a Russian plea for a European army; and the charge that the EU is escalating war in the Middle East, while Europe is anxious to please both sides. As Jews come to the rescue of Muslims in Europe–for fear that the EU might turn against Jews next–the Anglican church in the USA nominated a lesbian to the office of bishop, thereby angering headquarters in Britain.

We also note that Britain and France are at odds again–as they have been so many times during their turbulent history–but the latest feud might very well contribute to Britain’s likely decision to exit the EU. In addition, the USA might very well abandon Britain in the end.

We report on “wartime” President Obama’s acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize and his bewildering statements justifying war.

We quote an article on the return of the historical plague of syphilis in Britain and conclude with a special report on the summit in Copenhagen and the ongoing heated and sometimes mean-spirited controversy on “man-made global warming” or “climate change.” It is becoming obvious that Europe and the USA, as well as China, are drifting further and further apart on the issue–as one article’s headline reads: “Europe Turns on US and China Over Weak Emission Targets.”

“Europe’s Secret Nuclear Weapons”

Time magazine wrote on December 2:

“Is Italy capable of delivering a thermonuclear strike? Could the Belgians and the Dutch drop hydrogen bombs on enemy targets? And what about Germany – a country where fear of atomkraft is so great that the last government opposed all civilian nuclear power? Germany’s air force couldn’t possibly be training to deliver bombs 13 times more powerful than the one that destroyed Hiroshima, could it?

“It is Europe’s dirty secret that the list of nuclear-capable countries extends beyond those – Britain and France – who have built their own weapons. Nuclear bombs are stored on air-force bases in Italy, Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands – and planes from each of those countries are capable of delivering them. The Federation of American Scientists believes that there are some 200 B61 thermonuclear gravity bombs scattered across these four countries.

“Under a NATO agreement struck during the Cold War, the bombs, which are technically owned by the U.S., can be transferred to the control of a host nation’s air force in times of conflict. Twenty years after the fall of the Berlin Wall, Dutch, Belgian, Italian and German pilots remain ready to engage in nuclear war.”

The Bible prophesies that a nuclear world war is coming soon–and that a nuclear Europe will be heavily involved.

The Russian View–Europe Needs an Army

The Pravda wrote on November 27:

“The European Union needs the joint all-European army… The US administration is very negative about the idea. The question about the all-European army was pushed into the background after the Balkan war… Things changed in 2009. The European Parliament established the Rapid Deployment Force of the European Union in 2009. Last week, officials of the Italian administration put forward a suggestion to look into the matter of the European Army again. Italy’s Foreign Minister Franco Frattini stated that Europe needed the army to deepen the European integration, optimize the spending on military operation in NATO and repulse possible threats…

“Europe wants to increase its weight in the world and turn into a real center of influence. Europe has not been happy with its role of America’s minor partner, not to mention its position of a subordinate member in NATO…

“Some experts say that the EU does not need the army because it is a political, not a military organization. European countries prefer not to participate in military actions. They would rather subordinate to someone than get ready for war to defend their interests and territories…

“Other experts say that the creation of the common European force is good for Russia. Russia supposedly used its friendly relations with Italy and initiated Frattini’s statement to distract the EU from the USA… Europe needs to get rid of America’s influence because the latter plans to betray its old-time partners for the sake of the new partnership – with China. The Washington-Beijing axis is a real threat, and Europe will be able to handle it only if it joins forces with Russia.”

The Bible clearly shows that Europe will have a very powerful joint army in the very near future. It is also possible, judging from history, that Europe will align at first with Russia, against the USA, but prophecy also reveals that finally Europe and Russia will be warring enemies (as happened so many times before, including under Hitler and Stalin).

Is the EU Escalating War in the Middle East?

  The EUobserver wrote on December 4:

“The EU must put real pressure on Israel to halt settlement growth in East Jerusalem or risk seeing an escalation of the Middle East conflict that could spill into Europe, a Jewish politician on the front line of the peace process has warned. ‘We have reached the last moment when it is still possible to divide and share Jerusalem. If it [decisive action] does not happen this year, it will become impossible to implement any plan like the two-state solution,’ Meir Margalit, a Jerusalem city councilor, told EUobserver in a phone interview on Thursday (3 December).

“‘This is not an internal conflict. You [the EU] are part of this conflict,’ he added. ‘I am talking about terrorism. I am talking about another London, about the clash of civilisations. The clash of civilisations started in Jerusalem and it will end in Jerusalem,’ Mr Margalit said, referring to the tube bombing in the UK capital in 2005…

“Mr Margalit believes the situation has reached such a dangerous point that the EU should consider economic sanctions against Israel. The councilor rejected the argument that Europe cannot influence Israeli policy unless it acts jointly with the US. ‘The EU is not a bunch of boy scouts,’ he said. ‘It is the biggest power here after the US. It must realise that what happens here will impact what happens in Europe much more than what happens in the US.'”

It is prophesied that Europe will intervene militarily in the Middle East in an attempt to bring “peace” to that region.

Europe Pleases Both Sides–Temporarily

The Australian wrote on December 10:

“ISRAEL has expressed relief that the European Union has watered down a resolution that would have declared Jerusalem as the capital of any future Palestinian state. The EU yesterday supported a resolution that Jerusalem should be subject to negotiations as part of any final status agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. The softening of the initial Sweden-sponsored resolution followed lobbying by Israel, which feared the initial proposal would have made it difficult to engage in negotiations.

“It is understood Italy, France, Germany, Poland and Hungary were among the countries that overturned the earlier draft. The statement by the council of foreign ministers was a rare accomplishment for the EU, giving both Israel and the Palestinians something to be pleased with…

“Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat rejected any suggestion that Jerusalem be divided, saying the EU’s resolution was ‘a real danger for the future of Jerusalem that will never work.'”

A Third Temple by 2010?

On December 6, Haaretz reported the following:

“If the 18th-century rabbinic authority the Vilna Gaon was right, on March 16, 2010, construction will begin on the third Temple. His projection states that the auspicious day will coincide with the third completion of the Hurva Synagogue in Jerusalem’s Jewish Quarter. The great day is at hand: On March 15, the reconstructed Hurva Synagogue, considered the most important house of prayer in Jerusalem will be rededicated. It was last destroyed in the War of Independence.”

The Bible strongly indicates that a third Temple will be built, and that the Jews will begin to offer sacrifices in that Temple.

Jews and Muslims–an Unlikely Alliance

The Jerusalem Post wrote on December 3:

“Citing religious discrimination, a diverse coalition of Jewish organizations is objecting to Switzerland’s ban of minarets on local mosques… Jewish organizations, realizing that a crackdown on Islam could have repercussions for Jews as well, have come to the defense of Muslim worshipers, arguing that the Swiss’s move was unjustifiable…

“‘This is not the first time a Swiss popular vote has been used to promote religious intolerance,’ said the ADL [Anti-Defamation League] in a press release. ‘A century ago, a Swiss referendum banned Jewish ritual slaughter, in an attempt to drive out its Jewish population’…

“Meanwhile, it appeared that Italy might hold an anti-minaret referendum of its own. Roberto Caldeoli, leader of Italy’s right-wing Northern League party, said, ‘Respect for other religions is important, but we must put the brakes on Muslim propaganda, or else we will end up with an Islamic political party.’

“French Ambassador Christophe Bigot told The Jerusalem Post that ‘Muslims, like Catholics, like Jews, should be allowed to worship the way they wish. So why limit construction of mosques?’…

“Hegumen Filaret (Bulekov), a Moscow Patriarchate representative at the Council of Europe, voiced support for Switzerland’s ban. ‘Accusing Switzerland that it is somehow discriminating against the Islamic minority would be at least lopsided,’ Filaret told Interfax [news] service. ‘The issue of minarets is not an issue of religious freedom, but it is an issue of political presence of people of a certain faith and ethnic background in a country. Taking into account a rapid rate of Islamization, visible signs of Muslims’ presence would have, in particular, a political tint,’ he said.”

The New York Times wrote on December 9:

“Suddenly, people are expressing views that they once would have considered racist or intolerant… 41 percent of French people questioned said they opposed the construction of mosques, up from 22 percent in 2001. On the question of building minarets, 46 percent were opposed… One source of the fear of Muslims… is Europeans’ deep and complicated resentment of an unfamiliar, historically hostile religion that is perceived as a direct challenge to Christianity, Europe’s dominant faith.”

Europe is returning to its historical roots. The historical Holy Roman Empire–a combination of state and church–is being revived. We can expect that the EU will embrace Roman Catholicism as their state religion (as is already the case in Italy and some other EU countries). The EU will become an Orthodox Christian power bloc, which will not tolerate in the end non-Christian religions, including Islam and Judaism. Most non-Catholic “Christian” churches will come under the Catholic Church’s umbrella and accept the pope as their spiritual leader with unquestioned authority in spiritual matters. The next article on the election of a lesbian bishop in the Anglican Church might give us one of the reasons why this might be happening.

Anglican Church–“In Your Face…”

Mail On Line wrote on December 6:

“The worldwide Anglican Church has been plunged into a fresh crisis after a lesbian was chosen as its second gay bishop… Canon Mary Glasspool was elected as an assistant bishop for the diocese of Los Angeles… Rod Thomas, the leader of the conservative evangelical group Reform and a member of the General Synod, said: ‘I feel deeply ashamed that this is happening in the Anglican Church. I think a schism is absolutely inevitable.’

“But St Paul’s Cathedral’s Canon Chancellor Giles Fraser, a leading liberal, said: ‘This is another nail in the coffin of Christian homophobia.’ Canon Glasspool, 55, has openly stated that she has lived with her partner, Becki Sander, since 1988. American Gene Robinson became the first gay Anglican bishop in 2003.”

Times On Line wrote on December 6:

“The Archbishop of Canterbury and a majority of the other 38 Anglican primates had requested a moratorium on gay bishops and same-sex blessings in an attempt to prevent the Communion from splitting between evangelicals and liberals… Kendall Harmon, of the conservative diocese of South Carolina, said that the election of Canon Glasspool was damaging. ‘This decision represents an intransigent embrace of a pattern of life Christians throughout history and the world have rejected as against biblical teaching.’

“However, influential Anglicans spoke up in support of Canon Glasspool’s election… Liberals in England are increasingly frustrated that an Archbishop of Canterbury who was himself elected for his supposedly liberal views on this and other subjects has embraced conservative Christian values in the name of Church unity…

“Canon Glasspool needs approval from a majority of dioceses in the Episcopal Church in the US before she can be consecrated. The US church has become more conservative in the wake of the gay controversy and recently the dioceses voted against the consecration of a bishop who is sympathetic towards the Buddhist tradition. However, it is thought likely that this latest consecration will go ahead.”

It appears that many Anglicans have taken an “in your face”–approach. They don’t only seem to care about the survival of their church; they seem to pursue intentionally and willfully a suicidal road of self-destruction to push their own anti-biblical agenda. In all this discussion, we should not forget that the Bible does not only prohibit the appointment of practicing homosexual or lesbian ministers; it also prohibits the appointment of women–whether lesbian or heterosexual–to the office of a minister.

Britain and France at Odds

The EUobserver wrote on December 4:

“A meeting between French President Nicolas Sarkozy and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, scheduled to take place in London on Friday (4 December), has been cancelled amid ongoing tensions surrounding recent EU appointments… The French president recently proposed the London visit as a means of defusing angst over last week’s appointment of Frenchman Michel Barnier to the important internal market portfolio inside the European Commission.

“The City of London greeted the job announcement with dismay. But subsequent comments from Mr Sarkozy that he had ‘out-manoeuvred’ Mr Brown and that the appointment was a ‘triumph’ for French ideas on financial regulation only added fuel to the fire and served to enrage Downing Street. Fears that further public comments during Friday’s visit could serve to aggravate the dispute appear to be the reason behind the cancellation, with British civil servants suggesting it was London that put the brakes on the idea.”

The centuries-long feud between Britain and France will continue, and will affect continental Europe. It is very likely that ultimately, Britain will exit the EU.

Is America Betraying Britain?

The Daily Mail wrote on December 9:

“In all the speeches Obama has made since becoming President – indeed, in all the speeches he made when on the campaign trail, too – neither Britain nor the special relationship have merited a single mention. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that while the special relationship may not be dead yet, it’s certainly dying, a fact that should be enormously worrying to politicians – and voters – on both sides of the Atlantic.

“And yet Obama seems strangely oblivious to the dangerous path he has embarked on, becoming the first U.S. President in modern times to place no importance on the historic relationship between the U.S. and Britain…

“This, after all, is a man who, within days of being sworn in as President, ordered that a bust of Winston Churchill – a gift from the British people to the U.S. in the dark days that followed 9/11 – be removed from the Oval Office… Unlike so many of his predecessors, Obama is certainly a man with no close family ties to this country. He never attended a university here and has no great political affinity with Britain either. His Kenyan grandfather, however, was reportedly mistreated under British colonial rule during that country’s Mau Mau rebellion – an event to which he devotes 35 pages of his memoir, Dreams From My Father…

“Obama… seems to be a president with no real grasp of history… By withdrawing plans for a missile shield to be located in Eastern Europe, he not only appeased the Russians, he also betrayed the Poles and the Czechs, people who have only just been released from the yoke of Soviet control and have since become enthusiastic and valuable Western allies. What he did in Eastern Europe, he now seems to be doing to us…

“Time and again, history has shown – most recently, of course, in Iraq and Afghanistan – that when it comes to taking decisive military action, the only country the U.S. has ever been able to rely on is Britain. When the U.S. marches in, it’s only ever the British who can be depended on to march alongside them. And yet all that proud history, all that noble sacrifice, seems to count for nothing in Obama’s eyes. He seems oblivious to the debt of gratitude he, and the American people, owe this country…

“Britain needs America – of that there is no doubt. But recent history shows that America needs Britain, too. Barack Obama needs to wake up to that; before it’s too late.”

It is entirely possible that Britain will find itself in the end abandoned by the USA.

Wartime President Obama Accepts Peace Prize

The Associated Press reported on December 10:

“President Barack Obama entered the pantheon of Nobel Peace Prize winners Thursday with humble words, acknowledging his own few accomplishments while delivering a robust defense of war… A wartime president honored for peace, Obama became the first sitting U.S. president in 90 years and the third ever to win the prize – some say prematurely.

“And yet Obama was staying here only about 24 hours and skipping the traditional second day of festivities. This miffed some in Norway but reflects a White House that sees little value in extra pictures of the president, his poll numbers dropping at home, taking an overseas victory lap while thousands of U.S. troops prepare to go off to war and millions of Americans remain jobless.

“Just nine days after ordering 30,000 more U.S. troops into battle in Afghanistan, Obama delivered a Nobel acceptance speech that he saw as a treatise on war’s use and prevention… In them, Obama refused to renounce war for his nation or under his leadership…

“‘A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler’s armies. Negotiations cannot convince al-Qaida’s leaders to lay down their arms,’ Obama said. ‘To say that force is sometimes necessary is not a call to cynicism, it is a recognition of history.’

“The president laid out the circumstances where war is justified – in self-defense, to come to the aid of an invaded nation and on humanitarian grounds, such as when civilians are slaughtered by their own government or a civil war threatens to engulf an entire region. ‘The belief that peace is desirable is rarely enough to achieve it,’ he said. He also spoke bluntly of the cost of war, saying of the Afghanistan buildup he just ordered that ‘some will kill, some will be killed.'”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 10 that President Obama received the “wrong prize at the wrong time.” But the German reaction overall was mixed, and Der Stern wrote that President Obama’s “furious speech,” explaining when a war is “justified,” has increased his credibility.

However, what this deceived world does not understand is that NO war, fought by humans, is EVER justified. The lesson and recognition of history is that wars fought by humans have NEVER produced lasting peace, and they never will. Christ commanded His disciples to put the sword away (Matthew 26:52) and to rely instead on GOD (verse 53; compare Exodus 14:14). Ancient Israel did not do this, and neither does our “Christian” world today. This is WHY we don’t have peace–and WHY we will NEVER achieve peace with this kind of thinking. Far too many “Christians” are rejecting God and the words of Jesus Christ, while following their own wrong philosophies and reasoning. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Should YOU Fight in War?,” and please listen to our new StandingWatch program, “Lessons from the Afghan War.”

The Return of Syphilis in the UK

The Daily Mail wrote on December 5:

“Syphilis is making a comeback because of promiscuity among middle-aged men who ignore safe sex guidance, warn experts. Cases of the sexually transmitted infection have shot up more than tenfold in the past decade. It was thought the disease – which can cause madness, paralysis and even death in its final stages – had been largely wiped out with the advent of penicillin. But while their great-grandparents were well aware of the dangers of syphilis, adults today are seemingly ignorant about it and aiding its spread, with hotspots in London and the North West… Sexual health clinics say the rise in syphilis in the UK can also be traced back to increased contact with former Eastern Bloc countries such as Russia and Poland, where the disease has remained endemic.”

The Bible shows that many known and unknown diseases and sicknesses will affect this world, and especially countries like the United States and Great Britain, in these end times.

Copenhagen and the Global Warming Debate

This week, the global warming summit in Copenhagen began. It is unparalleled in size and attendance. It has been labeled as the most important summit in the history of man. But what is it all about? The selection of our articles below shows that there is strong disagreement regarding the existence of man-made global warming or climate change–and this debate recently accelerated, of course, with the infamous “climate-gate” occurrences. It is interesting that parallels are drawn by global warming supporters between the theory of evolution and climate change–perhaps without realizing that the theory of evolution HAS BEEN PROVEN to be false. Also interesting is the fact that Europe is turning on the USA and President Obama, insisting that he make more concessions on behalf of the USA–but very few believe that he will.

Belief in Global Warming at All-Time Low — Even BEFORE Climategate

Newsmax reported on December 6:

“A new poll reveals that the percentage of Americans who believe carbon dioxide emissions will cause global warming has dropped dramatically in recent years. And that poll by Harris Interactive was conducted between Nov. 2 and 11 — before the so-called ‘climategate’ controversy erupted, calling into question the validity of some of the science supporting manmade global warming.

“The poll found that the percentage of American[s] who believe in global warming has dropped from 75 percent in 2001 and 71 percent in 2007 to just 51 percent. At the same time, the percentage of those who do not believe in global warming has risen from 19 percent in 2001 and 23 percent in 2007 to 29 percent today, and the percentage who are unsure has climbed from 6 percent to 21 percent since 2001… Opinions differed sharply along party lines — 73 percent of Democrats believe in manmade global warming, compared to 28 percent of Republicans and 49 percent of Independents…

“Six days after the poll closed, on Nov. 17, someone hacked a server used by the Climatic Research Unit of the University of East Anglia in Norwich, England, and disseminated more than a thousand e-mails and other documents… The leaked documents ‘show that prominent scientists were so wedded to theories of manmade global warming that they ridiculed dissenters who asked for copies of their data, plotted how to keep researchers who reached different conclusions from publishing, and concealed apparently buggy computer code from being disclosed under the Freedom of Information law,’ CBS News reported.”

Worst Fears Have Come True

The Financial Times reported on December 7:

“Failure to agree [to] a new global framework on climate change at Copenhagen would squander the world’s best hope of avoiding the worst effects of global warming, officials from close to 190 countries heard on Monday morning.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 7:

“The worst fears of many delegates to the Copenhagen climate negotiations have already come true: It has become clear that the official attempt to replace the Kyoto Protocol will fail to produce a concrete plan to reduce carbon emissions…

“It is often claimed that we could easily stop warming through carbon emission reductions, if only politicians had the willpower. In fact, political willpower is the least of our worries. This policy approach — which we have followed for nearly 20 years — is critically flawed. It is flawed economically, because short-term carbon taxes will cost a fortune and do little. It is flawed politically, because negotiations to reduce CO2 emissions will become ever more fraught and divisive for the actors in Europe, America and Asia. And it is flawed technologically, because it will not ensure that alternative energy is ready to end our reliance on carbon…

“Global energy demand will double by 2050. Alternative sources of energy are far from ready for widespread use… Rather than making fossil fuels more expensive, we need to make alternative energy cheaper.”

“Europe Turns on US and China Over Weak Emission Targets”

Times on Line reported on December 7:

“The European Union today rejected the new carbon emission targets tabled by the United States and China and said they were much too weak to prevent catastrophic climate change. The dispute between the three main players at the Copenhagen climate change summit overshadowed the first day of negotiations and dashed hopes that a deal on emissions was imminent.

“The EU called on President Obama to announce a more ambitious target next week, when he arrives in Copenhagen for the last day of the conference on December 18. But the US insisted that the provisional offer made 10 days ago by Mr Obama was ‘remarkable’ and in line with what scientists had recommended.

“Mr Obama has proposed to cut its emissions by 4 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020, although he has said this is subject to getting the approval of Congress. The EU has made a legally binding commitment to cut its emissions by 20 per cent over the same period. It has also said it would increase the cut to 30 per cent if other countries committed to ‘comparable action’.

“Andreas Carlgren, Sweden’s environment minister and the EU’s main negotiator under the rotating presidency, said the targets proposed by the US and China were too low to qualify as comparable action and therefore the EU would not strengthen its 20 per cent target.”

“Saboteurs” Against Global Warming?

Times On Line wrote on December 6:

“Ed Miliband was furious. His press conference should have highlighted Britain’s role at the Copenhagen climate talks that open tomorrow — but instead he faced questions on whether global warming was even true. ‘We have to beware of the climate saboteurs,’ he barked. ‘The timing of this leak and the questioning of the science [are] not coincidental.’

“Miliband was not just referring to the now infamous leaking of emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit. His definition of ‘saboteurs’ also included climate sceptics such as Lord Lawson, who recently set up the Global Warming Policy Foundation, and David Davis, the former Conservative frontbencher, who last week challenged the science in a newspaper article… Miliband said [:] ‘The science is, however, clear and settled and we will push on in getting an agreement that is consistent with the science.’

“The day he spoke, his words were being undermined — by the man who has done most to make global warming a global obsession. Jim Hansen, director of Nasa’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies, said he shared the sceptics’ hope that the Copenhagen talks would fail. ‘The whole approach [at Copenhagen] is so wrong that it is better to reassess the situation,’ he said. What Hansen was complaining about was not the science, but the solutions to be proposed at Copenhagen and, in particular, the proposal to set up global carbon markets, in which permits to pollute are bought and sold.”

Danish Speaker of Parliament Questions Man-Made Global Warming

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 4:

“Denmark’s Speaker of Parliament has expressed serious doubts as to the way in which the climate debate has developed. ‘The problem is that lots of people go around saying that the climate change we see is a result of human activity. That is a very dangerous claim… Unfortunately… scientists say: “We have a theory” – then that crosses the road to the politicians who say: “We know”‘… Thor Pedersen says.

“[He] adds that the temperature has not risen in the past decade… ‘You should say that although we believed in our models, that the temperature would rise from 1998 to 2008, we have to admit that it has not risen. We cannot explain why it has not risen, but we believe we still have a problem. I’m just asking that people say what they actually know,’ Pedersen  [says]… ‘We should all shake hands and agree to do everything possible to create good living conditions. That has nothing to do with the climate debate, in which we try to determine the globe’s temperature. It is common sense…'”

Republicans and Democrats at Odds Over Climate Change

The Associated Press wrote on December 2:

“House Republicans pointed to controversial e-mails leaked from climate scientists and said it was evidence of corruption. Top administration scientists looking at the same thing found no such sign, saying it doesn’t change the fact that the world is warming… House Republicans Wednesday read excerpts from at least eight of the e-mails, saying they showed the world needs to re-examine experts’ claims that the science on warming is settled… ‘These e-mails show a pattern of suppression, manipulation and secrecy that was inspired by ideology, condescension and profit,’ said U.S. Rep. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis…

“Defending the scientists, Rep. Jay Inslee, D-Wash., said somehow the e-mails aren’t stopping the Arctic from warming, the oceans from getting more acidic, and glaciers from melting…”

When All Else Fails… Blame It on Russian Conspiracy…

Times on Line wrote on December 6:

“UN officials likened the Climategate controversy to Watergate today, claiming that computer hackers who stole thousands of e-mails sent by a senior climate scientist were probably paid to do it by people intent on undermining the Copenhagen summit. Jean-Pascal van Ypersele, vice-chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), said… the fact that the e-mails were first uploaded to a sceptic website from a computer in Russia was an indication that the culprit was paid…

“Jonathan Pershing, the senior US climate negotiator, said the controversy surrounding the e-mails came at an unfortunate time ‘but has no fundamental bearing on the outcome’ of the summit…

“Reports today suggest that the Tomcity server based in the Siberian town of Tomsk was used to upload the e-mails on to the web. The server is used mainly by Tomsk State University, one of the leading academic institutions in Russia, and other scientific institutes…”

Is Global Warming as Fake as Evolution?

In an accompanying article, Times on Line wrote on December 5:

“In 1999, National Geographic magazine announced the discovery of a remarkable fossil. Archaeoraptor, as it was named, was claimed to be a dinosaur with feathers, a missing link of evolution that showed these long-extinct creatures were the ancestors of modern birds. A year later, however, the magazine was left with a dinosaur-sized portion of egg on its face. Scientific investigations revealed that Archaeoraptor was a fake — a composite of dinosaur and primitive bird fossils that had been glued together. The episode was seized upon by creationists, yet it has done nothing to dent the fundamentals of evolutionary theory. It survived this fraud — as it survived others such as Piltdown Man — because it is far too broadly attested to be threatened by a single piece of dodgy evidence.

“Research in dozens of disciplines — including genetics, anthropology, palaeontology, geology and medicine, to name but a few — shows evolution to be a scientific fact. It is hard to credit the view that all are wrong. This is worth remembering in the context of the Climate Research Unit (CRU) hacking scandal…

“It is possible that a few scientists might have faked or manipulated evidence, like the fossil-maker behind Archaeoraptor, though there is no proof of this in the CRU emails. But the notion that so many different branches of science have all connived undetected to manufacture a falsehood defies belief.”

Not, if we realize that Satan the devil is the author of many “scientific” postulations and conclusions. Satan, the god and ruler of this world, is called a liar, and the truth is not in him. And it is he who has deceived the whole world, and the Bible says that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.

The fact that Darwin’s evolution theory IS a massive fraud must not be questioned in light of the biblical and archeological fossil records. You might want to read our free booklet, “The Theory of Evolution–a Fairy Tale for Adults?” Whether the notion of man-made global warming is equally a fraudulent fake, invented by scientists under Satan’s tutelage, still awaits a final verdict.

We are indeed close to the time of the year when people get all excited in anticipation of the Christmas season, complete with the hustle and bustle of shopping and, far too often, excesses both in over-spending, over-eating and over-drinking.

Far too many never seem to stop and think about the consequences of these excesses. Are people considering the fact that what is charged and overspent has to be paid back and sometimes at high interest rates, and that for a long time; also, that there are long range effects of excesses in eating and drinking to one’s health; and finally, that there are terrible consequences for family relationships; especially, when arguments break out, leading to violence to the degree that someone loses his or her life?

Why is it that many don’t seem to ask: Is this really what God wants us to do? And apart from the excesses, where do the Christmas customs come from in the first place, and are they biblically based?

The attitude seems to be: Don’t confuse me with the facts. But the facts are that in spite of the saying, “Let’s put Christ back into Christmas,” Christ was never in Christmas to begin with.

For instance, there is no biblical emphasis on the day He was born. The Bible nowhere tells us WHEN He was born, except that it makes it abundantly clear that He was NOT born anywhere near December 25. The biblical emphasis is more on the fact of His death and resurrection–showing the importance of the teaching that by His shed blood and His resurrection, man can also obtain forgiveness of sin and eternal life. And the Bible does tell us when Christ died and when He was resurrected–but this did not occur on “Good Friday” or “Easter Sunday”–both of which are additional human inventions based on paganism.

The whole Christmas manger scene is a complete fraud. There were no wise men at the manger. The number of the wise men is not specified. It is only stated that they gave three types of gifts, but they didn’t see Christ until He was a young child. At that time, He was no longer in a manger, but lived in a house (Matthew 2:11). According to Matthew 2:16, Christ was at that time perhaps as old as two years, since King Herod had all children two and under killed, based on the information which he had received from the wise men.

It was the shepherds watching over their flocks by night who visited Joseph, Mary and the Baby when He was born. An historical study of the area would determine that they never had flocks out in the fields after late October, so the date of Christ’s birth could not have occurred after the end of October. There is no biblical injunction to celebrate one’s birthday and, as mentioned, there is certainly no emphasis placed on the date of Christ’s birth.

The Bible tells us that we must not keep man’s religious holidays, which are steeped in paganism (compare Deuteronomy 12:29-32). A perusal of any encyclopedia or reliable historical source into the origins of the Christmas holiday would bring one to the conclusion that it and its customs are totally pagan in origin. In fact, ALL the Christmas customs, as well as the festival itself, are derived from the worship of pagan deities and sun gods. For full proof, please read our free booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas.”

What the Scriptures clearly tell us and what mankind for the most part rejects, is the command to observe the seven annual Holy Days of GOD, outlined in Leviticus 23 and Deuteronomy 16. Seven is oftentimes representative of the number of completion (compare, for example, the 7-day week created by God, as recorded in Genesis 1 and 2). The seven annual Holy Days picture God’s plan for mankind from beginning to end. They are holy because God placed His presence in them. They totally encompass what God has in mind for mankind as to man’s potential and reason for being on this earth.

God’s annual Holy Days are introduced with the Passover, which is a memorial of Christ’s death. It was on the day of Passover, in 31 A.D., that Jesus Christ died. Contrary to popular belief, that day was a WEDNESDAY–NOT a Friday. The Passover is a festival but not an annual Holy Day per se.

The first and last Days of Unleavened Bread are the first two annual Holy Days. They picture putting sin out of our lives and also point at the resurrection of Jesus Christ–which occurred on SATURDAY at sunset, and NOT on Sunday morning–exactly three days and three nights after His BURIAL–during the Days of Unleavened Bread. It is only through Christ living in us that we can overcome sin. Seven denotes completion, so the SEVEN Days of Unleavened Bread picture removing sin completely. We put the physical leaven out of our homes, and refrain from eating leavened products during that time, as a symbol of putting sin out of our lives.

The next annual Holy Day is Pentecost, which pictures, historically, the Church receiving the Holy Spirit. When we repent of our sins, believe in and accept Jesus Christ as our personal Savior, are baptized and have hands laid on us by a true minister of Jesus Christ, we, too, receive the gift of the Holy Spirit–as a down payment or guarantee of eternal life (see 2 Corinthians 5:5). With the help of God’s Spirit in us, we can and must grow in the fruit of the Spirit, as well as in the grace and knowledge of Jesus Christ, by using the tools God provides for us, including prayer, Bible study, meditation and occasional fasting.

Pentecost is followed by the annual Holy Day of the Feast of Trumpets. It pictures the glorious return of Jesus Christ to establish the Kingdom of God on this earth. At the same time, true Christians who are still alive, and those who died in Christ and who are then resurrected, will be given eternal life in the Family of God.

The Day of Atonement is the fifth annual Holy Day, which pictures the removal of Satan. Christ will place all of man’s sins, for which Satan is responsible, on his head and will banish him for 1,000 years. During that time, he will be unable to deceive mankind.

Following Atonement is the annual Festival of the Feast of Tabernacles. This is a seven day event. The first day of the seven-day Festival is an annual Holy Day. The Festival pictures the millennial rule of Christ and His saints on this earth and over this earth. The Kingdom or Family of God will rule mankind to help them also reach their potential–eternal life in the Kingdom of God as the very members of the God Family.

The final and seventh annual Holy Day is the “Eighth Day” or the “Last Great Day,” which pictures a time after the Millennium, when those will be resurrected who have lived and died without ever having been given an opportunity to know and accept Christ as their personal Savior. Then, they will have their opportunity to either accept or reject Christ and the government of God over them. Those who reject God the Father and Jesus Christ will be thrown into the lake of fire to be devoured and burned up–their existence will cease. The Bible does not teach a never-ending torture in an ever-burning hell fire; rather, their final punishment will be swift and decisive.

After all these events, God the Father will come to earth and dwell with His Family of immortal Spirit-born Sons and Daughters. The God Family will rule for all eternity, and there will be no more pain, sorrow or death (see Revelation 21:4)

This future for man, which is revealed through God’s annual Holy Days, is much more fulfilling than the false commercialized Christmas or Easter concepts pushed upon an unsuspecting and deceived world. In fact, Christmas and Easter celebrations portray an altogether false image of Jesus Christ. They either picture Him as a little baby in a manger, or as a dead man on the cross. But Christ is ALIVE–He is our LIVING High Priest–the second glorified and all-powerful member of the immortal GOD Family. He is LIVING in true Christians to help them become born-again immortal members in the God Family as well.

Why would we want to neglect keeping God’s meaningful Holy Days, by substituting them with a cheap and unsatisfying alternative? And why would we try to engage in syncretism–mixing paganism with Christianity–in an attempt to keep all of them? God tells us not to do this! (For more information, please read our free booklet, “Is That in the Bible?–Man’s Holidays or God’s Holy Days.”)

The choice seems clear. It is the choice between sin and righteousness; between life and death. God wants us to choose life and live–we as well as our descendants. Let us ensure that we DO choose life.

Lead Writer: Rene Messier

A new member letter was written, sent out and posted on the Web. In the letter, Brian Gale discusses the evils of this world (including the upcoming Christmas season) and encourages all of us to stay close to God and avoid this world’s pitfalls and deceptions.

A new StandingWatch program was posted this week on StandingWatch and You Tube. It is titled, “Lessons from the Afghan War.” The following is discussed: President Obama’s decision to send more troops to Afghanistan has been described as “dangerous.” It was pointed out that “parallels between Afghanistan and Vietnam are impossible to ignore.” The President’s speech has been labeled as “false,” and the war itself as unnecessary, unsuccessful and unsolvable. But the most important lessons from the war have been completely overlooked. 

A new German StandingWatch (AufPostenStehen) program was also recorded. It discusses the decision of the German highest constitutional court to ban Sunday shopping, following the complaint of the Catholic and Protestant Church. In addition, the change from the Sabbath to Sunday is addressed.

A new German sermon, titled, “Der Ursprung des Weihnachstfestes” (“The Origin of Christmas”), was posted on the Web.

On December 5, 2009, Dave Harris will give the sermon, titled, “Those Who Are Called.”

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.

Jesus was never too timid or shy to express the truth in the strongest terms. Sometimes, He spoke purposefully in figurative language to test His disciples’ commitment to God. On other occasions, He struck to the core of their innermost motives and hidden feelings, to let them know that He understood their thoughts and could read their hearts.

Christ did not go on a crusade to gain a following, knowing that God the Father must call and draw people to Him. At times, He even dissuaded people from walking with Him. He was more concerned with the quality, rather than the quantity, of His disciples. He did not perform public signs or miracles to be accepted or admired. He shocked people by saying and doing things which were unexpected.

Many of the early followers of Christ fell into the carnal trap of pursuing wrong goals and giving in to distracting desires, craving for recognition, power, or doing “great things.” How about us today? Are we interested in spiritual growth–in gaining a better understanding of the true values of Christian living–or are we content with the “knowledge” that we think we have? Are we frozen in time, refusing to follow Christ wherever He leads us? Or, are we anxious to come up with and teach “something new,” in order to “reach” and “attract” those with itching ears who are always learning and never coming to the knowledge of the truth–let alone accepting the love of the truth?

Are we really focusing on God’s Kingdom and His righteousness–or are we concerned about how well people like and accept us? Do we look at “Church assembly” as a place for social activities–for “fun and games”? Is our Church attendance dependent on how few or how many members show up, and who in particular? Is our Christian life only worthwhile to us, when we are prosperous or financially secure, or healthy, or accepted by others, or successful in our physical endeavors? Are we happy and relaxed when things go “our way,” but do we fall into depression and despair when our wishes don’t correspond with God’s perfect Will for us? Are we conditioning our doctrinal understanding on how it affects our personal life?

Are we determined to carry on with the work or responsibility which God has given us–individually and collectively–no matter how our task is viewed or received by others? Do we measure our “favor” or “success” with God by how many people respond to our message–or, how many other groups might want to merge with our particular organization? Are we willing to compromise or “re-evaluate” our beliefs, so we can become part of “something bigger”? Are we desperate to be able to “report” some spectacular healings–imagined or real–in order to “prove” that God is with us? Do we think we must preach some “new truth,” proclaim some prophetic speculation, or set dates for Christ’s return, in order to gain or maintain attention?

God wants to see in us strong and unwavering convictions. He wants us to stay focused and to allow Him to build His righteous character in us. He wants us to fulfill our duties, and to follow Him gladly and thankfully in “good times and in bad times.” He wants us to concentrate on the true goals and values–not on cheap and passing “substitutes.” He wants us to learn more and more how to follow Christ’s example in everything. Is that what you want?

We begin with several articles on Afghanistan–and the futile and lost war that the Western powers are waging in that country. Both in the USA and in Europe, the tide is turning against prolonging this war. Der Stern wrote that the situation is “unsolvable”; the Financial Times stated that the Afghan war will decide whether President Obama “succeeds or fails,” arguing that it is “not a necessary war” and speculating that “one spectacular Taliban strike might flip the balance of opinion – and, with or without extra forces, the US would then be back on the path to defeat.”

We also show how Israel is upset with the EU; how Iran continues to defy the world; and how public opinion in Switzerland–and also in Germany and other European countries–is erupting against the spread of Islam in Europe. Commenting on the referendum in Switzerland to ban the construction of Muslim minarets, the German mass tabloid Bild wrote that Germans would probably vote the same way, continuing, “Large parts of the Islamic world don’t share our basic European values… Nowhere is life made harder for Christians than in Islamic countries. Those who are intolerant themselves cannot expect unlimited tolerance from others.”

At the same time, Germany’s constitutional court, following the request of the Catholic and Protestant Church, upheld the general prohibition against Sunday shopping. As one commentator said: “Strange isn’t [it] how some people accept this law on grounds of religion and social unity, yet are outraged at the thought of a minaret because Islam and sharia law may have similar laws restricting freedoms.”

Turning our attention to the elections of the EU Commissioners, new facts evolved pertaining to EU President Herman Van Rompuy, and especially Great Britain is unhappy with the nomination of French minister Michel Barnier as Commissioner for the key internal market post. The Daily Mail wrote that “Mr Barnier is expected to push hard to give Brussels the power to regulate financial institutions [in Britain] instead of the British authorities.” At the same time, the paper speculates whether Britain is on the brink of bankruptcy.

We conclude with a few articles pertaining to the horrible practice of flagellation in the Catholic Church and with the despicable methods employed by scientists to support global warming. These articles show how far this world has drifted away from the true God of the Bible and His values and teachings.

Afghanistan–the Gordian Knot

Der Stern wrote on November 26 about “Obama’s dangerous decision” to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan. The paper said that “he does not know a way out” and that the situation appears more and more like the “Gordian knot”–that is, “unsolvable.” It also wrote:

“For eight years, the USA and NATO are fighting, but the Taliban is as strong as never before. For eight years, money flows into the country for reconstruction, but the drug traffic tops all records. For eight years, President Karzai is supported, but he only won the election through massive fraud…”

Afghanistan is a lost cause for the Western World. The attempt to bring democracy to that country–especially with the use of weapons–was destined to failure from the outset. The declared goal to capture Osama Bin Laden and to defeat the Taliban has been a total debacle–the incompetence of Western powers to achieve this goal is utterly astonishing and embarrassing.

Afghanistan–President Obama’s Biggest Test

The Financial Times wrote on November 29:

“Even more than healthcare, the war in Afghanistan will decide whether Barack Obama succeeds or fails… Mr Obama already owns this ‘necessary’ war, as he has called it, contrasting this battle with his predecessor’s supposedly needless war in Iraq… If health reform goes wrong, there will be others to blame. If this war goes wrong, it will be all his fault. It is Mr Obama’s biggest bet by far…

“At the moment the US and its allies are losing. It is that simple. Mr Obama’s options are essentially to pull out altogether, conceding defeat in his necessary war; maintain roughly the existing commitment… or provide the resources his military commanders say are needed…

“A point may come when the US is doing more harm than good, or when the Afghans themselves want us out. The case for gradual withdrawal, starting now, is not obviously wrong. This is not a necessary war. It is a war of choice, and a finely balanced choice at that. This makes Mr Obama’s political difficulty acute.

“Parallels between Afghanistan and Vietnam are impossible to ignore. The most pressing is that the US loses wars like this at home. A bigger effort in Afghanistan can be sustained only as long as the country supports it… As with Vietnam, most Americans are unsure why their sons and daughters are dying in Afghanistan. The administration’s unduly protracted debate over what to do has sent the message that it too is unsure. Shallow support for the war suggests that one spectacular Taliban strike might flip the balance of opinion – and, with or without extra forces, the US would then be back on the path to defeat.

“It gets worse. Mr Obama’s own party opposes the policy he seems to have chosen. Last week leading Democrats called for a war tax to cover the cost of the country’s expanding commitments. Not exactly helpful: but they are right that operations in Afghanistan are enormously costly, in financial as well as human terms. The administration says it costs $1m a year for every extra soldier. An additional 35,000 troops would cost $35bn a year – enough to buy a lot of health reform.

“For his narrow margin of support on extra forces Mr Obama relies on Republicans, with whom he has fallen out bitterly on every aspect of domestic policy. The president’s approval rating continues to slide. The mid-term elections are in sight, and Democrats are anxious. They have reason to be. In short, the test for Mr Obama could hardly be more demanding. Having made his decision, he must get the country behind it, without making promises he cannot keep or sending messages that encourage the enemy…

“Since taking office, Mr Obama has been a less effective leader than many of his admirers, myself included, had hoped. On many issues, he has simply chosen not to try. On Afghanistan, standing aside is not an option. We will see what kind of president he is.”

On December 3, 2009, The Financial Times added:

“Instead of posing as a visionary, Obama played the role of a sober realist in his West Point speech. He no longer spoke of a victory in Afghanistan, rather he talked of bringing ‘this war to a successful conclusion.’ It was a clear recognition of the facts on the ground. Afghanistan is not a classic war in which one can ‘break the enemy’s will’ as Republican Senator John McCain is now demanding.

“The situation in Afghanistan is so confusing and — for foreign powers — so uncontrollable that it will be difficult enough for the Western alliance to achieve even its most modest of aims. NATO has failed to reach the formerly espoused goal of introducing a stable, Western-style democracy to Afghanistan. Obama’s West Point speech was an admission of this failure.”

Afghanistan–President Obama’s Devastating and Untruthful Speech

Der Spiegel Online reported on December 2:

“Never before has a speech by President Barack Obama felt as false as his Tuesday address announcing America’s new strategy for Afghanistan. It seemed like a campaign speech combined with Bush rhetoric — and left both dreamers and realists feeling distraught… Just minutes before the president took the stage inside Eisenhower Hall, the gathered cadets were asked to respond ‘enthusiastically’ to the speech. But it didn’t help: The soldiers’ reception was cool.

“One didn’t have to be a cadet on Tuesday to feel a bit of nausea upon hearing Obama’s speech. It was the least truthful address that he has ever held. He spoke of responsibility, but almost every sentence smelled of party tactics. He demanded sacrifice, but he was unable to say what it was for exactly… US strength in Afghanistan will be tripled relative to the Bush years, a fact that is sure to impress hawks in America. But just 18 months later, just in time for Obama’s re-election campaign, the horror of war is to end and the draw down will begin. The doves of peace will be let free.

“The speech continued in that vein. It was as though Obama had taken one of his old campaign speeches and merged it with a text from the library of ex-President George W. Bush. Extremists kill in the name of Islam, he said, before adding that it is one of the ‘world’s great religions.’ He promised that responsibility for the country’s security would soon be transferred to the government of President Hamid Karzai — a government which he said was ‘corrupt.’

“… the public was more disturbed than entertained. Indeed, one could see the phenomenon in a number of places in recent weeks: Obama’s magic no longer works… In his speech on America’s new Afghanistan strategy, Obama tried to speak to both places. It was two speeches in one. That is why it felt so false. Both dreamers and realists were left feeling distraught. The American president doesn’t need any opponents at the moment. He’s already got himself.”

Most Controversial Promises

On December 1, The Washington Post commented in particular on one segment  in President Obama’s speech. The President said: “I have determined that it is in our vital national interest to send an additional 30,000 U.S. troops to Afghanistan. After 18 months, our troops will begin to come home. Taken together, these additional American and international troops will allow us to accelerate handing over responsibility to Afghan forces, and allow us to begin the transfer of our forces out of Afghanistan in July of 2011.”

The paper wrote:

“This is likely to be the most controversial notion in the speech — that the president can flood the zone with troops, and that in the same breath he can talk about removing them from the country… Obama is careful to offer a caveat — ‘we will execute this transition responsibly, taking into account conditions on the ground’ — but that date is likely to linger in viewers’ minds. This administration has had real trouble meeting deadlines — witness the difficulty with closing the detainee facility in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba — so it will be interesting to see how much of an albatross this date becomes.

“Obama’s timeline for the start of a withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan is likely to stir some concerns in military circles, even though the pace of that eventual drawdown remains vague. Many in the military will recall how both in Iraq and Afghanistan previous predictions about the need for fewer troops proved overly optimistic and destabilizing when drawdowns were undertaken without regard for deteriorating security. In addition, some U.S. military officers may worry that the Obama timeline, while a warning to the Karzai government, could also encourage Taliban insurgents who seek simply to outlast the military offensive.”

The Left Attacks Obama

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 2:

“As expected, US President Barack Obama promised a large increase in the number of American troops in Afghanistan. But at the same time, he promised to begin pulling them out already in 2011. His speech offered many details, but little vision. And Obama failed to adequately explain a war that many no longer support…

“This mixture of retreat and advance is also making it more difficult for Obama to convince perhaps the most important group of constituents: his supporters… Controversial film maker Michael Moore… was harsh in his criticism. ‘With just one speech … you will turn a multitude of young people who were the backbone of your campaign into disillusioned cynics,’ he wrote… In the letter he asked whether Obama really wanted to be the new ‘war president’… Meanwhile the president’s advisors were busy trying to put a positive spin on the decision, arguing that the trust of the Afghan people would be strengthened through the increased troop numbers. But it’s the trust of Americans that Obama should be most worried about.”

No Substantial Help from Europe

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 2:

“The US government is looking for up to 7,000 additional troops for Afghanistan from its NATO allies. But few countries in Europe are rushing to fill the void. Germany and France want to wait until the Afghanistan conference at the end of January… Indeed, the only countries which immediately offered to up their troop contingent were Britain, Poland and Italy. Prime Minister Gordon Brown said that the UK would send an additional 500 troops with Poland likely to up its contribution to 2,600 from 2,000. Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini said his country would send more as well, but avoided a concrete pledge, saying only that Rome would ‘do a lot.'”

Germany in Political Upheaval Over Afghanistan

The Financial Times wrote on November 27:

“Angela Merkel was forced to reshuffle her cabinet less than one month into her second term as German chancellor on Friday after Franz Josef Jung resigned his portfolio as labour minister. Mr Jung, defence minister in Ms Merkel’s first government, stood accused of playing down the high number of civilian casualties caused by a German-ordered Nato air strike in Afghanistan in September. The controversy could undermine already fragile support for the German mission in the country. Mr Jung’s departure… is the latest and most serious setback for the new centre-right coalition, which has spent much of its first weeks in office squabbling over economic policy… this week’s revelations about the controversial air strike could have more negative repercussions for the government.”

Der Spiegel Online added on November 29:

“The furore centers on Jung’s immediate claims following the Sept. 4 airstrike that no civilians had been killed. At the time, he announced that it was only members of the Taliban who had been killed when a German colonel called in a US air strike on two tankers that had been seized by the insurgents in Kunduz, near a German military base. However, it has subsequently emerged that civilians were most likely among the victims, with estimates ranging from 17 to 142 casualties.

“Jung said on Thursday that he had told the public and parliament what he knew at the time regarding the events in Afghanistan. But a Thursday report in the tabloid Bild suggested that reports about civilian casualties had reached his ministry by the evening of Sept. 4, reports that he then forwarded to NATO headquarters. He claimed on Thursday that he did not read the report before sending it further and had not knowingly lied to the German public and parliament…

“The debacle has made things difficult for Germany’s new Defense Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg. He is reported to have ‘exploded’ when he first learned of the report… He immediately called in the General Inspector Schneidhan to see if he was aware of the report. Once it was clear that he had known about it, there was little choice but for him to resign. Peter Wichert, the deputy defense minister, was also fired.

“Guttenberg was in effect left hanging by his staff. After coming into office, the young minister had quickly said he regretted any civilian casualties but stated that, having seen the NATO report into the incident, the air strike had been ‘appropriate militarily.’ He now says he may have to reassess that statement. It now appears that the Bundestag’s defense committee will establish a parliamentary investigation into the affair.”

EU Provokes Israel

The EUObserver wrote on December 1:

“EU plans to call for East Jerusalem to be the capital of a future Palestinian state have been described as a ‘provocation’ of Israel’s right-wing government by a key figure in the history of the Middle East Peace Process. Israeli daily Haaretz on Tuesday (1 December) published a leaked copy of a draft statement on Israel to be adopted by EU foreign ministers next week.

“The text – which is likely to undergo changes during internal EU discussions in the run-up to the ministerial meeting – said that peace talks should lead to: ‘an independent, democratic, contiguous and viable state of Palestine, comprising the West Bank and Gaza and with East Jerusalem as its capital.’ ‘The European Union will not recognise any changes to the pre-1967 borders,’ it added, in reference to Israel’s occupation of East Jerusalem and parts of the West Bank following the so-called Six Day War…

“The Israeli foreign ministry reacted angrily to the Haaretz leak on Tuesday… But a number of EU officials voiced surprise that the provisional statement evoked such a hostile reaction. ‘Jerusalem should be the shared capital of two states. I think this is a position which has been stated often enough,’ Lutz Gellner, the spokesman of the EU’s new foreign relations chief, Catherine Ashton, said.”

Israel and Iran

Der Spiegel wrote on December 2:

“Iran’s leaders continue to reject compromises over their nuclear program and are rebuffing the IAEA. The West is likely to respond with tighter sanctions, but that is unlikely to satisfy Israel, which has attack plans already drawn up…

“Netanyahu has said often enough that he will never accept an Iranian nuclear bomb. He doesn’t believe Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when he insists that Iran’s nuclear program is intended solely for civilian purposes. But he does take Ahmadinejad — a notorious Holocaust denier — at his word when he repeatedly threatens to wipe out Israel. Netanyahu draws parallels between Europe’s appeasement of Hitler and the current situation. ‘It’s 1938, and Iran is Germany,’ he says. This time, however, says Netanyahu, the Jews will not allow themselves to be the ‘sacrificial lamb’…

“A narrow majority of the Israeli population currently favors bombing the Iranian nuclear facilities, while 11 percent would consider leaving Israel if Tehran acquires nuclear weapons.”

How Iran Defies the World

BBC News reported on November 29:

“Iran’s government has approved plans to build 10 new uranium enrichment plants… The government told the Iranian nuclear agency to begin work on five sites, with five more to be located over the next two months. It comes days after the UN nuclear watchdog rebuked Iran for covering up a uranium enrichment plant… Sunday’s announcement is a massive act of defiance likely to bring forward direct confrontation over Iran’s nuclear programme.”

With the exception of Israel, the Western World has demonstrated its unwillingness to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. The time is drawing nearer when we can expect an Israeli attack on Iran. 

Switzerland Votes to Ban Minarets

AFP wrote on November 29:

“Over 57 percent of Swiss voters on Sunday approved a blanket ban on the construction of Muslim minarets… A final tally of 26 cantons indicates that 57.5 percent of the population have voted in favour of the ban on minarets… Only four cantons rejected the proposal brought by Switzerland’s biggest party — the Swiss People’s Party (SVP), which claims that minarets symbolise a ‘political-religious claim to power.’

“The SVP had forced a referendum under Swiss regulations on the issue after collecting 100,000 signatures within 18 months from eligible voters. The Swiss government was firmly against the call, arguing that accepting a ban would bring about ‘incomprehension overseas and harm Switzerland’s image.’ Switzerland has an uneasy relationship with its Muslim population of some 400,000 in a country of 7.5 million people. Islam is the second largest religion here after Christianity.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on November 30:

“Switzerland’s decision to ban the construction of minarets in a referendum on Sunday has drawn condemnation from politicians across Europe and from Muslim leaders, but far-right politicians have welcomed it as a courageous step that should be copied by other countries. Egypt’s Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, the country’s top cleric, called the ban an ‘insult’ to Muslims across the world… The right-wing populist Dutch politician Geert Wilders, who is famous for his anti-Islam views, called the result ‘great’ and said he would push for a similar referendum in the Netherlands.

“… mass circulation Bild, which can claim to have its finger on the nation’s pulse more than other newspapers, said Germans would probably vote the same way if they were allowed a referendum on the issue: ‘The minaret isn’t just the symbol of a religion but of a totally different culture. Large parts of the Islamic world don’t share our basic European values: the legacy of the Enlightenment, the equality of man and woman, the separation of church and state, a justice system independent of the Bible or the Koran and the refusal to impose one’s own beliefs on others with “fire and the sword.” Another factor is likely to have influenced the Swiss vote: Nowhere is life made harder for Christians than in Islamic countries. Those who are intolerant themselves cannot expect unlimited tolerance from others’…

“The left-wing Die Tageszeitung writes: ‘… the collapse of Swissair and other objects of Swiss national pride was also painful, as was the humiliating treatment by Libya’s dictator Moammar Gadhafi who has been holding two Swiss nationals as hostages for more than a year. The global economic crisis has also left clear marks on Switzerland. The perfectly devised campaign for a ban on minarets provided a suitable bogeyman for those who were unsettled by this general uncertainty and whose self-confidence has been shattered…'”

BBC News wrote on November 30:

“In Switzerland the soul-searching has begun following Sunday’s nationwide referendum in which voters surprisingly backed a plan to ban the construction of minarets… What many Swiss politicians are beginning to realise this morning is that they underestimated the concern among their population about integration of Muslims in Switzerland, and about possible Islamic extremism…

“Swiss cabinet ministers who had advised, and confidently expected, voters to reject a ban, have woken up to newspaper headlines calling the referendum a slap in the face for the government, and a ‘catastrophe’ for Switzerland. They are now facing the delicate task of explaining the voters’ decision to Muslim countries with whom Switzerland has traditionally good trade relations. Within government circles, there is the expectation that these relations will be damaged and that the Swiss economy may suffer as a result.

“So concerned is the government by the decision that Swiss Justice Minister Eveline Widmer Schlumpf, watching the results come in on Sunday afternoon, apparently told her advisers there ought to be some restrictions on what the general public can actually vote on. This, for Switzerland, is political dynamite. The country’s system of direct democracy is sacrosanct. The people are allowed to vote on any policy and to propose policy themselves, which is what they did on minarets… The real issue is that there was clearly unease among the Swiss population, particularly among rural communities, about Islam.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 1:

“Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said Switzerland’s vote to ban the construction of minarets was a ‘sign of an increasing racist and fascist stance in Europe’… Islamophobia was a ‘crime against humanity,’ just like anti-Semitism, Erdogan said. Turkish President Abdullah Gül… said the vote was a ‘disgrace’ for the people of Switzerland and showed how far Islamophobia had advanced in the Western world… In Cairo, Egypt’s Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa, the country’s top cleric, said the ban was an attack on freedom of religion and an attempt to ‘hurt the feelings of the Islamic community inside and outside Switzerland.'”

The EU will develop into a “Christian” power bloc–returning to its very “roots” of “orthodox Christianity.” Islam will be perceived more and more as a “foreign” institution which should have no legitimate place in Europe.  

No German Shopping on Sunday

Following a law suit by Germany’s main churches, the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Church, Germany’s highest constitutional court has upheld the ban against Sunday shopping–at least in general–while at the same time ignoring the religious beliefs of those who don’t want to keep Sunday. In addition, the main tragedy is that the Bible nowhere demands Sunday worship–in fact, it condemns it.

Der Spiegel wrote on December 2:

“Germany’s highest court has ruled that Sunday should be kept as a day of rest and has overturned a Berlin law easing restrictions on Sunday shopping…

“Yet many of Germany’s 16 states have already made some exceptions, allowing stores to open a few Sundays a year. And in Berlin the city government had gone the furthest in chipping away at the ban on Sunday trading. In 2006 the German capital gave the green light for retailers to open on 10 Sundays a year, including the four Advent Sundays preceding Christmas.

“However, Germany’s Constitutional Court has now upheld a complaint made by the country’s Catholic and Protestant churches, based on a clause in the German constitution that Sunday should be a day of rest and ‘spiritual elevation.’ The court on Tuesday decided in favor of the churches, saying that Sunday opening should not take place four weeks in a row. The ruling will not affect shopping this December, but would come into force next year. However, the ruling did not overturn completely the principle of limited Sunday store opening.

“The labor unions had joined the churches in their campaign to ring-fence Sunday as a day off for the nation. However, their focus was not on protecting the right to practise religion, but rather on protecting workers in the retail sector from having to work on Sundays, sometimes the only day they might get to spend with other members of their family…

“The conservative Die Welt writes: ‘The churches have argued correctly that employees in the retail sector are not given the possibility of organizing their Advent Sundays according to Christian principles: going to church, being involved in the community, singing and reading aloud. It is part of religious freedom to be able to do these things…’

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘… It may sound old fashioned but it is still correct: Sunday is Sunday because it is unlike other days. This is not about tradition or religion or a social heritage… It is a day to synchronize society, that is what makes it so important…’

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes: ‘The ruling by the Constitutional Court has revived the emotional debate about opening hours of shops on Sundays. That alone is annoying. But even more annoying is that with its strong emphasis on the religiously based day of rest on Sunday, it is interfering in individual and economic freedom. Without a doubt the freedom to practise religion is of great value… In the public debate there is too little mention of the freedom of shop owners to keep customers through opening on Sundays, who would otherwise order online. And the freedom of towns to use Sunday opening hours to attract tourists. Or the freedom of customers to decide for themselves if they would rather spend Sundays amidst the crowds in the shopping malls or walking in the forest…’

“The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung, which is based in Berlin, writes: ‘Sunday as a day off is a great gift. The treadmill is closed for 24 hours. The court has given relaxation, rest and ‘spiritual elevation’ precedence over the thirst for profit and the right to a consumer fix. However, it made it clear in its ruling that Sunday was not just for those who wanted to practise their religion undisturbed. It is also to play cards, go for a walk or simply to laze around. After all even the strictest atheist needs the switching off that Sundays allow.'”

Deutsche Welle wrote on December 1:

“Sunday is enshrined in Article 140 of Germany’s Basic Law as a day of rest and ‘spiritual edification’… The idea that traders need particularly stringent regulation remains firmly anchored in German law, according to Berlin Retail Association head, Nils Busch-Petersen. ‘Boozing and waging war is allowed on Sundays, but retailers are looked on very critically. Shining through this ruling is an unfortunate tradition with Occidental-Christian roots that discriminates against traders,’ he commented…”

The Local wrote on December 1:

“Citing the so-called Weimar Church Article of the German Reich’s constitution from 1919, [which is now part of Germany’s basic law, Art. 140], the justices said that Sunday had a special protected status to ensure Germans could rest from work and have time for spiritual rejuvenation. Shops in Berlin will now only be allowed to open a few Sundays a year deemed in the ‘public interest’ by the city government, as well as a handful [of] other days for special events such as street festivals or anniversaries.

“Both church and trade union officials welcomed the verdict as a victory for families and workers. Katrin Göring-Eckardt, head of Germany’s main Protestant lay organisation, called it a ‘gift to society from Christians’… But Berlin Mayor Klaus Wowereit called the ruling a ‘real step backwards’ that did not take into consideration modern lifestyles.”

The reaction to the ruling by readers is interesting. Here are a few excerpts, as published by The Local:

“Yes, the Church is protecting us from ourselves… Unfortunately we don’t live in a free world. Religious beliefs still continue to dictate to the rest of us what we can or can’t do… How can the church expect to get any money in their collection baskets on Sunday when people are out buying food instead?… This is supposed to be a secular state, so the church ‘shouldn’t’ have a say – but religion is nothing more than fancy dressed politics… I work away from home so only have the weekend available to me to do shopping, see friends, do housework… etc I might have to do. Wouldn’t it be great if I could choose to do some of those things on a Sunday instead of being dictated to that I have to do those on a Saturday?… Strange isn’t [it] how some people accept this law on grounds of religion and social unity, yet are outraged at the thought of a minaret because Islam and sharia law may have similar laws restricting freedoms… As if Jesus would not like to buy his bread, fish and wine supplies on a Sunday!… after laws against home schooling, this is one of another crazy law i have ever seen,,,churches attendance in Germany is already so low, how could this help?”

More News on EU President Herman Van Rompuy

WorldNetDaily wrote on November 24:

“Jerome Corsi, senior WND staff writer and author of the New York Times best-seller ‘The Obama Nation,’ has issued an alert… The report cited a speech from Herman Van Rompuy, as he was appointed the first permanent president of the European Council of the European Union, saying he believes a new world order will be dominated by international organizations that will seek to destroy the last vestiges of nation-states.

“The speech was captured by BBC and posted on YouTube. In it, Van Rompuy proclaimed ‘2009 is the first year of global governance with the establishment of the G20 in the middle of the financial crisis.’ He continued, ‘The climate conference in Copenhagen is another step toward the global management of our planet.’

“In another widely viewed YouTube video, Mario Borghezio, a member of Italy’s Lega Nord, who is also a member of the European Parliament, pointed out in a speech to the European Parliament that Van Rompuy is a frequent attendee at Bilderberg Group and Trilateral Commission meetings.”

EU Commissioners Nominated

The EU published the nominations of their 27 commissioners. If approved in January by the European Parliament, they don’t include any spectacular candidates. But some tendencies seem to emerge–especially the involvement of Eastern nations (including the Czech Republic, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria) in potential relationships with Russia; the roles of France, Germany and Spain; and the diminished influence of an “Anglo-Saxon voice.”

BBC News reported on November 27:

“France will take charge of the key internal market post in the new 27-strong European Commission… Former French agriculture minister Michel Barnier got the job… Joaquin Almunia from Spain will become EU Competition Commissioner – another much-coveted post in the EU’s executive arm… Timothy Kirkhope MEP, the UK Conservative leader in Brussels, said that ‘the loss of an Anglo-Saxon voice in the commission’s top economic team is of concern, given the recent spate of over-prescriptive economic and financial legislation to come from Brussels’…

“A Czech politician, Stefan Fuele, will take charge of the EU’s enlargement job. He will also be in charge of the EU’s neighbourhood policy concerning Ukraine and other former Soviet states. Germany’s Guenther Oettinger was named Energy Commissioner, a reflection of the policy’s growing importance for the EU…

“The biggest countries in Eastern Europe also got plum jobs – budget for Janusz Lewandowski from Poland and agriculture for Romania’s Dacian Ciolos… [The post for] International Co-operation, Humanitarian Aid and Crisis Response was assigned to Rumiana Jeleva [from Bulgaria].” 

Britain Unhappy with Nomination of French Michel Barnier

The Daily Mail wrote on November 28:

“The power to oversee the City of London was yesterday given to a Frenchman known for his dislike of the free market and love of a strong EU. The unveiling of former French foreign minister Michel Barnier was seen as a severe blow for Gordon Brown. Mr Barnier is expected to push hard to give Brussels the power to regulate financial institutions here instead of the British authorities. He helped draw up the original European constitution and has called for an end to Britain’s EU budget rebate…

“French government officials are on record as saying they want Paris to become ‘a rival’ to London, which is Europe’s dominant financial market and vital for the UK economy. City insiders fear tighter regulations could drive British-based finance firms offshore or push them to list on the New York stock market instead…

“The Commissioner has significant leeway to set the EU agenda for financial services and is responsible for drafting new legislation. The EU is already creating a single regulator of financial markets with the power to overrule national regulator.”

Brussels is tremendously unpopular in Britain, and the perception that a Frenchman will decide on British economic issues will only pour oil onto the fire. It is very likely that Britain will exit the EU. 

Britain on the Brink of Bankruptcy?

The Daily Mail wrote on November 27:

“A year ago, the world reacted with astonishment as Iceland technically went bust. It seemed inconceivable that a modern democratic nation could have such parlous finances that only an emergency $6billion bail-out from the International Monetary Fund enabled its economy to keep functioning. This week, we witnessed a similar crisis in the Middle East but on a far, far more dangerous scale, as Dubai effectively defaulted on £48billion of loans… Which leads us to a haunting question: as the country in the world hardest hit by the credit crunch, with gross domestic product (GDP) projected to decline by almost five per cent in 2009, could Britain be next?…

“Even before the financial crisis, the British Government spent roughly £30billion more per year than it earned in tax revenues. This money, of course, had to be borrowed from international investors. Today, the Government needs up to £200billion a year for at least the next three years in order to meet its spending commitments… There may be other, hidden, liabilities. After this week’s shocking revelation of secret loans of £62billion made by the Bank of England to the Royal Bank of Scotland and HBOS at the height of the credit crunch, who knows how many other skeletons remain in the Treasury’s closet? It is wise to assume that the true size of Britain’s debts could be much bigger than we all think…

“If international lenders begin to doubt the creditworthiness of UK plc, they will downgrade our credit rating and dramatically increase the rates of interest they charge. UK banks will have to follow suit to match these rates, putting unsustainable pressure on our struggling economy. Thousands of businesses already hit by the recession will go bust. Trapped by soaring unemployment and welfare benefits, the Government will have to borrow more. And so the vicious debt cycle will continue to spiral down towards national insolvency – and, potentially, social anarchy…”

If Britain should go bankrupt, continental Europe might ultimately not react in friendly terms. The Bible strongly indicates an outright war between continental Europe and Great Britain in the not-too-distant future. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”

Flagellation in the Catholic Church

Newsmax wrote on November 24:

“As Pope John Paul II’s beatification cause moves forward, more is coming to light about the late pontiff’s life… John Paul II often put himself through ‘bodily penance,’ said Sister Tobiana Sobodka, a Polish nun who worked for the Pope in his private Vatican apartments and at his summer residence in Castel Gandolfo near Rome. ‘We would hear it,’ said Sister Sobodka, who belongs to the Order of the Sacred Heart of Jesus. ‘We were in the next room at Castel Gandolfo. You could hear the sound of the blows when he would flagellate himself. He did it when he was still capable of moving on his own.’ Emery Kabongo, a secretary of John Paul II, also backed up the claim. ‘He would punish himself and in particular just before he ordained bishops and priests,’ he said…

“The Catholic Church’s tradition of corporal mortification is founded on the Christian belief that Jesus Christ, out of love for mankind, voluntarily accepted suffering and death as the means to redeem the world from sin. The church teaches that Christians are called to emulate Jesus and join him in his redemptive suffering… John Paul II used to whip himself, according to the recent testimonies…

“Many of the church’s greatest saints flagellated themselves, including St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa of Avila, St. Ignatius of Loyola, Blessed Mother Teresa, and St. Thomas More…”

The practice of flagellation is a horrible perversion of the teaching of the Bible. Christ died and suffered for us; He never sinned, but He paid the penalty for our violating physical and spiritual laws of God. We read that we can obtain forgiveness of sins and healing of our sicknesses because of His sacrifice for us. To voluntarily inflict oneself with bodily harm is a wrong attempt to usurp authority and responsibilities which were only given to Christ, and it is in total contradiction to God’s expressed love for us. 

Despicable Methods of Scientists to Support Global Warming

Whether one believes in man-made global warming or climate change, or not, the following article’s description of methods by leading scientists to support their claim would be outright despicable. If the allegations in the article are correct, then lying and cheating and attacking and suppressing the opinions of others constitute a terrible indictment against “academic freedom.” Totalitarian governments are famous for their willingness to brainwash and control the minds of their subjects. Now leading scientists are accused of the same “crime”! Of course, similar methods have been used for decades by some scientists desirous to support their idle belief in Darwin’s false theory of evolution–and we suspect, this may be true in many other areas of life which most people take for granted.  

The Telegraph wrote on November 28:

“A week after my colleague James Delingpole, on his Telegraph blog, coined the term ‘Climategate’ to describe the scandal revealed by the leaked emails from the University of East Anglia’s Climatic Research Unit, Google was showing that the word now appears across the internet more than nine million times. But in all these acres of electronic coverage, one hugely relevant point about these thousands of documents has largely been missed.

“The reason why even the Guardian’s George Monbiot has expressed total shock and dismay at the picture revealed by the documents is that their authors are not just any old bunch of academics. Their importance cannot be overestimated. What we are looking at here is the small group of scientists who have for years been more influential in driving the worldwide alarm over global warming than any others, not least through the role they play at the heart of the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

“[Professor Philip Jones’] global temperature record is the most important of the four sets of temperature data on which the IPCC and governments rely – not least for their predictions that the world will warm to catastrophic levels unless trillions of dollars are spent to avert it… Since 2003, however, when the statistical methods… were first exposed as fundamentally flawed by an expert Canadian statistician Steve McIntyre, an increasingly heated battle has been raging… [calling] into question the entire statistical basis on which the IPCC and CRU construct their case…

“There are three threads in particular in the leaked documents which have sent a shock wave through informed observers across the world. Perhaps the most obvious… is the highly disturbing series of emails which show how Dr Jones and his colleagues have for years been discussing the devious tactics whereby they could avoid releasing their data to outsiders under freedom of information laws. They have come up with every possible excuse for concealing the background data on which their findings and temperature records were based.

“This in itself has become a major scandal, not least Dr Jones’s refusal to release the basic data from which the CRU derives its hugely influential temperature record, which culminated last summer in his startling claim that much of the data from all over the world had simply got ‘lost’. Most incriminating of all are the emails in which scientists are advised to delete large chunks of data, which, when this is done after receipt of a freedom of information request, is a criminal offence.

“But the question which inevitably arises from this systematic refusal to release their data is – what is it that these scientists seem so anxious to hide? The second and most shocking revelation of the leaked documents is how they show the scientists trying to manipulate data through their tortuous computer programmes, always to point in only the one desired direction – to lower past temperatures and to ‘adjust’ recent temperatures upwards, in order to convey the impression of an accelerated warming. This comes up so often… that it becomes the most disturbing single element of the entire story…

“The third shocking revelation of these documents is the ruthless way in which these academics have been determined to silence any expert questioning of the findings they have arrived at by such dubious methods – not just by refusing to disclose their basic data but by discrediting and freezing out any scientific journal which dares to publish their critics’ work. It seems they are prepared to stop at nothing to stifle scientific debate in this way, not least by ensuring that no dissenting research should find its way into the pages of IPCC reports…

“In light of the latest revelations, it now seems even more evident that these men have been failing to uphold those principles which lie at the heart of genuine scientific enquiry and debate… Our hopelessly compromised scientific establishment cannot be allowed to get away with a whitewash of what has become the greatest scientific scandal of our age.”

The Daily Express wrote on December 2:

“THE scientific consensus that mankind has caused climate change was rocked yesterday as a leading academic called it a ‘load of hot air underpinned by fraud’. Professor Ian Plimer condemned the climate change lobby… In a controversial talk just days before the start of a climate summit attended by world leaders in Copenhagen, Prof Plimer said Governments were treating the public like ‘fools’ and using climate change to increase taxes. He said carbon dioxide has had no impact on temperature and that recent warming was part of the natural cycle of climate stretching over ­billions of years.

“His comments came days after a scandal in climate-change research emerged through the leak of emails from the world-leading research unit at the University of East Anglia. They appeared to show that scientists had been massaging data to prove that global warming was taking place. The Climate Research Unit also admitted getting rid of much of its raw climate data, which means other scientists cannot check the subsequent research. Last night the head of the CRU, Professor Phil Jones, said he would stand down while an independent review took place.

“… mining geology professor Plimer said there was a huge momentum behind the climate-change lobby. He suggested many scientists had a vested interest in promoting climate change because it helped secure more funding for research. He said: ‘The climate comrades are trying to keep the gravy train going. Governments are also keen on putting their hands as deep as possible into our pockets.'”

The answer to this question has far reaching implications! First, consider that the people in the time of Jesus Christ looked for the prophetic Elijah—the one promised in the Book of Malachi.

By way of background, here is the reference in question, in fuller context—quoting Luke 1, verses 15-17:

“‘For he [John] will be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink [indicating that he was a lifelong Nazarite]. He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb. And he will turn many of the children of Israel to the Lord their God. He will also go before Him in the spirit and power of Elijah, “to turn the hearts of the fathers to the children,” and the disobedient to the wisdom of the just, to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.’”

Gabriel applies a portion of a prophecy of Malachi to John. Here are the relevant statements of that Old Testament book, as recorded in Malachi 4: 4-6:

“‘Remember the Law of Moses, My servant, Which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, With the statutes and judgments. Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD. And he will turn The hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers, Lest I come and strike the earth with a curse [“utter destruction”].’”

What John accomplished in his relatively brief public ministry did indeed fulfill prophecy, but his work was a part of an even greater fulfillment that would culminate in the generation alive to witness “‘the coming of the great and dreadful day of the LORD’” (Malachi 4:5). The time of John’s preaching did usher in—prepare for—Jesus Christ and His first appearance (compare Malachi 3:1); however, his witness was limited, foremost, to the population of Judah.

We have John’s own testimony about his role, for when he was directly asked who he was, his response was unequivocal:

“Now this is the testimony of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, ‘Who are you?’ He confessed, and did not deny, but confessed, ‘I am not the Christ.’ And they asked him, ‘What then? Are you Elijah?’ He said I AM NOT.’ ‘Are you the Prophet?’ And he answered, ‘No’” (John 1:19-21).

The people of that time anticipated the literal appearing of Elijah, but that understanding was erroneous. John himself knew that he was fulfilling the Elijah-like commission, and his direct answer to those sent was to apply a prophecy given in Isaiah 40:3—here is the rendering found in John 1:23: “He said, ‘I am, “The voice of one crying in the wilderness: Make straight the way of the LORD,” as the prophet Isaiah said.’” John knew that his preaching was a forerunner to the Messiah (compare John 1:29-34).

Following the vision of Christ appearing in glory with Moses and Elijah, His disciples were puzzled. They, too, thought that the original Elijah must appear, and here Jesus gives the true understanding and application of the Malachi prophecy:

“And His disciples asked Him, saying, ‘Why then do the scribes say that Elijah must come first?’ Jesus answered and said to them, ‘Indeed Elijah is coming [first] and will restore all things. (NOTE: The precise answer given by Jesus, in earlier manuscripts, does not include the added word, “first.”) But I say to you that Elijah has come already, and THEY DID NOT KNOW HIM but did to him whatever they wished. Likewise the Son of Man is also about to suffer at their hands’” (Matthew 17:10-12).

Based on what Jesus told them, the disciples now understood that John had indeed—as the angel Gabriel stated—come “in the spirit and power of Elijah.” Note this statement in Matthew 17:13: “Then the disciples understood that he spoke to them of John the Baptist.” Also, consider that the people likewise wondered if Jesus Christ might be Elijah. In addressing this belief, Jesus very specifically taught His disciples about His true identity (compare Matthew 16:13-20).

WHY, then, is Elijah used as a focal point in the biblical record?

Initial mention of Elijah is found in 1 Kings 17, and his pivotal role as God’s prophet to the rebellious House of Israel finds its focus in chapter 18 of 1 Kings. He confronts the people about their pagan practices. Furthermore, he challenges the powerless false prophets and executes all of them.

What Elijah did with God’s miraculous help was to turn the people of that day away from false worship and back to the God of Israel. In later accounts, we find that both the Houses of Israel and Judah continued to rebel—to such an extent that they would not listen to prophets like Elijah, and they both went into national captivity (compare 2 Kings 17:13-18; 2 Chronicles 36:15-16).

A vitally important fact for us to understand—and this directly relates to the nature of John the Baptist’s ministry—is that Elijah’s prophetic commission was a CONTINUING one, both in actual fact and in type!

During his lifetime, Elijah was given three specific duties to carry out:

“Then the LORD said to him: ‘Go, return on your way to the Wilderness of Damascus; and when you arrive, anoint Hazael as king over Syria. Also you shall anoint Jehu the son of Nimshi as king over Israel. And Elisha the son of Shaphat of Abel Meholah you shall anoint as prophet in your place’” (1 Kings 19:15-16).

Elijah only personally carried out one of his assignments—that was to anoint Elisha (compare 1 Kings 19:19-21). Anointing Hazael as king over Syria was accomplished by Elisha (compare 2 Kings 8:7-16). The third commission given to Elijah to anoint Jehu was actually fulfilled by “one of the sons of the prophets”—at the direction of Elisha (compare 2 Kings 9:1-10).

Elisha also fulfilled his role of prophet “in the spirit and power of Elijah”—quite literally! When the time came for Elisha to take the office as prophet in place of Elijah, Elisha asked for this remarkable gift: “‘…Please let A DOUBLE PORTION OF YOUR SPIRIT be upon me’” (2 Kings 2:9). Remember that Gabriel said of John the Baptist—even before his birth—that, “‘…He will also be filled with the Holy Spirit, even from his mother’s womb’” (Luke 1:15). ALL of the true servants of God are empowered by God through His Holy Spirit in order to accomplish His purpose (compare Ephesians 4:7-16).

The MESSAGE that John preached, like that of Elijah, was to “‘turn The hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers…’” (Malachi 4:6). We have this record of John, found in Matthew 3:1-3: “In those days John the Baptist came preaching in the wilderness of Judea, and saying, ‘Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand!’ For this is he who was spoken of by the prophet Isaiah, saying: ‘The voice of one crying in the wilderness: “Prepare the way of the LORD; Make His paths straight.”’”

The MESSAGE that followed John the Baptist was brought by Jesus Christ, and what He preached continued “the spirit and power of Elijah,” of Elisha and of all the preachers of righteousness: “Now after John was put in prison, Jesus came to Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, and saying, ‘The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand. Repent, and believe in the gospel’” (Mark 1:14-15).

Concerning what it means to come “in the spirit and power of Elijah,” let’s understand that John the Baptist PERFORMED NO MIRACLES (compare John 10:41)! What John did do was to preach the TRUTH of God (compare John 5:33). Jesus said this of the messenger who preceded Him: “‘Assuredly, I say to you, among those born of women there has not risen one greater than John the Baptist; but he who is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he’” (Matthew 11:11).

The Church of God carries on this commission, as is shown by Peter’s preaching on the Day of Pentecost (compare Acts 2:37-39). The job remains of preparing a people—the elect, likened to the seven thousand of Elijah’s day by Paul in Romans 11:1-7. This is also what Jesus Christ appointed His Church to accomplish (compare Mark 16:15-18).

Note that both Peter and Paul restored life to the dead through God’s Power! In the beginning record of the Church of God, remarkable miracles occurred; however, we must also consider that no leader of the Church since that time has left a record of these kinds of miracles! However, in these last days, the Church has been preaching and is continuing to preach the GOSPEL of the kingdom of God in all the world.

Still lying ahead of us is a continuing fulfillment of the prophecy in Malachi 4:5: “‘Behold, I will send you Elijah the prophet Before the coming of THE GREAT AND DREADFUL DAY OF THE LORD.’” Likewise, this ”Elijah” work will witness powerfully to the world, “‘And he will turn The hearts of the fathers to the children, And the hearts of the children to their fathers, Lest I come and strike the earth with [utter destruction]’” (Malachi 4:6).

This continuation of the Elijah work will be accompanied by mighty miracles and signs, just prior to Christ’s return; it will far exceed anything that has yet happened in modern times in terms of miracles (compare, for example, Revelation 11:3-6).

Elisha CONTINUED the work of Elijah—including having double the spirit of Elijah. John the Baptist came in “the spirit and power of Elijah” through the message he preached. The Church of God continues, “to make ready a people prepared for the LORD”–the elect– and to proclaim the gospel of the kingdom of God. And it will be Jesus Christ–the final “Elijah”–who will restore all things, with the help and assistance of His Church (Matthew 17:11; Acts 3:19-21).

For more information, please read chapter 9 of our free booklet, “Human Suffering–Why… And How Much Longer?”, Norbert Link’s Editorial in Update #55, dated September 7, 2002, as well as our Q&A in Update #143, dated May 14, 2004. You might also want to listen to Dave Harris’ sermon, dated November 7, 2009, titled, “The Spirit and Power of Elijah,” which is posted on the audio page of our website (www.eternalgod.org).

As prophecy very emphatically reveals, there remains much to be accomplished—IN THE SPIRIT AND POWER OF ELIJAH!

Lead Writer: Dave Harris

Norbert Link’s final video-recorded sermon on the book of Galatians was posted on the Web, titled, “Letter to the Galatians, Part 6.”

Our new German sermon, titled “Nuklearer Dritter Weltkrieg!” (“Nuclear World War III!”) has been posted on the Web.

by Simon Akl

Recently, during my fall break, I turned twenty-one and was able to spend Thanksgiving with family and long-time friends, whom I consider as part of the family. The week’s activities were absolutely amazing and thrilling. As I reflect on them, it seems that the best memories are not those when I was blessed to enjoy physical materials such as food and games; but instead, the instances when we all sat together talking, laughing, and sharing stories.

In a week that can easily turn into a materialistic-driven focus because of the many delicious meals and activities; I found myself being thankful for more than just the temporary thrills like food. I was able to take a step back and be thankful for the things which I can sometimes take for granted, such as relationships with family and friends, health, and even each opportunity to laugh and smile, among many others.

My mom is always telling me to be thankful and exclaiming to me that her cup is overflowing. I have found that when I am not as focused spiritually as I should be, I stumble into thoughts of helplessness, despair and self-centeredness. The example of my fall break served as a great reminder to me that when I take the time to thank God for all blessings in my life, small or big, I start to change my outlook and perspective; focusing on how my cup is constantly overflowing. Therefore, I work to strive consistently on being thankful for each and every single blessing that God gives me!