On July 4, 2009, Kalon Mitchell and Michael Link will be giving split sermons, titled, respectively, “The Beatitudes, Part 2,” and “Freedom.”

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.

Growing up and being an elementary school-age child, I was told by a much wiser and older friend (a whole 2 grades ahead of me) that there was one God, but with several different names: God, Buddha, Allah, etc. This made perfect sense to me in my understanding of languages and the belief that there was only one God anyway.

Interestingly enough, now, many adults will tell you nearly the exact same thing, without giving it any more thought than a fourth grade student would. In fact, a former President, leader of the United States, in reference to Christians and Muslims, said: “…I believe we worship the same God.”

Within some religions, the god that is the main character, is defined as war-like, arbitrary and unknowable. Others will tell you that Jesus did not come, die and rise from the dead. Even within some of the so-called Christian religions, there can be a vast difference in the description and character of the god being worshipped. In the name of their god, they condone carved images, the killing of unborn babies, situational lies, and “justifiable” murder in war.

But the Bible defines God in a completely different way. God is a Family, consisting of God the Father and God the Son. Both are unified–they are “one.” They are of the same one mindset and have the same one purpose and goal. God is peaceful, trustworthy, and personal. God the Father sent His only-begotten Son to us, who did die and was raised from the dead. God is explicit in His instructions not to have idols, kill, or lie.

What we have then are competing versions of the God or gods that are being worshipped. The plain and simple fact is that they all cannot be true. Rather, only one characterization can be true. For example, either God says it is permissible to steal, or “do not steal” means, do not steal! It cannot be both, because God–both the Father and the Son–is the same always (Hebrews 13:8). God does not change, nor is there any variation or shadow of turning with Him (James 1:17).

There is no moral relativism when it comes to God and His Ways. Instead, He is defined by one specific set of doctrines in the Bible. If we are to be assured that we are worshipping the only true God who is worthy of our reverence and that we are reflecting Him in our lives and actions, we must do it in truth (John 4:24). 

It was a big announcement by the end of last week: Finally, the original biblical Ark of the Covenant will be unveiled! Of course, it did not happen. It was all a big misunderstanding, according to the patriarch of the Orthodox Church of Ethiopia who was visiting the Pope in Rome. Nevertheless, Ethiopia insists they have the Ark, and that they will never allow it to be removed. Is it possible that something like the “ownership” or “custody” of the [alleged] original Ark might lead to violent and perhaps even military confrontations between Ethiopian and Christian and/or Muslim countries in the not-too-distant future?

The Catholic Church announced this week that the bones of the Apostle Paul were found in Rome. However, this claim is definitely false, as our comments explain.

The world was also shocked to learn that after the still ongoing violent unrest in Iran [as well as continued attacks in Afghanistan and Iraq, coupled with military threats from North Korea], Honduras joined the fold. The military action to oust its President, Manuel Zelaya, was strongly condemned by the Obama Administration and the international community, even though Zelaya attempted to subvert the Constitution. Zelaya is a close friend of anti-American propagandist, Venezuela President Hugo Chávez, and, as the Wall Street Journal suggests, America fears a political backlash in Latin America if they were to support the newly appointed interim President, Roberto Micheletti. The developments in Honduras, in spite of America’s attempts to prevent them, show how little influence America has in the region, and Mr. Obama’s “condemnation of the coup” is deeply unpopular with Honduran deputies.

Reviewing developments in Iran, time seems to be running out for that country to avert Israeli and perhaps even European military action against it. In the wake of an Irani “arrest” of British diplomatic staff, all of the 27 EU member states became united in their condemnation and threatened with a “strong and collective response.” The questionable finding of the Guardian Council that no irregularities had occurred during the recent elections did not help to restore any confidence in the reasonableness of Iran’s governmental system. Not surprisingly, however, Germany’s neo-Nazis have voiced in the meantime their unwavering support for Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his insane measures, which, according to the Netzeitung, even prohibit public dancing and look with disfavor on listening to music.

Turning to the US, Mr. Obama seemingly scored a big victory when the House adopted a costly and expensive climate change bill. Politico’s and Fox News’ articles show, however, how bills are adopted through the questionable means of politics, and how politicians are pressured for their vote–while all of this is justified with the perception of a “greater good.” In the meantime, due to a worldwide loss of confidence in the American currency, the dollar continued to decline against the euro and the yen [even though it is suggested that China’s economy might be in grave danger]; President Obama’s Stimulus Package has FAILED; experts judge the Obama Administration as “lacking leadership and awareness”; California’s former riches have gone to rags; and Der Spiegel explains how Mr. Obama’s meeting with German Chancellor Merkel resulted in–to say it with Shakespeare–“much to do about nothing.”

In another shocking piece of news, it was revealed that the United Kingdom is the crime capitol of Europe.

Finally, and to nobody’s surprise, the German Constitutional Court gave the [politically motivated?] green light for ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, but it ordered German lawmakers to adopt legislation to give more power to the German Parliament in EU matters. Most observers expect this new German law to be enacted within the next few months. And Der Spiegel speculates how a future unified Europe under the Lisbon Treaty might look.

The Ark of the Covenant–Lost and Found and Lost Again…

WorldNetDaily reported on June 24:

“The patriarch of the Orthodox Church of Ethiopia says he will announce to the world Friday [June 26] the unveiling of the Ark of the Covenant, perhaps the world’s most prized archaeological and spiritual artifact, which he says has been hidden away in a church in his country for millennia… ‘The Ark of the Covenant is in Ethiopia for many centuries,’ said Pauolos. ‘As a patriarch I have seen it with my own eyes and only few highly qualified persons could do the same, until now.’ According to Pauolos, the actual Ark has been kept in one church, but to defend the treasure, a copy was placed in every single church in Ethiopia…

“The idea that the Ark is presently in Ethiopia is a well-documented, albeit disputed, tradition dating back to at least 642 B.C… Ethiopians believe it is destined to be delivered to the Messiah when He reigns on Mount Zion – the Temple Mount in Jerusalem… Muslim scholars say it will be found near the end of times by the Mahdi – a messianic figure in Islam.”

But, not surprisingly, it was not supposed to be.

The Ethiopian Review wrote on June 27:

“Yesterday, millions were waiting to watch eagerly the Ark of the Covenant revealed. A day passed but it was not made public. ‘No, the ark is not going to be revealed. Nobody could touch it. If you do so, God will smite you,’ Aba Gebremedhin said… [He] also talked of building a museum in Axum… within two years… [In it] could also be placed the Ark of the Covenant, but this needs to be decided by the Holy Synod, the supreme body of the Orthodox Church of Ethiopia [he said].”

Nevertheless, WorldNetDaily added the following on June 26:

“Bob Cornuke, biblical investigator, international explorer and best-selling author… said Ethiopians consider the Ark to be the ultimate holy object, and the church guards the suspected artifact from the ‘eyes and pollution of man… In Ethiopia, their whole culture is centered around worshipping this object’… But according to a statement… by the webmaster for the Ethiopian Orthodox Church, there is no chance that the religious leaders and people in the nation will give up their custody of what they believe is the Ark.”

The Apostle Paul’s Bones Found?

CNN reported on June 29:

“Scientific tests prove bones housed in the Basilica of St. Paul in Rome are those of the apostle St. Paul himself, according to Pope Benedict XVI. ‘Tiny fragments of bone’ in the sarcophagus were subjected to carbon dating, showing they ‘belong to someone who lived in the first or second century,’ the pope said in a homily carried on Italian television. ‘This seems to confirm the unanimous and undisputed tradition that these are the mortal remains of the Apostle St. Paul,’ Benedict said in Sunday’s announcement.”

As will be pointed out below, this tradition is neither “unanimous” nor “undisputed.” In fact, it is FALSE!

The Telegraph added on June 29:

“The announcement of the discovery was timed to mark the end of the ‘Pauline Year’ – 12 months in which the Roman Catholic Church has been celebrating the 2,000th anniversary of the birth of the ‘Apostle of the Gentiles’… The discovery of the bone fragments came shortly after the Vatican announced archaeologists had discovered what they believe is the oldest image in existence of Saint Paul, dating from the late 4th century, on the walls of catacomb beneath Rome.”

Der Stern wrote on June 30 that there is NO EVIDENCE that these were the bones of the Apostle Paul. Quite to the contrary, the magazine points out that the sarcophagus was only built in about 390 A.D., so that the bones could not have been placed there before. The magazine also asks how one can be sure that the bones which were found in that particular sarcophagus were the bones originally placed there, and that those bones were not later replaced.

Die Welt On Line added on June 30 that there can be no certainty that the bones are those of the Apostle Paul, and that experts DOUBT the accuracy of the Pope’s claim.

We can say that the excavated bones, allegedly belonging to a person who lived in the first or second century, are definitely NOT the bones of the Apostle Paul, even IF the age determination of the highly unreliable Carbon 14 method were correct in this case. The reason being, the Apostle Paul’s remains are NOT to be found in Rome.

Even the Catholic news agency Zenit admitted on June 28: “Despite the fact that the original tomb of St. Paul had been the object of profound devotion on the part of pilgrims from the beginning, over the centuries it disappeared from view and eventually could no longer be identified.” There are reasons for that development. For more information, please read our Q&A on the subject of the time and place of the Apostle Paul’s burial.

And Now… Unrest in Honduras

The Wall Street Journal wrote on June 29:

“Honduran soldiers rousted President Manuel Zelaya from his bed and exiled him at gunpoint Sunday to Costa Rica, halting his controversial push to redraw the constitution but spurring fresh concerns about democratic rule across Latin America… Mr. Zelaya called the action a kidnapping, and said he was still president. The U.S. and other countries condemned the coup. President Barack Obama said he was ‘deeply concerned’ and called on all political actors in Honduras to ‘respect democratic norms.’ Venezuela President Hugo Chávez, a close ally of Mr. Zelaya and nemesis of the U.S., said he would consider it an ‘act of war’ if there were hostilities against his diplomats. ‘I have put the armed forces of Venezuela on alert,’ Mr. Chávez said…

“Troops with riot shields continued to surround the presidential palace on Monday and armored military vehicles were parked in front… Honduras’s Supreme Court gave the order for the military to detain the president… Later, Honduras’s Congress formally removed Mr. Zelaya from the presidency and named congressional leader Roberto Micheletti as his successor until the end of Mr. Zelaya’s term in January…

“Mr. Micheletti is a member of Mr. Zelaya’s Liberal party. But he had opposed his plans for a referendum that could have led to overturning the constitution’s ban on re-election, allowing Mr. Zelaya to potentially stay in power past January, when his term ends…

“The Obama administration and members of the Organization of American States had worked for weeks to try to avert any moves to overthrow President Zelaya… The efforts accelerated over the weekend, as Washington grew increasingly alarmed… On Sunday, the U.S. embassy here tried repeatedly to contact the Honduran military directly, but was rebuffed. Washington called the removal of President Zelaya a coup and said it wouldn’t recognize any other leader.

“The U.S. stand was unpopular with Honduran deputies. One congressman, Toribio Aguilera, got prolonged applause from his colleagues when he urged the U.S. ambassador to reconsider. Mr. Aguilera said the U.S. didn’t understand the danger that Mr. Zelaya and his friendships with Mr. Chavez and Cuba’s Fidel Castro posed. Retired Honduran Gen. Daniel López Carballo justified the move against the president, telling CNN that if the military hadn’t acted, Mr. Chávez would eventually be running Honduras by proxy. It was a common view Sunday…

“Latin America analysts said the Honduran coup will complicate President Obama’s efforts to re-engage a region where anti-Americanism has flourished in recent years. They said Mr. Chavez is likely to seize on the crisis to depict Central America as under attack… As a result, analysts said Mr. Obama will need to aggressively call for the reinstatement of President Zelaya, despite U.S. concerns that he is seeking to mirror Mr. Chávez’s campaign to secure limitless rule…

“Mr. Casas-Zamora [Costa Rica’s former vice president and a senior fellow at Washington’s Brookings Institution] and other regional analysts said the coup raised questions about just how much influence Washington actually has in Central America, given the Obama administration’s failed effort to avert it. Honduras receives more than $200 million in development aid from Washington annually.”

Reuters wrote on June 29:

“U.S. President Barack Obama said on Monday the coup that ousted Honduran President Manuel Zelaya was illegal and would set a ‘terrible precedent’ of transition by military force unless it was reversed… Despite Obama’s comments, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the administration was not formally designating the ouster as a military coup for now, a step that would force a cut-off of most U.S. aid to Honduras. Under U.S. law, no aid — other than for the promotion of democracy — may be provided to a country whose elected head of government has been toppled in a military coup.”

The Associated Press wrote on July 1:

“The Obama administration said Wednesday it has suspended joint military operations with Honduras to protest a coup that forced President Manuel Zelaya into exile.”

Reuters added on July 2:

“Rejecting the return of ousted President Manuel Zelaya, Honduras’ interim leaders dug in for a fight on Thursday… In the worst crisis in Central America in a decade… a standoff… is testing U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration after he promised an era of better relations with the region.”

International Community Condemns Honduras “Coup”

The left-leaning magazine, Der Spiegel Online, wrote on June 30:

“This weekend’s coup in Honduras has been met with general international condemnation. Criticism of the putsch is coming from all sides of the political spectrum… Micheletti has not been recognized, various South American states have withdrawn diplomatic staff and halted trade. The United Nations has called for ‘a reinstatement of the democratically elected representatives of the country,’ the European Union wants to see ‘a swift return to constitutional normality’ and the US, which has strong military ties with Honduras, has also weighed in…

“The financial daily Handelsblatt writes:

“‘What makes this coup particularly bad is the complicity between the Honduran parliament and the local armed forces. Only hours after Zelaya was forced to leave the country, Congress presented a blatantly false letter of resignation from him… Zelaya himself wasn’t always a good democrat — he ignored, for example, the fact that the highest judicial office in his country had ruled against the referendum he planned to hold… In any case, a coup was clearly the wrong solution…’

“The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes:

“‘… this situation cannot be justified. It is the duty of centrist politicians everywhere to protest these actions… But they also need to take care that they are not dancing to the same tune that Zelaya’s local allies — leaders like Chavez, Ortega and Morales — are playing. Because the politics of those leaders actually have more to do with the bad old days in Latin America than any pure, new democratic order’…”

But not all are in agreement. Die Welt On Line wrote on June 30 about the “fairy tale of a coup in Honduras.” The paper stated that there was NO coup, but only the parliament-initiated removal of a president who was in the process, step-by-step, to usurp the constitution and bring about a coup himself. The paper also claimed that the violence in Honduras is perpetrated by pro-Zelaya demonstrators who were seen shooting at the police, and not vice versa.

Time Is Running Out For Iran

The Financial Times reported on June 27:

“Iran’s nuclear programme and its post-election crisis dominated talks this weekend among Group of Eight foreign ministers meeting in Italy, with a sense that time was running out for the international community to respond, diplomats said. The ministerial discussions, preparing a wide range of global issues for next month’s G8 summit, also revealed how little they understood of what was happening inside Iran and within the regime…

“Although Israel was not directly mentioned, the diplomats said there was an unspoken understanding of a danger that Israel might take military action against Iran’s nuclear sites if the international community did not make progress on the diplomatic front. The final G8 statement expressed deep concern over the proliferation risks of Iran’s ongoing nuclear programme and called on Iran to ‘seize this opportunity to give diplomacy a chance to find a negotiated solution to the nuclear issue.’ Diplomats said the coded language conveyed a message to Iran that non-diplomatic means – including possible military action – remained a risk it should consider… There was no discussion of drawing up further economic and financial sanctions against Iran…

“Iran has defied UN resolutions demanding that it halt its uranium enrichment programme… Javier Solana, EU foreign policy chief who has led on-off nuclear negotiations with Iran, has a mandate to try to re-engage the Iranians, although it is not clear to whom he might talk. Mr Solana was prepared ‘to put more on the table,’ diplomats said, without giving details. But they did not expect Iran to re-enter talks in the near future…

“Western foreign ministers and Japan were relieved that Russia signed up to the final statement which deplored, but did not ‘condemn,’ the post-electoral violence in Iran and expressed ‘solidarity with those who have suffered repression while peacefully demonstrating’… Russia, with its close economic and military ties to Iran, was quick to congratulate Mr Ahmadi-Nejad on his re-election when he visited Russia after the vote.

“The G8 comprises Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Russia, the UK and US.”

EU Warns Iran

Deutsche Welle reported on June 28:

“The European Union agreed on Sunday that intimidation and harassment of European diplomatic staff by Iran in Tehran would be met with a ‘strong and collective response’… At least 25 people have been killed during crackdowns by Iranian police and religious militia in recent demonstrations… On Sunday, police arrested [nine] Iranians working for the British Embassy in Tehran, claiming they played a role in the post-election riots…

“The international community continues to voice alarm at the violent crackdown on opposition protesters in the election aftermath, but the Iranian government has hit back, accusing Western nations – particularly the United States, Britain, France and Germany – of meddling in the country’s internal affairs.”

EU “Unites” Against Iran

The Financial Times wrote on June 28:

“The European Union’s 27 nations on Sunday joined forces to condemn Iran’s detention of British embassy staff in Tehran, as tensions escalated between Iran and the west in the wake of the disputed elections. After Iran arrested nine local employees working at the UK embassy in Tehran, EU foreign ministers meeting in Corfu said they would respond firmly to any further ‘harassment or intimidation [by Iran] of foreign or Iranian staff working in embassies’… The seriousness of the diplomatic stand-off was underscored by the EU statement in which foreign ministers said they were becoming ‘seriously concerned’ about developments inside Iran… as of Sunday morning four of the nine staff had been released [In the meantime, seven were released.]. The EU statement demanded all should immediately be set free.

“Iranian media said the staff had been detained because of their ‘considerable role’ in instigating riots triggered by this month’s disputed election result… Iran has repeatedly claimed UK diplomats have been interfering in the country’s domestic affairs. Last week Iran forced two British envoys to leave the country, a decision that triggered an immediate tit-for-tat response by London.

“[David] Miliband [Britain’s foreign secretary] roundly rejected Iran’s allegations about the locally hired staff on Sunday. ‘These are hard-working diplomatic staff and the idea that the British Embassy is somehow behind the demonstrations and protests that have been taking place in Tehran in recent weeks is wholly without foundation,’ he said. The UK has been the focus of Iran’s diplomatic protests, partly because the US does not have an embassy in Iran.

“But the troubled relationship between the UK and Iran also has a long history, going back to British involvement in a 1953 coup in Iran… Iran’s leaders stepped up their attacks on the west on Sunday. Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, denounced what he described as ‘interfering statements’ by western officials.”

The Financial Times wrote on June 30:

“Most of the European Union’s 27 member states will recall their ambassadors from Tehran as early as this weekend if the Iranian authorities refuse to free the [two remaining “detained”] British embassy employees… Amid continuing anger across Europe over the embassy arrests, senior EU diplomats said a co-ordinated diplomatic protest would take place ‘within days.'”

The EUObserver wrote on July 2:

“Iran says Europe is no longer qualified to hold nuclear talks due to its meddling with the post-election protests in the country, with Sweden, as the new EU presidency, calling up officials from the 27-member bloc to discuss the next diplomatic move.”

German Neo-Nazis Support Ahmadinejad

Netzeitung reported on June 25:

“Neo-Nazis in Germany are applauding the repression of protests in Iran and publishing statements supporting the reelection of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and his hard-line government. Two extremist parties, the NPD and DVU, have managed to contort their racist thinking to embrace the Iranian leader because Ahmadinejad openly advocates the elimination of Israel…

“Censorship in Iran, which makes listening to music a risky business, and outlaws dancing in public, is praised by the NPD, which says the music could be considered decadent and subversive.”

No Irregularities in Iran Elections?

Haaretz reported on June 29:

“Iran’s top legislative body on Monday confirmed President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s victory in the contested June 12 presidential recount. The Guardian Council’s official recount of the votes found… no irregularities in the election which brought about the largest protest on Iranian streets since the 1979 revolution. Protesters have claimed that the vote was imbued with massive fraud, but the legislative body has insisted that it was legitimate.”

The Times On Line wrote on July 2:

“Three of Iran’s most prominent opposition leaders flagrantly courted arrest yesterday by denouncing President Ahmadinejad’s Government as illegitimate, one day after the regime said that it would tolerate no more challenges to the election result… Mr Mousavi, 67, is living at home with his family in Tehran, with security and intelligence agents watching his every move. They have arrested most of his inner circle and made it progressively harder for him to communicate with his followers.

“Since Tuesday, when Iran’s Guardian Council declared that a partial recount had confirmed Mr Ahmadinejad’s disputed re-election, hardliners have all but accused Mr Mousavi of treason…

“Forced from the streets by the security forces, Mr Mousavi’s supporters are also preparing a campaign of civil disobedience. They are talking of strikes, boycotting goods advertised in the state-controlled media, moving money out of government-controlled banks and giving money directly to the needy instead of government-controlled charities.

“Analysts say that anger will grow and could erupt at football matches, prayer meetings or anywhere that large numbers gather. They say that opposition supporters will go underground and stage lightning demonstrations. They also expect some elements to start launching violent attacks on government targets.

“In a possible sign of the regime’s anxiety Mr Ahmadinejad abruptly cancelled a visit to Libya for an African Union summit yesterday.”

Amidst Violence, Iraqis Happy to See US Troops Leave Cities

On June 29, USA Today wrote the following:

“It was just a week ago that two of his brothers were killed in a bombing in a crowded market, but Haider Abbas Ali put his sorrow aside Monday to celebrate the departure of most U.S. troops from the capital and other Iraqi cities. ‘Their presence has brought nothing good. It is long past the time for the Americans to leave,’ said Ali, who draped himself in an Iraqi flag as he danced with friends prior to Iraqi security forces taking control Tuesday.

“Thousands of Iraqis gathered in central Baghdad’s Zawra Park for a concert to mark the milestone that is part of a security pact that will also require all U.S. combat forces to leave Iraq by Aug. 31, 2010. A countdown clock on a state television channel ticked down at midnight. The Iraqi government has declared Tuesday National Sovereignty Day, six years after the U.S.-led invasion that toppled dictator Saddam Hussein…

“U.S. troops weren’t in sight in the capital Monday. Instead, Iraqi police and soldiers flooded the streets… Some U.S. troops will remain in the cities as trainers and advisers, but most of the 130,000 Americans in Iraq have been relocated to large bases outside urban centers.

“While Iraq celebrated the switch-over, violence continued. The U.S. military announced Monday that a soldier was killed in combat on Sunday, but his name was not released. More than 4,300 U.S. troops have died in Iraq since the war began in 2003…

“Many Iraqis at the Zawra park celebration said they are glad to see Americans out of their neighborhoods, but some remain nervous about whether the Iraqi security forces are up to the task.”

House Approves Costly Climate Change Bill

Die Welt Online wrote on June 27:

“President Barack Obama scored a major victory on Friday when the U.S. House of Representatives passed legislation to slash industrial pollution that is blamed for global warming. The House narrowly passed the historic legislation to cut carbon emissions blamed for climate change, thus handing President Obama a hard-fought victory.

“The Democratic-controlled House passed the climate change bill, a top priority for Obama, by a vote of 219-212. As has become routine on major bills in Congress this year, the vote was partisan, with only eight Republicans joining Democrats for the bill. Forty-four Democrats voted against it.

“Climate change legislation still must get through the Senate. Senators were expected to try to write their own version but prospects for this year were uncertain. After the House vote, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid said he hoped the Senate can pass a bill ‘this fall’…

“The bill requires that large U.S. companies, including utilities, oil refiners, manufacturers and others, reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other gases associated with global warming by 17 percent by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050, from 2005 levels. They would do so by phasing in the use of cleaner alternative energy than high-polluting oil and coal.

“At the core of the bill, which is around 1,500 pages long, is a ‘cap and trade’ program designed to achieve the emissions reductions by industry.”

Adoption of Climate Change Bill–Politics, Politics and More Politics

Politico wrote on June 25:

“The House of Representatives passed a sweeping climate-change bill Friday – a major victory for President Barack Obama and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi that left Republicans fuming about a ‘national energy tax’ they said would exacerbate the nation’s economic woes. The vote was extremely close…  the debate leading up to it was intense…

“Republicans accused the Democrats of ramming the bill through the House. Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.), managing the debate for his party, asked repeatedly if there was even a copy of the current version of the bill anywhere in the House chamber. Democratic Rep. Ellen Tauscher – sitting in the speaker’s chair although she’s already been confirmed as Obama’s undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security — repeatedly dodged the question.

“Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), one of the bill’s sponsors, finally rose to say that a single copy of the current version of the bill was available at the speaker’s desk – and on the Internet, which members would have to leave the floor to access.

“That wasn’t good enough for House Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio), who delayed the roll call vote by reading page-by-page through a 300-page managers’ amendment Democrats added at around 3 a.m. Friday. Boehner seemed to relish the hour-long stunt, picking out the bill’s most obscure language and then pontificating about what it might – or might not – mean. Republicans laughed along with him and roared with applause when he was done.

“Before Boehner took the floor, Republicans asked the House to observe a moment of silence for Americans who would lose their jobs as a result of the bill. Democrats objected. Pelosi argued later that the bill would mean ‘jobs, jobs, jobs, jobs.’

“Making his closing argument for the bill he co-sponsored, House Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Henry Waxman (D-Calif.) told his colleagues that they had ‘a unique historical opportunity’ to protect the nation’s national security, improve the environment and transform the economy… But in an impassioned speech of his own, House Minority Whip Eric Cantor (R-Va.) said the cap-and-trade bill would exacerbate the recession, disproportionately hurt the poor and ‘hamstring’ U.S. industry. He was followed by House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), who called the bill a ‘great contribution to human kind’ and attacked Republicans for offering nothing but ‘negative political shots’…

“Throughout the day Friday, the House chamber had the feeling of a place where history was being made… Behind the scenes, the administration worked hard to help the Democratic leadership garner support for the legislation. Obama, Energy Secretary Steven Chu and other administration officials have been calling skeptical lawmakers from both parties for weeks. Energy adviser Carol Browner met with several on-the-fence lawmakers Thursday.”

And Still More Politics…?

Fox News wrote on June 29:

“A top Republican senator has ordered an investigation into the Environmental Protection Agency’s alleged suppression of a report that questioned the science behind global warming. The 98-page report, co-authored by EPA analyst Alan Carlin… argued that the information the EPA was using was out of date, and that even as atmospheric carbon dioxide levels have increased, global temperatures have declined…

“According to internal e-mails that have been made public by the Competitive Enterprise Institute, Carlin’s boss told him in March that his material would not be incorporated into a broader EPA finding and ordered Carlin to stop working on the climate change issue… Carlin told FOXNews.com on Monday that his boss, National Center for Environmental Economics Director Al McGartland, appeared to be pressured into reassigning him.

“Carlin said he doesn’t know whether the White House intervened to suppress his report but claimed it’s clear ‘they would not be happy about it if they knew about it,’ and that McGartland seemed to be feeling pressure from somewhere up the chain of command. Carlin said McGartland told him he had to pull him off the climate change issue…

“Reps. James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., and Darrell Issa, R-Calif… wrote a letter last week to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson urging the agency to reopen its comment period on the finding. The EPA has since denied the request… In a written statement, Issa said the administration is ‘actively seeking to withhold new data in order to justify a political conclusion.’

“‘I’m sure it was very inconvenient for the EPA to consider a study that contradicted the findings it wanted to reach,’ Sensenbrenner said in a statement, adding that the ‘repression’ of Carlin’s report casts doubt on the entire finding. Carlin said he’s concerned that he’s seeing ‘science being decided at the presidential level’…

“The controversy is similar to one under the Bush administration — only the administration was taking the opposite stance. In that case, scientist James Hansen claimed the administration was trying to keep him from speaking out and calling for reductions in greenhouse gases.”

Obamas Hold Gay Rights Reception

The Associated Press wrote on June 30:

“Countering criticism that he has done little to advance gay rights, President Obama commemorated the 40th anniversary yesterday of the birth of the modern movement by welcoming its leaders to the White House and reaffirming his commitment to their top priorities.

“’I will not only be your friend; I will continue to be an ally and a champion and a president who fights with you and for you,’ Obama told members of the core Democratic constituency as he and his wife Michelle hosted a cocktail-and-appetizer reception in the East Room marking the four decades since the police raid on New York City’s Stonewall Inn that spurred gay rights activism across the country.”

The Washington Post added on June 30 that Mr. Obama “also drew a parallel between the progress gays and lesbians have made in recent decades and the struggles of black Americans to win equality.”

U.S. Dollar Declines

Bloomberg reported on June 27:

“The dollar declined the most against the euro in a month and dropped versus the yen after China repeated its call for a new global currency… ‘The dollar’s status as a reserve currency is being questioned,’ said Benedikt Germanier, a foreign-exchange strategist in Stamford, Connecticut at UBS AG, the second- largest currency trader. ‘There are reasons to sell the dollar.’”

Stimulus Package Isn’t Working… Job Losses Increase…

The Financial Times reported on July 2:

“The US economy shed another 467,000 jobs last month, signalling aggressive government stimulus measures are failing to unshackle the labour force from the grips of the recession…

“The result was worse than economists predicted and pushed the unemployment rate from 9.4 per cent to 9.5 per cent… a 26-year high. Thursday’s figure shows further erosion from the previous month’s decline of a revised 322,000 drop and knocked wind from the notion that the pace of job losses might be slowing.”

Bloomberg added on July 2:

“Employers in the U.S. cut 467,000 jobs in June, the unemployment rate rose and hourly earnings stagnated, offering little evidence the Obama administration’s stimulus package is shoring up the labor market.”

“We ARE in the Middle of a Financial Crash…”

CNBC wrote on July 2:

“The financial system is crashing… Nassim Taleb, author of ‘The Black Swan,’ told CNBC Thursday… ‘So if I’m going to forecast something, it is that it’s going to get worse, not better… What makes me very pessimistic [is] not seeing any leadership or awareness on parts of government on what has to be done.'”

California–From the Richest to the Poorest…

On June 29, the Financial Times reported the following:

“California… grapples with an unprecedented cash crunch and prepares to begin its new fiscal year deep in the red. Once the US’s richest state, California now has the dubious distinction of having the worst credit rating in the country…”

The Los Angeles Times reported on July 2:

“With budget negotiators at a loggerheads and California government facing a cash crisis, the state controller’s office will start printing IOUs this afternoon for the first time in 17 years. The presses are set to start at 2 p.m., churning out 28,742 IOUs worth $53.3 million that will be dispatched mostly to residents throughout the state still awaiting their income-tax refunds.

“A panel of state finance officials will meet this morning to set the interest rate for banks and other financial institutions that decide to accept the IOUs. Some banks have agreed to honor them, including Bank of America, which will do so until July 10…

“With the California economy hobbled, tax receipts waning and the budget deficit continuing to swell, the governor Wednesday declared a fiscal emergency, and ordered state workers to take a third unpaid furlough day each month. He also issued a new list of cuts to schools and public universities to address a deficit that his finance team now says has swelled to $26.3 billion.”

UK Crime Capitol of Europe

The Telegraph wrote on July 2:

“The United Kingdom is the violent crime capital [sic] of Europe [including in respect to murder] and has one of the highest rates of violence in the world, worse even than America… Analysis of figures from the European Commission showed a 77 per cent increase in murders, robberies, assaults and sexual offences… The total number of violent offences recorded compared to population is higher than any other country in Europe, as well as America, Canada, Australia and South Africa… The figures combined crime statistics for England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland.”

China’s Economy in Grave Danger

The Telegraph wrote on June 28:

“China’s banks are veering out of control. The half-reformed economy of the People’s Republic cannot absorb the $1,000bn (£600bn) blitz of new lending issued since December… Fitch Ratings has been warning for some time that China’s lenders are wading into dangerous waters, but its latest report is even grimmer than… suspected… World trade… will not rebound fast in a world where the US savings rate has risen to a 15-year high of 6.9pc…

“So the [Chinese] regime is resorting to hazardous methods to keep excess factories humming: issuing a ‘Buy China’ decree: using a plethora of export subsidies; holding down the price of coke, bauxite, zinc and other resources to lower production costs (prompting a complaint from America and Europe); and suppressing the yuan, again. Protectionism is a risky game for a country that lives off global trade and runs a surplus…

“[China might be] repeating the US tariff blunder of 1930 that brought the world crashing down on Washington’s head… If the world’s biggest surplus state ($400bn) is too structurally deformed to help offset the demand shock as Western debtors retrench, we are trapped in a long deflation slump.”

Obama and Merkel Meet–“Much to Do About Nothing”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 27:

“During German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s White House visit on Friday, one thing topped the agenda: a show of friendship. US President Barack Obama praised Merkel to the hilt, while she returned the compliment. Politics were pushed into the background… The German-American agenda for the meeting was clear this time: A show of friendship — after all the reports of a cool relationship between Obama and Merkel, which have now started to appear in the US as well as the German media…

“The fact that Merkel had prevented Obama from speaking in front of the deeply symbolic Brandenburg Gate was now all forgotten. And the fact that Obama’s team had acted with some arrogance during his Dresden visit and for a long time had rejected the idea of a brief visit to the Frauenkirche was also ancient history…

“The issue that has seen the greatest tensions between the two leaders was hardly mentioned — the response to the global financial crisis and the German [skepticism] about America’s massive state spending that could culminate in an even bigger stimulus package and an even greater budget deficit… That left nothing but harmony in the East Room. The chancellor denied there were any differences with the new US president…

“However even a good natured Obama cannot dispel the worries of many Europeans that they are becoming more marginalized in Washington in the face of the many political problems and increasing number of hot spots around the world. When the German chancellor was presented with the Warburg Prize for her contribution to trans-Atlantic relations on Thursday evening in the Library of Congress, only one out of a possible 435 members of the House of Representatives bothered to turn up.”

You might want to listen to our new StandingWatch program, “America and Europe–Friends or Foes?” [posted on StandingWatch or YouTube] to learn more about the REAL relationship between Mr. Obama and Mrs. Merkel.

German Constitutional Court Gives Green Light for the Lisbon Treaty

The Financial Times wrote on June 30:

“Germany’s constitutional court gave a green light in principle to the Lisbon treaty on Tuesday but suspended its ratification until the German parliament had amended [domestic German] law governing its influence over European legislation… Despite the new hurdle, the ruling was greeted with relief by the government… Berlin is confident that the necessary amendments to its ratification laws can be expedited in the summer, fulfilling its commitment to ratify the treaty before 2010…

“The Bundestag, parliament’s lower chamber, on Tuesday revealed it had already convened an extraordinary session in August for an initial review of the legislative amendments. Final approval should take place on September 8… before the general election of September 27. The bill requires a two-thirds majority on both houses of parliament.”

The EUObserver added on June 30:

“Germany’s highest court on Tuesday ruled that the EU’s new treaty is compatible with German law, so long as the role of the national parliament in EU decision-making is strengthened. ‘The German constitution says yes to the Lisbon treaty, but on a national level the parliament has to have a stronger say in EU matters’, vice-president of the German constitutional court, Andreas Vosskuhle, said… The court in Karlsruhe also said that the treaty and the German constitution would not allow the creation of an ‘EU federal state…”

Deutsche Welle reported on June 30:

“German opponents of the Lisbon Treaty [a group of about 50 lawmakers seeking to stop the Treaty] had argued that the document undercuts German sovereignty. They say that the country’s constitution would be subject to European law… Supporters of the Lisbon Treaty dismiss such fears, and insist that Germany and Europe would become more democratic and more transparent.

“German Interior Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble… says the treaty would protect the German constitution, not undermine it. Schaeuble says the [German] constitution’s preamble, dating from 1949, states that Germany wants to be an equal member of a unified Europe which works towards world peace. ‘From the beginning, this constitution was BASED ON EUROPEAN UNITY,’ he says.”

Der Spiegel Online added on June 30:

“Chancellor Merkel welcomed the court’s decision, saying that it was ‘a good day for the Lisbon Treaty’… German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier… said that he was pleased that the court had found the treaty to be ‘completely compatible’ with the [German] constitution. He predicted that the Lisbon Treaty would come into force by early 2010 at the latest.

“If the German Constitutional Court had ruled against Lisbon, it would likely have killed the treaty. It would have given the Czech Republic and Poland a reason not to ratify it and it also could have derailed plans to hold a second referendum on the EU reform in Ireland in early October.

“European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso welcomed the German ruling. ‘I am confident we can complete the process of ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon in all countries by the autumn,’ he said.”

The Future of Europe–Back to the Core?

Der Spiegel wrote on June 29:

“In times such as these, with no end to the financial crisis in sight, the rotation of the EU Presidency makes one thing patently clear: The European Union needs clearer structures, more integration, and better foreign representation. Moreover, the Czech tenure has revealed that smaller EU countries are not up to the daunting coordination and leadership tasks that a crisis of this magnitude requires… In the financial crisis as in the gas dispute, all eyes were focused once again on the heavyweights in the European Union, namely on Germany and France, without whom no significant European contribution would have been possible at the G-20 summit in April…

“As of July it is Sweden’s obligation… Foreign Minister Carl Bildt is striving to make Georgia, and perhaps Moldova as well, into ‘model nations’ of successful EU engagement. Both countries have sunk into war and unrest in recent months and are practically demanding European intervention… Bildt… would like to position the European Union as a player in the Middle East… He would like to… represent the European Union as an international role model at the Copenhagen climate conference at the end of the year…

“Should the Lisbon Treaty be ratified, Sweden will quickly set clear priorities for the formation of the European foreign service and, accordingly, for the formulation of the responsibilities of both the High Commission for Foreign and Security Policy as well as of the future European Presidency. Both entities should be given as much space and capacity as possible within the European system…”

Over the years, many ideas have been advanced to the effect that Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, as described in Daniel 4, has some kind of hidden prophetic meaning for us today. In the last Q&A, we discussed Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in much detail. We pointed out that the dream referred to that ancient king and predicted his seven years of insanity to punish his pride. We showed that the dream was fulfilled, exactly as God had pronounced it, and that King Nebuchadnezzar subsequently repented of his pride at the time when his sanity was restored to him.

Some have pointed at Nebuchadnezzar’s “seven years” of insanity and applied it to seven “prophetic” years of punishment for the entire Babylonian Empire. The rationale goes something like this: A “prophetic” year of 360 DAYS is the equivalent of 360 YEARS. [The one day for one year PRINCIPLE is, in fact, biblical in some instances, and is described in passages such as Numbers 14:34 and Ezekiel 4:4-6.] If applied in this way, seven prophetic “years” of 360 “days” or “years” each, would amount to 2,520 years. Beginning to count with the time when Babylon fell (which occurred about 539 B.C.), one would reach the year 1982 A.D.

It is also claimed by some that the Babylonian Empire was somehow unproductive for 2,520 years after its ancient fall, but emerged again, beginning in 1982.

As one author puts it:

“The tree of the… dream may represent not only Nebuchadnezzar but the Babylonian Empire as well. Babylon fell in 539 B.C… In essence, the ‘roots’ of the tree remained to sprout anew in the future. Considering this, it has been proposed that the ‘seven times’ could be viewed as seven 360-day prophetic years. The prophetic ‘day-for-a-year’ principle… yields 2,520 years… perhaps stretching from the fall of ancient Babylon to the beginnings of its revival in modern times.”

Another author wrote:

“Daniel records a prophecy about a tree (picturing the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar) that was to be chopped down, but its stump and roots were to remain—bound by a band of brass and iron until seven times had passed… The king’s seven years of insanity partially fulfilled the prophecy. However, the Bible also reveals that a prophetic year of 360 days is the equivalent of 360 years… Seven prophetic years (of 360 days) amount to 2,520 years. Babylon fell in 539 [B.C.]… Seven prophetic times from 539 [B.C.] brings us to 1982—the date John Paul urged Europeans to ‘give life to their roots.’ Since 1982 the modern Babylon emerging in central Europe from its ancient roots has seen dramatic growth.”

Depending on who is identified as modern Babylon, it is also said that the Catholic Church began in 1982 to exert its ever-growing influence on the countries of Europe; or that the nations of Europe experienced a revival, beginning in 1982 [pointing at a Scripture in Daniel 4, speaking of the band of iron and bronze around the tree (verses 15 and 23), which was allegedly loosed in 1982, or that the new leaders of modern Babylon, which are sometimes falsely claimed to be the USA and the Catholic Church, will begin to defeat the ancient Medes and Persians (which are alleged to be modern Iraq and Iran)]. Others make different claims, which are all related, somehow, to 2,520 years of punishment of “Babylon,” followed by a revival and restoration to power.

To complicate matters even further, it is also claimed that Christ’s reference to the “fulfillment” of the “times of the Gentiles” in Luke 21:24 relates, somehow, to Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 4. We have explained in a previous Q&A that the “times of the Gentiles” will be fulfilled when Christ returns. We also showed that Gentile kingdoms have ruled throughout the history of man.

Some of those who link “the times of the Gentiles” to Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 4 claim that this phrase speaks exclusively of the rule of the ancient and modern Babylonians and that the times of the Gentiles BEGAN in 1982 (when the 2,520 years-long insanity or punishment of Babylon was removed and Babylon’s rule was restored). Others have claimed in the past that the times of the Gentiles would actually END in 1982, and that Christ would return BEFORE the times of the Gentiles were fulfilled. (Since Christ has not returned, that concept was subsequently dropped.) Others teach correctly (as we pointed out in our previous Q&A), that the times of the Gentiles will be fulfilled AT the time of Christ’s return.

Can the concept that Daniel 4 contains a prophecy for the ancient and modern Babylonian EMPIRE be proven from Scripture? Is it even biblically POSSIBLE that this idea COULD BE correct?

When we carefully examine what the Bible DOES teach, the answer is, NO!

First of all, as pointed out in our previous Q&A, there is not even the slightest hint in Daniel 4 that Nebuchadnezzar’s dream of the cut-down tree refers to anyone but Nebuchadnezzar. He was indeed insane for seven years, living with the animals, but when he repented of his pride, the kingdom was restored to him. To apply this scenario of seven prophetic years of insanity to the Babylonian power is inaccurate, as Babylon was not “unproductive” or “paralyzed” from 539 B.C. to 1982 A.D.

In addition, the Bible shows that end-time modern Babylon will behave in a totally insane way and will be responsible for a worldwide catastrophe, which would lead to the annihilation of man if Christ were not to return to save man from himself. Therefore, it cannot possibly be suggested that Babylon was insane from 539 B.C. until 1982 A.D., but REPENTED of its pride and regained its sanity, beginning in 1982.

Those who claimed, albeit erroneously, that the times of the Gentiles would be fulfilled in 1982, after Christ’s return, understood at least that Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 4, IF applied to the Babylonian Empire, would require repentance before its kingdom or rule could be restored.

As one author wrote as early as 1953: “[1982 is the year] when the seven times of punishment would be fulfilled…. Since Zechariah 14:1-3 shows that Jesus Christ will return in order to deliver Jerusalem from the Gentiles, it is plain that the second coming of Christ will occur SHORTLY BEFORE the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled… Just as Nebuchadnezzar finally regained his throne and acknowledged God’s authority, so the Gentile nations when their punishment is over, will come up to the kingdom of God and ask to learn of his ways (Micah 4:1-3) so that they also may become begotten and finally born into His kingdom as members of the ruling family of God.”

Of course, the idea that Christ would come back prior to 1982 and that the punishment of modern Babylon would end in 1982 and that they would come to repentance in 1982 was clearly wrong. But at least it recognized the need for Babylon to REPENT–IF we WERE to apply Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 4 to 2,520 years of Babylonian punishment. Those who teach today that Babylon returned to power in 1982 don’t even seem to recognize THAT.

We should also ask, what spectacular event occurred in 1982 which would have indicated that Babylon returned to power after 2,520 years of paralysis? As we have already seen, some of those who preach the prophetic meaning of the dream for the Babylonian system state that Pope John Paul gave a speech in 1982 encouraging Europe to discover its origins and give life to its roots. It is claimed that THIS SPEECH indicates, somehow, the return to power of modern Babylon and the beginning of the growth of the cut-down tree.

The whole concept that one can apply the “seven times” in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream to “seven prophetic years” of 2,520 years seemed to have been invented by the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Watchtower Society. They claimed that the destruction of Jerusalem through Nebuchadnezzar [alleged to have occurred in 607 B.C.] began the times of the Gentiles which allegedly ended in 1914 when God allegedly reestablished His Kingdom in heaven. However, as we will show, that entire concept is biblically unconvincing.

First, we need to explain what the Bible says about the identity of modern Babylon. We need to comprehend who Babylon is. For instance, modern Babylon is not a combination of the USA and the Catholic Church, as it has been suggested, and, in passing, the modern Medes are not the Iraqis, either.

As we point out in our free booklets, “Europe in Prophecy” and “Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation,” modern Babylon is identified in Revelation 17 as the “WOMAN riding the beast.” That woman is a religious power which has been sitting on the LAST SEVEN POLITICAL AND MILITARY REVIVALS of the ancient Roman Empire. It is true that modern Babylon also describes the military and economic aspect of the Babylonian SYSTEM in Revelation 18, but the fact that the woman (the religious system) has been riding the last seven revivals of the beast (the political system) MUST NOT BE NEGLECTED. This PROVES that Babylon has not been dormant for 2,520 years. Quite to the contrary, BABYLON has been ALIVE and WELL for many centuries prior to 1982.

Note how Revelation 17 describes Babylon. In verse 3, we read that John sees in a vision “a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of names of blasphemy, having SEVEN HEADS and TEN HORNS.” Verse 5 explains that on the woman’s forehead, the name was written: “Mystery, Babylon the Great, The Mother of Harlots…”

That woman is further described as follows, in verse 18: “And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth.” That city is described, in verse 9, as being built on seven mountains or “hills” (compare, for example, the New International Version and the Living Bible).

Halley’s Bible Handbook writes: “The description of Babylon the great… exactly fits Papal Rome.” Ungers’ Bible Handbook states that the woman “denotes a religious system… the woman has her headquarters in the Beast’s capital, which is the seven-hilled city of Rome.”

Focusing on the BEAST on which the woman sits, we learn in Revelation 17 that the seven heads of the beast are seven kings or kingdoms (verse 10). What John saw in that vision referred to a time when five of the seven kings or kingdoms had fallen, one was, and one was still to come (verse 10). When it comes, it will be ruled by the ten horns or ten kings, giving their power and authority to the beast (verses 12-13).

As we explain in our above-quoted literature, the seven heads of the beast on which the woman sits, are the seven last revivals of the ancient Roman Empire. In fact, Revelation 13 and Daniel 7 tell us that the ancient Roman Empire would be revived TEN times, but the first three revivals occurred through barbarian tribes which did not believe in the religion propagated by the woman. In fact, the woman was responsible for the demise of the rule of these barbarian tribes (the Vandals, the Heruli and the Ostrogoths). The woman did not sit on the first three revivals of the Roman Empire, but according to Revelation 17, she would and did sit on the last SEVEN of the ten revivals.

We learn from history that six of the last seven revivals have already occurred. These were revivals of political and military kingdoms cooperating with the woman–the religious power. Six of these last seven revivals have already occurred under Justinian (bringing about the Imperial Restoration of Europe, by uniting East and West Rome), Charlemagne (crowned Emperor by Pope Leo III), Otto the Great (crowned by Pope John XII), Charles V of Habsburg (crowned by Pope Clement VIII), Napoleon Bonaparte (crowned by Pope Pius VII) and Hitler/Mussolini (who worked closely together with Pope Pius XII).

For instance, under Charlemagne, the revival was called “HOLY Roman Empire,” and under Otto the Great, it was called, “HOLY Roman Empire of the German Nation,” indicating the RELIGIOUS and political nature of these revivals. The last and final revival of the ancient Roman Empire is happening right now in Europe.

To say that biblical Babylon was inactive for 2,520 years since its fall in 539 B.C. is historically inaccurate. In fact, going way back in history, Will Durant explained in “The Story of Civilization,” that the Code of Justinian (who brought about the fourth resurrection of the Roman Empire) “enacted orthodox Christianity into law [and] acknowledged ecclesiastical leadership of the Roman Church, and ordered all Christian groups to submit to her authority.”

In addition, and just focusing on modern events, it still cannot be legitimately said that the Pope’s speech in 1982 signified the revival of the Babylonian system. For instance, it was as early as 1929 when the Lateran Treaties were signed between Mussolini and the Pope, establishing the Vatican City State and the international character of the Holy See, and making Catholicism the official religion of Italy. Four years later, in 1933, Adolph Hitler signed a concordat with the Vatican, purportedly protecting the rights of the Catholic Church in Nazi Germany. Der Stern Online wrote in February of 2004 that Mussolini’s and Hitler’s fascist governments profited from the Lateran Treaties and the concordat, and that the Catholic Church supported the fascist propaganda.

Even when reviewing the very last and still ongoing revival of the ancient Roman Empire, the Pope’s speech in 1982 was not a decisive event, either. We need to emphasize that the Common Market itself was started under the inspiration of Catholic politicians. The Telegraph wrote in 1991 that politicians “such as Adenauer of Germany, Paul-Henri Spaak, Jean Monnet and Robert Schumann… were all deeply influenced by Catholic social teaching.” The Financial Times added on May 22, 1995 that the “idea of a united Europe” has been viewed as “essentially a Catholic concept.” But that concept existed long before 1982. It was in 1957 that the Treaty of Rome was signed by the original six member states. It gave birth to the unification of Europe. Der Stern Online wrote that that treaty signalized the “beginning of the success story of Europe.”

It should be obvious that 1982 was not a decisive year in the development of the last religious/political revival of the ancient Roman Empire. Notice, by contrast, the following years which DID represent milestones in the slow but sure unification of modern Europe. First of all, as mentioned, there is of course the signing of the Treaty of Rome in 1957, giving birth to the unification of Europe.

In addition, please note the following article, which was published in “Deutsche Welle” on June 27, 2009, celebrating the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Iron Curtain:

“On June 27 [1989,] exactly two decades ago, then Hungarian foreign minister Gyula Horn and his Austrian counterpart Alois Mock symbolically cut some barbed wire representing the Iron Curtain on the border separating their two countries. Two months later, on August 19, [1989,] some 600 East Germans escaped to the West during a picnic for peace organized at the Austro-Hungarian border during a period when the border gate opened for three hours. [The Wikipedia Encyclopedia adds that commencing with August 23, 1989, more than 13,000 East German tourists in Hungary escaped to Austria. Shortly thereafter, similar incidents occurred in neighboring Czechoslovakia.] In reality, Hungary had already begun to dismantle the Iron Curtain nearly two months earlier, on May 2, 1989.”

The fall of the Iron Curtain was necessary to bring about a united Europe which would embrace eastern European nations.

The Berlin Wall fell on November 9, 1989, and Germany’s reunification was formalized on October 3, 1990. Of course, a united Germany was and is necessary for a united EU.

On January 1, 1999, the euro was introduced. Newsweek wrote at the time: “The Euro will turn Europe into a superpower… Whether you love the Euro or hate it, know this; nothing so big has ever happened before.” Again, a common currency was and is absolutely necessary for a powerful united Europe.

What we need to remember, then, is that Revelation 17 states that the WOMAN–BABYLON THE GREAT–sits on ALL of the seven last [political/religious] revivals of the Roman Empire. By no stretch of the imagination can it be said, then, that Babylon had no influence on the world scene and that it was kept in chains for 2,520 years since its fall in 539 B.C., or, that the times of the Gentiles BEGAN 2,520 years after its fall; that is, in 1982.

The biblical prophecies and the historical records prove beyond the shadow of any doubt that the dream in Daniel 4 could not possibly be construed as a prophecy, stretching over 2,520 years, beginning with the fall of Babylon and an alleged revival in 1982. The dream in Daniel 4 related strictly and exclusively to the life of ancient King Nebuchadnezzar, containing the timeless message for us today that “the living may know That the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, Gives it to whomever He will, And sets over it the lowest [“basest,” Authorized Version] of men” and that “those who walk in pride He is able to put down” (Daniel 4:17, 37).

For more information, you might want to view our video-recorded sermon on the topic, “Babylon the Great.”

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch and YouTube. It is titled, “America and Europe–Friends or Foes?” In the program, Norbert Link is pointing out that in spite of their “unified” presentation during a press conference in the White House on June 26, 2009, President Barack Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel are “deeply divided” on critical key issues, such as the financial crisis and climate change. At the same time, the EU rendered the “most important decision of the year.” The EU and the USA are on a collision course–without any hope for substantial improvement.

A new German sermon was video-recorded this week and placed on the Web. It is titled, “Lasset Uns Menschen Machen…” (“Let Us Make Man…”) and is the second part in a series on the Nature of God and the Potential of Man. The first part is titled, “War und Ist Christus Gott?” (“Was and Is Christ God?”) and is posted on our German Website.

Norbert Link’s new video-recorded sermon, “Babylon the Great,” has been posted on the Web.

by Aaron Hooper

It’s easy to be alive. To just be. But my time here is short, and there’s no way for me to know just how much time I have. The greatest deception, that I personally have fallen under, is to think that there’s always tomorrow. There’s always tomorrow to take care of the important things. There’s always tomorrow to give an encouraging word to someone who needs it. There’s always tomorrow to start becoming the person that I need to be–that kind of person who obeys and follows God in everything. But when tomorrow comes, that means that today is gone. And today is the only real tangible thing that I have.

We’ve all heard “live today as if it’s your last,” and that is great advice, but every day that comes after today only furthers the deception. So it’s easy to simply think of that as just a nice statement. Every day that comes seems to prove that wrong. Procrastination. Neglect. These are my two biggest shortcomings. Before I know it, important things — bills, family, friends, future plans — can easily get away from me, if I’m not disciplined on a daily basis. I only deceive myself by thinking that tomorrow is any different than today. Tomorrow will come, but today will be lost.

Part of investing in my future is investing in today. The most important things are the little things that I can do in the moment. They add up. If they’re not done, then the moment is gone, and — well — that can really add up too. And not in a pleasant way. In an alarming, turn-your-stomach, self-destructing kind of way. I need to love every moment, please God and my fellow man every moment. I need to use what is given me. All I have is time, but it is in very short supply.

On June 27, 2009, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “Babylon the Great.”

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.

Recently I visited a longtime friend in the nearby regional hospital who had been transferred from surgery in the Vancouver area. He was recuperating, but was feeling kind of  low. He informed me that his hip replacement surgery did not go that well.  During the operation, they fractured his femur in several places, and he went through a lot of emotional trauma.

He felt especially down because when he went through a trial during his marriage, his wife would comfort him. He also said that when he faced  problems then, his children would come and touch his arm and tell him, it would be all right, dad. With no mate, friends or family in the area, he found it extremely trying, and he was emotionally distraught after the surgery.

He knew about the promise from Christ, in Hebrews 13:5: “Let your conduct be without covetousness; be content with such things as you have. For He Himself has said, ‘I WILL NEVER LEAVE YOU NOR FORSAKE YOU.'”

He also knew the admonition in 1 Corinthians 10:13: “No temptation [or serious trial] has overtaken you except such as is common to man; but God is faithful, who will not allow you to be tempted beyond what you are able, but with the temptation will also make the way of escape, that you may be able to bear it.”

Yet in spite of these Scriptures, he felt a deep loneliness, even on the verge of despair.

After coming home and during the next few days, I began to think about my visit. What I had experienced was something I could really relate to, having spent eleven months away from home in a hospital when I was six years old. It brought back those memories of missing family and friends.  My parents, being poor, were only able to visit me three times during these eleven months, and my two brothers and one sister saw me only once. I felt very lonely and had feelings of despair.

When pondering this, it got me thinking how blessed are the brethren who can meet on the weekly Sabbath for services and live close to fellowship during the week. Some are scattered and some don’t even have a converted mate, yet they do the best they can by partaking of the weekly Internet service on the Sabbath. How much would they like to attend Church services in person! They look especially forward to the Festival of Tabernacles and other occasions when they can all be together to fellowship in person and to worship God together.

We may be lonely at times but never alone in the sense that we can have weekly contact with our brethren. If brethren are scattered, they at least worship together via the Internet. It is hoped that those who have opportunity to attend services in person take advantage of this great blessing on a regular and consistent basis; and that they who are fortunate enough to be able to congregate as a group never take for granted the opportunity to meet together for services.

As we move closer to the time of the Great Tribulation and as problems and trials will increase, let us never forget that precious and valuable promise from Christ–that He will NEVER leave or forsake us, whether it be in good times or in bad times, in adversity and in blessings. If we want Him to, He will be there, helping us through thick and thin, and His Church will never cease to exist either.  That means, no matter what, we never have to be alone. 

Overshadowed by the events involving Iran and, to a lesser extent, North Korea, Iraq, Afghanistan and domestic U.S. politics, many did not take note of a decision of the EU, which Der Spiegel calls “the most important decision taken in Europe this year.” That decision could bring about the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty by the end of the year, giving European institutions greater powers, a more permanent EU President and foreign minister, and a strengthened role of the EU Parliament.

According to the Bible, the unification of Europe is a given. However, we are also to wait for the development of something like a core Europe within the EU–the emergence of 10 powerful European nations or groups of nations, which will then in turn transfer their powers to a charismatic political and military European leader–the final leader of the last revival of the ancient Roman Empire (referred to in biblical prophecy as “the beast,” “the king of the North” and “King Jareb of Assyria”). Based on some indications in the book of Daniel, it is possible that even if the Lisbon Treaty comes into effect, the first permanent president and/or foreign minister under that Treaty will not remain in office for long, but will be “supplanted” by a “vile” person “to whom they will not give the honor of royalty,” but who will be gaining authority “peaceably” and “by intrigue” (Daniel 11:21). Once in power, he might act “deceitfully” and “corrupt” those with “flattery” who act “wickedly against the covenant” (compare Daniel 11:23, 32).

Even though those above-quoted passages of the prophecy in Daniel 11 refer primarily to ancient Antiochus Epiphanes, it is possible that SOME OF THEM are of dual application. For example, Daniel speaks about the “abomination of desolation”–a statue of a pagan god erected in the temple at Jerusalem and invading armies in the Middle East, leading to the suppression of daily sacrifices. All of this was indeed caused and fulfilled by Antiochus Epiphanes in ancient times (Daniel 11:31). However, Christ said–and Daniel confirmed–that these events will be repeated just prior to His return (Matthew 24:15-22; Daniel 12:7, 11).

It is fascinating to read the character description of Antiochus Epiphanes and ponder about the possibility that it MIGHT also describe, to an extent, the character of the coming “beast” (Some commentaries even feel that the following excerpts don’t refer to Antiochus at all, but exclusively to the “beast”):

“Then the king shall do according to his own will: he shall exalt and magnify himself above every god, shall speak blasphemies against the God of gods [compare Revelation 13:5-6], and shall prosper till the wrath has been accomplished [compare Revelation 18:3, referring to the wrath of the fornication of the Babylonian system; compare also the following passages referring to the wrath of GOD, in Revelation 14:19; 15:1, 7; 16:1, 19; 19:15]… He shall regard neither the God [better: god or gods] of his fathers nor the desire of women [either being very licentious and not desirous of women in a lawful marriage, thereby disregarding what women may want; or perhaps indicating his desire for unnatural sexual preferences], nor regard any god; for he shall exalt himself above them all. But in their place he shall honor a god of fortresses; and a god which his fathers did not know he shall honor with gold and silver, with precious stones and pleasant things…” (Daniel 11:36-38).

Europe will MILITARILY intervene in the Middle East to attempt to bring peace to that region–perhaps after Israel will have received a mortal “wound” or a decisive defeat in a coming war (compare Hosea 5:13). The United States of America and Great Britain (referred to as “Ephraim” in Hosea 5)–already bogged down by economic turmoil, political isolation and their unsuccessful military involvement in Iraq, Afghanistan and perhaps soon North Korea–will not play any major role on the world scene at that time.

We need to be “on the watch,” carefully observing the events as they unfold in Europe and the Middle East.

EU Renders Most Important Decision of the Year

Der Spiegel wrote on June 19:

“Friday’s deal in Brussels paving the way forward for a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland is the most important decision taken in Europe this year. The treaty, which will bring widespread reforms to the European Union and give its institutions greater power, could… go into effect before the end of the year… Then the EU would get a president, a foreign minister and the role of the European Parliament would be strengthened considerably.

“Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen announced the referendum would be held during the first week of October. Public opinion polls currently indicate that Irish voters would likely approve the Lisbon Treaty this time around, following their rejection in a first referendum one year ago. Cowen said the European Council had given Ireland ‘firm legal guarantees’ and that he was ‘confident we now have a solid basis to go to the Irish people and to ask them again for their approval for Ireland to ratify the treaty so that Europe can move on.’

“The EU has provided guarantees to Ireland that it will remain independent in determining tax policies, military neutrality and abortion law (Ireland has one of Europe’s most restrictive abortion policies). The sovereignty guarantees are expected to be anchored in EU law as a treaty protocol in the mid-term future…

“The history of the Lisbon Treaty is a long one. It has been five [years] since EU leaders approved the text of the European constitution in Rome. After the constitution was rejected in two referenda in France and the Netherlands, the draft landed in the waste bin. Under German leadership, however, the text was brought back to life in its current incarnation as the Treaty of Lisbon.

“The streamlined treaty was supposed to have gone into effect at the end of 2008. However, another referendum got in the way. Irish voters said ‘no’ and the EU was thrown into yet another crisis. This time the other leaders made it clear that they would not accept the ‘no’ vote. They immediately began to consider how and when a second referendum could be held in Ireland.

“One year on, it looks like that referendum will soon take place. The mood in Ireland seems to be favorable: The financial crisis has made people think much more positively about the EU. And now the guarantees of sovereignty have given Cowen further arguments in favor of the treaty.

“There were tough negotiations at the summit over those guarantees. Cowen surprised the other EU leaders on Thursday when he said he would need the guarantees entrenched in the treaty. A declaration by the Council would not suffice… It was pure blackmail — but the EU leaders had little choice but to accept those terms. No one can even consider the Lisbon Treaty failing again…

“Ireland is not alone in not having ratified the Lisbon Treaty. The Czech Republic, Poland and Germany still haven’t done so. Germany, for example, must first wait for a ruling by the Federal Constitutional Court on Lisbon’s legality. However, these are regarded as much lower hurdles than Ireland.”

Merkel and Obama “Are Not Getting Any Warmer…”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 23:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel is traveling to Washington this week to discuss the financial crisis and climate change with US President Barack Obama — two issues where Germany and the US are deeply divided…

“When US President Barack Obama recently met with German Chancellor Angela Merkel in Dresden, he… remained true to the program at first. But then he unexpectedly asked ‘Angela’ why, exactly, she didn’t want Turkey to be accepted into the European Union. Merkel was taken aback. She had to think on her feet and quickly come up with an answer for an issue on which she had no pre-prepared comments. It became clear to her, once again, that this president is a challenge, both for Merkel and for German politics as a whole…

“A clash of cultures is raging between Berlin and the United States on the issue of financial policy… The German chancellor… considers the Americans’ offensive monetary policy to be dangerous… A few hours after the encounter between Merkel and Obama, Ben LaBolt, a White House press spokesman, told a colleague about the difficult relationship between the two leaders. ‘They are not getting any warmer,’ he said…

“Obama’s visits to Dresden and Buchenwald also ruffled some feathers in Germany. The US president’s advance team, which had been sent to help prepare for the trip, made a negative impression on the Germans through their coarse language and overbearing behavior. German officials were shouted at, treated like schoolchildren and told to wait their turns… As it is, the US president in person is by no means the charming and smiling character many have come to expect from his television appearances. He cultivates a cool style or, as one of the members of the delegation describes it, ‘an almost unfeeling style.'”

Deutsche Welle added on June 24:

“Ms Merkel arrives in Washington on Thursday and meets Mr Obama on Friday. It will be their third meeting in less than a year. Ms Merkel hosted the US president in Dresden three weeks ago. Yet in spite of frequent meetings and delight among Germans at Mr Obama’s election, the rapport between the old allies has deteriorated in recent months… ‘The chancellor is not interested in joining the competition for who gets along best with Obama,’ a senior aide said on Wednesday…

“Economic policy is not the only source of tension. While Berlin has long been critical of the prison at Guantánamo Bay, it has rejected US requests to take detainees. It has also dragged its feet on committing troops to Afghanistan… Other matters have conspired to poison the atmosphere. German officials said last month the US Treasury’s role in talks between Berlin and General Motors over the future of Opel, its German arm, had been offhand and unhelpful.

“While Mr Obama had only planned to tour the Buchenwald concentration camp during what had been billed as a private visit this month, Ms Merkel insisted he go to Dresden, the Baroque city razed by US and UK bombers in 1945. Their first clash goes back before Mr Obama’s election last summer, when Ms Merkel vetoed his plan to make a speech before the Brandenburg gate. The address was moved a mile west to the victory column.”

Europe Caught Between Rock and Hard Place on Iran

Deutsche Welle wrote on June 19:

“With mass demonstrations continuing since the announcement of the presidential election results in the Iranian capital and other cities despite a government crackdown, many observers inside and outside the country had hoped that Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei would make an effort of reconciliation in his traditional Friday sermon. Instead, Khamenei defended Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, declaring him the clear winner of the election and urged the opposition to end its protests.

“That puts the West in a terrible bind, says Nicola Pedde, Director of Globe Research, a Rome-based think tank focusing on the Middle East. ‘We can do nothing. If you support the reformists, the Iranian government will say that the opposition is supported by agents of foreign governments. And if you stay silent it can be interpreted negatively as support for the government.’

“Paul Luft, founder of the Center for Iranian Studies at Durham University, agrees that Western countries should stay out of what he describes as an internal conflict… If the West is perceived to be meddling in Iran’s domestic affairs, that could help unite the Islamists, says Luft…

“But other experts argue that the West can’t just stand by and let events unfold, but must make a concerted effort to support the democracy movement in Iran… ‘The West shouldn’t prematurely recognize Ahmadinejad as the winner of the election’, says Jamsheed Faroughi, Head of Deutsche Welle’s Farsi service. Instead, Western countries should demand new elections in Iran under independent, international supervision. ‘If Ahmadinejad really won the election by a landslide as the official results claim, then what is the government afraid of?’

“It is crucial that Europe doesn’t just remain on the sidelines this time, argues Bernd Kaussler, an Iran expert at James Madison University… Kaussler admits that Europe is in a difficult position, but says it could lose all of its credibility with reform-minded Iranians if it doesn’t act now… Kaussler agrees with Faroughi that the West should not recognize Ahmadinejad as the winner of the election. While the EU and the US shouldn’t endorse his opponent Mir Hossein Mousavi in order not to meddle too much in Iranian affairs, they should highlight human rights violations and demand freedom of expression in Iran. ‘It could start with the European Parliament issuing a resolution claiming solidarity with the Iranians.'”

The article also published the following chart, explaining more fully the rather complicated Iranian governmental system or power structure.

Exiled Son of Shah Warns of Nuclear War

AFP wrote on June 22:

“The exiled son of the late shah of Iran, Reza Pahlavi, warned Monday of dire consequences for the volatile Middle East and the rest of the world if the popular uprising in Iran is crushed. The defeat of the movement protesting the outcome of presidential elections… would not only threaten global stability but could lead to nuclear war, Pahlavi [said].”

Iran Plays Hardball–Attacks Britain…

USA Today reported on June 23:

“Iran’s rulers stiffened their stance against protesters Tuesday, firmly rejecting demands to annul the election over fraud allegations, setting up a special court for detained demonstrators and keeping troops in riot gear on the streets to break up any gatherings. Iran also expelled two British diplomats Tuesday after bitterly accusing Britain of meddling and spying… During Friday prayers at Tehran University, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei lashed out against Western countries he said were displaying their ‘enmity’ against the Islamic state, ‘and the most evil of them is the British government’…

“In a boost for the embattled regime, Russia said Tuesday that it respects the declared election result. But France summoned Iran’s ambassador to express concern about what it called ‘brutal repression’ of protesters in Tehran.”

The Telegraph reported on June 24 that “Britain… was throwing out two Iranian diplomats in response to Tehran’s expulsion of two British diplomats.”

The Times wrote on June 25:

“In a briefing to heads of foreign missions in Tehran this week, Manochehr Mottaki, the Foreign Minister of the Islamic Republic of Iran… reserved his severest criticism for Britain. In what must rank as one of the most idiotic statements made by a serving Foreign Minister of an Iranian Government, Mr Mottaki charged that ‘they [the British Government] sent planes full of passengers to Iran with special intelligence and security ambitions’…

“The madness does, of course, have some method attached to it. It… plays to a particular constituency in Iran, which still sees Britain as the root of all evil.”

… and the USA

Reuters reported on June 25:

“Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad accused President Barack Obama on Thursday of behaving like his predecessor toward Iran and said there is not much point in talking to Washington unless Obama apologizes. Obama said on Tuesday he was ‘appalled and outraged’ by a post-election crackdown, and Washington withdrew invitations to Iranian diplomats to attend U.S. Independence Day celebrations on July 4, stalling efforts to improve ties with Tehran…”

The Times added on June 25:

“Hugo Chavez, the President of Venezuela who is an ally of Mr Ahmadinejad, [said about the demonstrations in Iran], ‘People are in the streets, some are dead, they have snipers, and behind this is the CIA, the imperial hand of European countries and the United States.'”

The irony is that, according to Western reports, Iran might be using terrorists from Hamas and Hezbollah to brutally suppress the demonstrations in Iran.

Iran’s Turmoil Unsettles the Middle East

The Wall Street Journal wrote on June 24:

“The turmoil in Iran is threatening to reshape the balance of power in the Middle East, denting the Islamic Republic’s regional standing and spooking some Arab regimes with the specter of similar people-power uprisings. Whether or not the protests over Iran’s disputed June 12 presidential election endanger President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or the Islamic Republic itself, the crisis — Iran’s gravest internal challenge since the 1979 Islamic revolution — has already triggered repercussions well beyond the country’s borders…

“Iran-backed movements that the U.S. considers terrorists, such as Hezbollah in Lebanon and Hamas in the Palestinian lands… [put] moderate Arab states such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia on the defensive. But, over the past week, the vivid TV images of Iranian security forces and Basij militias beating and killing unarmed protesters, including women, on the streets of Tehran have punctured the Islamic Republic’s carefully constructed image as a champion of the oppressed masses…

“Even Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood, whose leaders used to praise Mr. Ahmadinejad’s radical views, seems dumbfounded by the upheaval. ‘People are confused about what’s happening in Iran,’ says the head of the brotherhood’s political bureau, Essam el Erian. On one hand, he explains, many Arabs share Mr. Ahmadinejad’s hostility to Israel and the U.S. Yet, he adds, they also admire the courage of Iranian protesters and can relate to their cause, because elections in most Arab countries are either falsified or not held at all…

“Arab governments seem equally at a loss over how to react to the Iranian protests. In Bahrain, a Shiite-majority country ruled by a Sunni royal family, the government, seemingly fearful of provoking Tehran, this week temporarily closed the nation’s oldest newspaper, Akhbar al Khaleej. The reason: a column, written by a government-appointed member of the country’s legislature that attacked Mr. Ahmadinejad and Iran’s theocratic system. In nearby Saudi Arabia, as well as in Egypt, state media gave relatively little prominence to Iranian protests.

“But the Saudi-backed al Arabiya satellite TV channel… was airing such sympathetic coverage of pro-democracy campaigners in Iran that the Iranian regime shut down the network’s Tehran bureau…

“In Palestine, Iran is the key supporter of Hamas, the Islamist movement that controls the Gaza Strip and fought a bloody war against Israel in January. Palestinians have long been grateful to Iran for its unflinching support against Israel… The supporters of Hamas ‘will remain sympathetic to Iran no matter what,’ estimates Ghassan Khatib, a former Palestinian Authority government minister and peace negotiator… In Lebanon, Hezbollah… has been even more defensive of the Iranian regime, and more scornful of pro-Mousavi protesters… Hezbollah remains a formidable force, and turmoil in Iran is unlikely to weaken its hold over Lebanon’s large Shiite community…”

Israel and Iran–Is Nuclear Apocalypse Inevitable?

On June 22, Der Spiegel Online published an article on Iran and Israel, with the following headline: “HEADING FOR A NUCLEAR APOCALYPSE.” It continued with the following question: “Is War between Iran and Israel Inevitable?”

The magazine went on to say:

“There is every indication that the coming nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran — if, indeed, they begin in the next few months with Ahmadinejad still Iranian president — will end in a stalemate by the end of the year. If that happens, US President Barack Obama will push for tougher sanctions against Tehran in early 2010, with the reluctant support of the Russians and Chinese. The leadership in Tehran will interpret this as an aggressive act and will likely speed up its uranium enrichment, meaning that Iran will only be a few months away from having the capability to build a nuclear bomb. At some point next spring, things could have proceeded so far that the Israelis could decide, even without Washington’s approval, to launch attacks against Iranian nuclear facilities. The entire Middle East would see thousands of casualties, and the consequences for the global economy would be devastating.

“To understand what motivates the Iranian president and the Israeli prime minister, and what convictions guide their policies, it is important to examine the deeply religious ideas that shape both Ahmadinejad and Netanyahu and practically destine them to clash with each other: the theology of the [fundamentalist] Islamic Haqqani school and the Jewish concept of Amalek…

“The so-called Mahdists [of the Haqqani school] around… Ahmadinejad believe that their Twelfth Imam disappeared from the face of the earth in the 9th century because Allah the Almighty hid him to put mankind to a test. They also believe that this Twelfth Imam, or Mahdi, will return to the earth… The Mahdi… will create a paradise on earth for believers and condemn blasphemers to eternal damnation. But he will only return when the world has undergone a catharsis, a whirling, gigantic, cleansing upheaval…

“In a face-to-face conversation, Ahmadinejad can be polite, even charming… But he also has a different, mystical side. He considers himself chosen. In a meeting with Iranian members of parliament, Ahmadinejad claimed that he was surrounded by a light when he addressed the United Nations General Assembly in New York, and that the light silenced the leaders of other countries in the audience during his speech…

“Benjamin Netanyahu… has repeated his mantra that the Iranian nuclear program is the greatest threat Israel has confronted ‘since its creation in 1948.’ The liberal and consistently well-informed Israeli daily Haaretz wrote: ‘Politicians in touch with Netanyahu say he has already made up his mind to destroy Iran’s nuclear installations’ — apparently without Washington’s approval.

“What could make the Israeli prime minister feel so confident that he is doing the right thing, given the potentially serious consequences of such a military strike, which could range from Iran firing missiles at Tel Aviv to a wave of Hezbollah and Hamas terrorist attacks, not to mention the damage this would do to Israel’s relations with the United States, whose backing is critical to its survival?…

“When American author and Israel expert Jeffrey Goldberg recently asked a Netanyahu confidant to explain this fixation, he simply replied: ‘Think Amalek.’… In a biblical context, Amalek was the grandson of Esau who, with his tribal warriors from Canaan, launched a treacherous and unprovoked attack on the Hebrews as they were traveling to the Holy Land, Eretz Israel. In a broader sense, the term Amalek refers to the existential threat to Judaism at all times, under all circumstances and by all enemies… Those who, like Netanyahu, see Iran’s nuclear program as Amalek’s arsenal of weapons, are not just entitled, but are in fact obligated, to take preventive measures to destroy it…

“Is a coming war virtually unavoidable?…  the signs are currently pointing to stormy weather ahead…”

The Threat of North Korea

The Associated Press reported on June 22:

“President Barack Obama assured Americans in an interview broadcast Monday that the U.S. is prepared for any move North Korea might make, amid reports that Pyongyang is planning a long-range missile test to follow up its provocative nuclear test last month. Defense Secretary Robert Gates has ordered additional protection for Hawaii as a precaution, though experts say North Korea doesn’t yet have a ballistic missile that can reach Hawaii and has not mastered mounting a nuclear bomb on a long-range missile. Still, North Korea declared itself a ‘proud nuclear power’ and warned it will strike if provoked… The U.S…. has 28,500 troops in South Korea…”

The Associated Press added on June 24:

“North Korea has said it would consider interception of its ships a declaration of war, and on Wednesday accused the U.S. of seeking to start another Korean War… The warning came on the eve of the 59th anniversary of the outbreak of the Korean War. The brutal fighting ended after three years in a truce in 1953, not a peace treaty, leaving the peninsula divided and in a state of war.”

No Peace in Iraq!

BBC News reported on June 25:

“At least 69 people have been killed by a bomb blast in the eastern Sadr City area of Baghdad… More than 130 people were also reported to have been injured in the blast, one of the worst in Iraq this year. It comes less than a week before US soldiers pull out of all Iraqi cities, a move the US said would not be affected by a recent surge in violence… Under an agreement with the Iraqi authorities, most of the 133,000 US troops in Iraq are due to leave the country’s cities and towns and withdraw to military bases by 30 June. Combat operations across Iraq are due to end by September 2010 and all US troops will be out of the country by the end of 2011…

“The attacks are the latest in a violent week in Iraq. On Monday, at least 29 people were killed in attacks in Baghdad and elsewhere… In the largest attack of the year, more than 70 people died in a truck bombing in Kirkuk on Saturday. But Iraq’s Prime Minister Nouri Maliki has said the violence will not delay the withdrawal which, he said, would ultimately be a triumph for the country.”

War in Afghanistan

Deutsche Welle reported on June 25:

“German Defense Minister Jung has insisted that Germany is not fighting a war in Afghanistan, rejecting calls for such an admission after three German soldiers died in the country this week. The parliamentary commissioner for the armed forces, Reinhold Robbe, on Wednesday called on the German government to recognize it was fighting a war in Afghanistan…

“Around 700 German troops are based in the Kundus region in the north of Afghanistan, a region previously considered relatively safe. Taliban fighters have become increasingly active in a region around Kundus known as Char Dara, where Tuesday’s attack took place. In June alone there were 30 Taliban attacks on German soldiers, putting the soldiers under daily fire…

“Germany has the third-largest contingent in the NATO-led force in Afghanistan, with about 3,380 troops. Despite US pressure to contribute troops to the more restive southern provinces where members of NATO and US soldiers have been fighting the Taliban since the 2001 invasion that ousted the group from power, the German army has focused on the Regional Command North…”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 25:

“Germany’s military presence in Afghanistan is deeply unpopular at home. But even after spending seven years there and losing 35 soldiers, many German politicians still refuse to call it a ‘war.’ German commentators argue Thursday that the government is afraid to tell the truth…

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘… Afghanistan is the Bundeswehr’s first wartime deployment…’

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes: ‘… There is no doubt that the number of people in Germany who disapprove of the mission in Afghanistan is very high… When the Bundeswehr is getting into firefights with Taliban militants on an almost daily basis, and when soldiers are dying in these exchanges, then that is war… The fact that the government still refuses to acknowledge this isn’t merely disrespectful to the soldiers putting their lives on the line in the Hindu Kush to defend Germany. It’s also completely useless in terms of political strategy.’

“The left-leaning Berliner Zeitung writes: ‘It would help if the Defense Ministry would just… be clear for once about why it is so adamant about not using the term “war”… the government’s insistence on using vague terminology makes it sound like it’s afraid of the truth.'”

California’s Tax Increases

SF Gate wrote on June 23:

“To help balance its budget, California has reduced the state tax credit for dependents. The change will increase a family’s California taxes for 2009 by about $210 per dependent compared with 2008… At issue is the exemption you get for each person listed on your tax return… If you are in this boat and would rather not face a big tax bill early next year, you could pay more state tax this year, either by increasing the amount withheld from your paycheck or – if you are self-employed – by making bigger estimated quarterly tax payments…

“At the same time it slashed the dependent credit, the state also raised all tax rates by one-quarter of 1 percent… The state sent new tax-withholding tables reflecting this change to employers in April. Employers should have started using them in May. Many employees will have been underwithheld for the first four months of the year. That means a slightly bigger tax bill (or smaller refund) when they file their 2009 taxes…”

Healthcare Promises Just That–Empty Words?

The Associated Press reported on June 24:

“President Barack Obama left the door open to a new tax on health care benefits Wednesday… ‘I don’t want to prejudge what they’re doing,’ the president said, referring to proposals in the Senate to tax workers who get expensive insurance policies. Obama, who campaigned against the tax when he ran for president, drew a quick rebuff from one union president… It was the latest in a series of signs of presidential flexibility…”

Is the Great Depression Coming…?

Newsmax.com wrote on June 23:

“Is Obama leading the nation into an economic train wreck? Dick Morris, one of America’s astute political observers, the person Time magazine called the most influential man in America, says, ‘Yes!’ Morris reveals that Obama’s policies and clear shift toward socialism will actually lead the country toward a 1930s-style Great Depression. In his newest blockbuster book ‘Catastrophe’ Dick lays out the shocking economic data — much of which has been hidden by the major media. Dick also reveals how Obama’s massive deficit spending will cause a tidal wave of inflation — which will shock the economy — at some point in the near future.”

Huckabee Attacks Establishment Republicans

Newsmax.com wrote on June 24:

“Signaling wider dissensions in the Republican ranks, former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate Mike Huckabee is slamming the National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) for endorsing Gov. Charlie Crist over another, more conservative Republican in Florida’s open Senate race… ‘I’m disgusted that they would take a position in a hotly contested race when you have a quality candidate like Marco Rubio, who was the youngest Speaker in the Florida House,’ Huckabee told The Hill. ‘This is not just some nameless, faceless guy that decided to throw his name in, who had no chance and no credibility.’

“He continued: ‘I thought that their endorsement not only was premature, but was outrageous. And they ought to get behind the guy who would do a whole lot more, in my mind, to unite and fire up Republicans, and that’s Marco Rubio. The establishment Republicans have made this endorsement for the same reason that they’re in so much trouble,’ Huckabee said. ‘They go out there and support stuff like TARP bills and stimulus packages, pork-barrel spending and huge debt, and they wring their hands and act like, “This is not good, but we don’t have a choice.”‘

Ron Paul Attacks Obama and Congress

Newsmax.com wrote on June 24:

“U.S. Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, says he was dismayed that Congress passed the war supplemental appropriations bill so easily last week. ‘An economic collapse seems to be the goal of Congress and this administration,’ Paul said during his weekly radio address Monday…

“Mocking the idea that Obama was a ‘peace candidate,’ Paul pointed out that his administration will be sending another $106 billion it doesn’t have ‘to continue the bloodshed in Afghanistan and Iraq…’ Paul noted that many of his congressional colleagues who previously voted with him in opposition to every war supplemental request under the Bush administration seem to have changed their tune…

“The emergency supplemental appropriations bill sends… $660 million to Gaza… $555 million to Israel… $310 million to Egypt… $300 million to Jordan… $420 million to Mexico… $889 million to the United Nations for so-called ‘peace-keeping’ missions… $1 billion overseas to address the global financial crisis outside U.S. borders… [and] $8 billion to address a potential pandemic flu, which [Paul] said could result in mandatory vaccinations ‘for no discernable reason other than to enrich the pharmaceutical companies’…”

Obama and Bush–Two of a Kind?

Der Spiegel Online wrote on June 25:

“The occupant of the White House may have changed recently. But the amount of ill-advised ideology coming from Washington has remained constant. Obama’s list of economic errors is long — and continues to grow. The president may have changed, but the excesses of American politics have remained. Barack Obama and George W. Bush, it has become clear, are more similar than they might seem at first glance.

“Ex-President Bush was nothing if not zealous in his worldwide campaign against terror, transgressing human rights and breaking international law along the way. Now, Obama is displaying the same zeal in his own war against the financial crisis — and his weapon of choice is the money-printing machine. The rules the new American president is breaking are those which govern the economy. Nobody is being killed. But the strategy comes at a price — and that price might be America’s position as a global power.

“In his fight against terrorism, Bush had the ideologue Dick Cheney at his side… Obama’s Cheney is named Larry Summers… President Barack Obama follows him like a dog does its master… Summers [said]  that the way to bring about an end to the crisis was — more confidence, more credit and more debt… Experts and non-experts alike were perplexed… Summers was unable to supply an adequate explanation for how a crisis caused by frivolous lending was going to be solved through yet more frivolity…

“Just as the US public initially rallied behind the war President Bush — even to the point of re-electing him — Americans have now thrown their support behind the debt president Obama. The mistakes of the Bush administration are now widely accepted. The mistakes of the Obama administration are still not recognized as such…

“According to conservative forecasts, Obama’s policies could end up being three times as expensive as US expenditures during World War II. If one calculates using today’s prices, America spent $3 trillion for the war. Obama’s budgetary calculations for the decade between 2010 and 2020 assume additional debt of $9 trillion.

“American borrowing in 2009 comprises about half of Obama’s budget. The country is living beyond its means — and it still would have been even if it weren’t for the economic crisis…

“Many believe that when the crisis ends, borrowing will automatically fall. The truth is that it could climb afterwards… Washington would need to spend several times more than it is now just to service current pension entitlements and the free, state-funded medical care provided to senior citizens. In addition, Obama has promised to introduce healthcare coverage for America’s close to 46 million uninsured…

“… trust in the gravitas and reliability of the United States has suffered to such a great degree that fewer and fewer foreigners are purchasing its government bonds…

“The supply of money has increased by 45 percent in the last three years and there has not been a corresponding rise in hard assets or production. That imbalance will eventually make itself felt in the form of inflation. The dollar, which has already lost 40 percent of its value against the euro since 2000, would then devaluate and its reputation would be further diminished…”

Much prophetic speculation has ensued pertaining to Nebuchadnezzar’s dream in Daniel 4, but if we allow the Bible to interpret itself, the answer to the meaning of that dream becomes very clear.

Note, first, the following highlights from that chapter. We are told that Nebuchadnezzar had a dream which made him afraid (verse 5), but none of the “wise men of Babylon” could explain the meaning of the dream. Finally, Daniel was brought before the king (verse 8). We will recall that Daniel had explained to the king his first dream about a statue, as recorded in Daniel 2.

Nebuchadnezzar described to Daniel his second dream and asked him to interpret the same for him. In the dream, Nebuchadnezzar had seen a strong tree, which was cut down, but the stump and roots in the earth would be preserved, “bound with a band of iron and bronze” (verse 15). Showing that the dream did not refer to an ordinary tree, the king continued to describe to Daniel that a watcher from heaven said: “The heart be changed from that of a man, Let him be given the heart of a beast, And let seven times pass over him” (verse 16).

Daniel proceeded to explain the meaning of the dream, as follows:

“(20) The tree that you saw, which grew and became strong… (22) It is you, O king, who have grown and become strong… (23) And inasmuch as the king saw a watcher, a holy one, coming down from heaven and saying, ‘Chop down the tree and destroy it, but leave its stump and roots in the earth, bound with a band of iron and bronze in the tender grass of the field; let it be wet with the dew of heaven, and let him graze with the beasts of the field, till seven times pass over him’; (24) THIS IS THE INTERPRETATION, O KING, and this is the decree of the Most High… (25) They shall drive you from men, your dwelling shall be with the beasts of the field, and they shall make you eat grass like oxen. They shall wet you with the dew of heaven, and seven times shall pass OVER YOU, till you know that the Most High rules in the kingdom of men, and gives it to whomever He chooses. (26) And inasmuch as they gave the command to leave the stump and roots of the tree, YOUR KINGDOM shall be assured TO YOU, AFTER YOU COME TO KNOW THAT HEAVEN RULES…'”

After about twelve months, the fulfillment of the dream began to come to pass. Nebuchadnezzar, in his pride, glorified himself rather than God, and immediately, he was driven out from men to live with the beasts “for seven times,” until, “at the end of the time,” his understanding and his reason returned to him (verses 32, 34, 36). Nebuchadnezzar is reported as saying: “…I was restored to my kingdom, and excellent majesty was added to me. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise and extol and honor the King of heaven, all of whose works are truth, and His ways justice. And those who walk in pride He is able to put down” (Daniel 4:36-37).

Please note that this dream is strictly talking about events in Nebuchadnezzar’s life. The dream referred specifically and exclusively to him–and not to anyone coming after him. Compare again Daniel 4:22, 25, 26, 32-33, 34.

This is remarkable because Nebuchadnezzar’s first dream in Daniel 2 clearly is said to refer to future times and kingdoms, beginning with Nebuchadnezzar, and ending with the return of Christ. Nothing similar is remotely suggested to apply to Nebuchadnezzar’s second dream in Daniel 4.

Let’s notice what is said specifically in and about that dream:

(1) The Cut-Down Tree

Verse 14 tells us that the tree was to be cut down and that the beasts were commanded to flee away from under its branches. This means that the king’s courtiers, officers, etc., all abandoned him as soon as his insanity appeared; and he soon fled from the society of men (compare Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible).

(2) The Stump and the Roots Remain

Verse 15 tells us that the stump and the roots should be left. Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible explains:

“The word here used [for “stump”] implies that it was still alive, or that there was a germ which would send up a new shoot, so that the tree would live again. The idea is, that though the mighty tree would fall, yet there would remain vitality in the root, or the portion that would remain in the earth after the tree was cut down, and that this would spring up again – a most striking image of what would occur to Nebuchadnezzar after he should be cast down from his lofty throne, and be again restored to his reason and to power.”

(3) Stump Bound With Band of Iron and Brass

We are also told, in verse 15, that the stump would be bound with “a band of iron and brass.”

Barnes explains:

“This expression may be regarded as applicable either to the cut-down tree, or to the humbled monarch. If applied to the former, it would seem that the idea is, that the stump or root of a tree, deemed so valuable, would be carefully secured by an enclosure of iron or brass, either in the form of a hoop placed round the top of the stump, to preserve it from being opened or cracked by the heat of the sun, so as to admit moisture, which would rot it; or around the roots, to bind it together, with the hope that it would grow again; or it may refer to a railing or enclosure of iron or brass, to keep it from being plowed or dug up as worthless. In either case, it would be guarded with the hope that a tree so valuable might spring up again.

“If applied to the monarch – an explanation not inconsistent with the proper interpretation of the passage – it would seem to refer to some method of securing the royal maniac in bonds of iron and brass, as with the hope that his reason might still be restored, or with a view to keep him from inflicting fatal injury on himself. That the thing here referred to might be practiced in regard to a valuable tree cut down, or broken down, is by no means improbable; that it might be practiced in reference to the monarch is in accordance with the manner in which the insane have been treated in all ages and countries.”

John Gill’s Exposition to the Entire Bible adds:

“… the allusion is to his distracted condition afterwards related; it being usual to bind madmen with chains of iron or brass, to keep them from hurting themselves and others, as in [Mark 5:4].”

(4) Heart Changed for Seven Times

Verse 16 explains that the king’s heart would be changed for seven times.

Barnes states regarding the king’s changed heart:

“… some man was represented by the vision… The word heart here seems to refer to nature – ‘let his nature or propensity cease to be that of a man, and become like that of a beast; let him cease to act as a man, and act as the beasts do…'”

Regarding “seven times,” Barnes points out:

“The more common interpretation is what supposes that it was a year, and this will agree better with all the circumstances of the case than any other period… Josephus understands by it ‘seven years’… While the Chaldee word is indeterminate in respect to the length of time, the most natural and obvious construction here and elsewhere, in the use of the word, is to refer it to years. Days or weeks would be obviously too short, and though in this place the word ‘months’ would perhaps embrace all that would be necessary, yet in the other places where the word occurs in Daniel it undoubtedly refers to years, and there is, therefore, a propriety in understanding it in the same manner here.”

The Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge agrees, stating: “seven times: That is, seven years, a time in the prophetic language denoting a year.”

The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown agrees (“times — that is, ‘years.'”); and so do Gill (“seven years are meant”); and Adam Clarke’s Commentary on the Bible, where we read:

“Let him continue in this state for seven years. I knew a man who was thus changed in his heart – in his imagination. He believed himself to be a bear, and would imitate the usual growl, etc.; and the case did not appear to be hypochondriacal. Whether he ever came to sound mind, I kno
w not.”

(5) The King’s Restoration

After seven years of insanity, King Nebuchadnezzar became sane again and was restored to his kingdom, as was also clearly announced in the dream (verse 26).

Clarke writes:

“No new king was set up; Evil-merodach his son was regent during his father’s insanity.”

Gill adds:

“… another king should not be set up in his place; and though the kingdom and administration of it would depart from him for a while, yet it would be restored again, and be firm and stable…”

Verse 34 tells us that “at the end of the days,” Nebuchadnezzar was restored to sanity. As Barnes explains, “That is, the time designated; to wit, the ‘seven times’ that were to pass over him.” Gill adds that that phrase means: “Of the time fixed in the dream; that is, at the end of seven years.”

(6) The Lion and the Man

Another reference to that incident is found in Daniel 7 where Daniel sees four beasts in a dream, representing four world-ruling kingdoms which would come up from the sea and arise out of the earth (verses 3, 17). The first beast was the Babylonian Empire under King Nebuchadnezzar. Verse 4 tells us that it “was like a lion, and had eagle’s wings… till its wings were plucked off; and it was lifted up from the earth and made to stand on two feet like a man, and a man’s heart was given to it.” The reference to Nebuchadnezzar is unmistakable, who was living with the beasts for seven years–with the heart of an animal–and who was then restored by receiving again the heart of a man.

The commentary of Jamieson, Fausset and Brown explains this passage as follows:

“Nebuchadnezzar is called ‘the lion’ [Jeremiah 4:7]… So long as Nebuchadnezzar, in haughty pride, relied on his own strength, he forfeited the true dignity of man, and was therefore degraded to be with the beasts. [Daniel 4:16]: ‘Let his heart be changed from man’s, and let a beast’s heart be given unto him.’ But after he learned by this sore discipline that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men’ [Daniel 4:35, 36], the change took place in him, ‘a man’s heart is given to him’; instead of his former beast’s heart, he attains man’s true position, namely, to be consciously dependent on God.”

(7) Conclusion

It is abundantly clear from the biblical description of the dream and its interpretation, that the dream referred strictly and exclusively to the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity and subsequent discovery.

We are aware that some have alleged over the years that Daniel 4 would also refer to the curse or punishment of the Babylonian Empire for seven “prophetic” times or 2,520 years, beginning with the fall of Babylon in 539 B.C. They have also claimed that somehow, ancient Babylon would be restored to power after the time of its punishment, and that Christ’s reference in Luke 21:24 to the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles (see previous Q&A), would be somehow related to that punishment and/or restoration of Babylon.

However, there is no biblical support for any of these concepts. A follow-up Q&A will discuss in more detail why all of these speculations are faulty.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

As announced in our previous Update, our newest booklet, “The Book of Zechariah–Prophecies for Today,” is being printed in England. At the same time, our booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound…” is being reprinted in England.

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch and YouTube. It is titled, Fixing Healthcare Through Brainwashing? In the program, Norbert Link points out that the U.S. healthcare system is broken and needs to be fixed, but the procedures employed by some politicians and parts of the media are highly problematic and dangerous.

A new German “AufPostenStehen” program, titled, “Irans Gefaehrliche Zukunft”  (“Iran’s Dangerous Future”) was posted on YouTube and our German Website.

Norbert Link’s recent video-recorded sermon, “The Wisdom of Solomon,” dated June 13, 2009, was posted on the Audio page of our Web, under “Sermon Videos.”

A new German sermon (“War und Ist Christus Gott?”) was recorded this week, addressing the fact that God the Father created everything through Jesus Christ; that Christ existed as God prior to His birth as a man, and that He is God today–the second member of the God Family. Also, that He was the God of the Old Testament Who wrestled with Jacob, spoke with Abraham and Moses, and led Israel out of Egypt.

Our Internet campaign in the USA has so far resulted in more than 80 requests for our booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.” In addition, almost 75 people requested our free booklet, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World,” which is also offered in the Internet ad. We have also just begun to run Internet ads for these two booklets in Canada. So far, 13 people requested the Great Tribulation booklet, and 10 the Angels and Demons booklet.

Our Internet campaign in the UK has resulted so far in almost 120 requests for our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

On June 20, 2009, Dave Harris will give the sermon, titled, “A Priesthood.”

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.

Week after week we witness the ongoing problems that this world is faced with, whether it be the economy, violence and terror, and/or even religious persecution.  We know that these things are coming to pass, as predicted in our booklets, our weekly StandingWatch programs and our weekly Updates, which are all based on the Bible. We also know that our religious beliefs will cause a bitter taste in people’s mouths, because they just don’t understand the truth that we have come to believe. Since Church members–those who have been called out of this world–are just a handful in comparison with all humans alive today, we must ask ourselves how strong OUR faith is.  And since faith grows through tests, how is our faith being tested?

Abraham had to have faith when he was tested. Hebrews 11:17 tells us that he was even willing to offer up his son Isaac, in order to obey God. Abraham was tested by God to see how strong his faith was, to do the unthinkable, offering his son of promise. At that time, Isaac did not have any children. Therefore, Abraham had to put all his trust in God that He would provide and fulfill His promise that he would have descendants through his son Isaac (compare Hebrews 11:18-19). 

Jesus Christ was also tested numerous times. He was even tempted by Satan, as Matthew 4:1-11 records. In that passage, Satan tempted Christ three times and failed. Christ was stronger than Satan.

We should also be the same way, when God tests us or when Satan tempts us.

We have to be careful, however, that we don’t test God, by testing faith. We must abstain from testing God’s power by assuming that God would intervene when we don’t fulfill our part–including taking necessary precautions or actions. When our health is involved, for example, if we think that we will never get hurt or sick or refuse to live in a healthy way, then we should reconsider our thinking. Needless to say, we all have to have the faith that God will heal us, when we are sick. We need to do our part by praying fervently in faith; confessing our trespasses to one another and thereby striving for reconciliation with each other; and asking for anointing by God’s ministry. And we shouldn’t test faith, by refusing to take affordable necessary  medication or by neglecting to reasonably avail ourselves of affordable competent medical help.

We must not–nor do we need to–test God. God tests us to see if we will succeed–having the confidence that we will. Jesus Christ says in Matthew 4:7 that we should not “put the Lord… to the test” (New Revised Standard Version). God tests our faith through trials and tribulations–especially now, as the end draws near. And Satan tempts us, hoping that we will fail the test and sin. He is like a roaring lion, seeking whom he may devour and destroy.

We are a very small group with a big potential. That is why we must continue to remain strong and confident. God promises us that no trial or temptation will be too difficult for us, and that we, with God’s help, can pass every test (compare 1 Corinthians 10:13).

The possibly staged re-election of Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad dominated the press coverage as much as the long-awaited speech of Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu.

Reactions to both events were filled with disappointment, skepticism and the realization that prospects of peace in the Middle East are as far removed as ever–since no real solution has been found in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict; Iran’s “insane” old and new dictatorial “undemocratic” leadership will not halt their nuclear ambitions; and an Israeli “pre-emptive” strike on Iran is becoming more and more likely–a fact which Secretary of State Hillary Clinton publicly acknowledged. 

Other news in this issue concentrate on North Korea’s threat to begin a nuclear war and firing a missile towards Hawaii; the ever-increasing “gay rights movement” in the USA and other parts around the world, including Israel; the discussions pertaining to President Obama’s healthcare proposals; proposals to spend more than $100 billion dollars for U.S. war efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan; ways to spend stimulus money for fish food and to save money by bulldozing major American cities; the ever-increasing troubles for Britain’s economy, including British Airways; and the acknowledgment that the transmission of the swine flu virus to humans occurred several months before the existing outbreak was recognized.

A Deeply Divided Iran

Der Spiegel wrote on June 15:

“Protesters took to the streets of Iran this weekend to vent their frustration and dismay at President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s landslide election victory… However, the 63 percent with which Ahmadinejad trounced his rival’s 34 percent — and avoided a run-off — left many questioning whether there had been irregularities in the vote and subsequent count…

“While Iran’s supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, initially endorsed the result, he has now ordered an investigation into the claims of vote-rigging and has called on [main challenger] Mousavi to pursue his appeal ‘calmly and legally.’ The powerful Guardian Council said on Monday that it would rule within 10 days on the complaints it had received.

“Protests by thousands of dismayed Mousavi supporters over the weekend have marked the most blatant show of discontent in Iran in years… Ahead of the elections, the hardline Revolutionary Guard had already warned that it would not tolerate a ‘velvet revolution’ in Iran…

“German newspapers on Monday are agreed the results point to a deeply divided Iran…

“The center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘…The Islamic Republic has become increasingly militarized in recent years. Ahmadinejad has deliberately strengthened the Revolutionary Guard and they won’t hesitate to use force if they get the order.’…

“The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes: ‘The Islamic Republic of Iran was never a true democracy and it didn’t want to be one. The hardliners always made sure that only candidates loyal to the regime could stand for election… The armed forces are the ones with the power… With Ahmadinejad, the Islamic Republic… is slowly becoming an authoritarian military dictatorship…'”

Not Without Cheating…

Die Welt Online wrote on June 13:

“Iranian and Western analysts abroad greeted the results with disbelief… ‘It doesn’t augur well for an early and peaceful settlement of the nuclear dispute,’ said Mark Fitzpatrick at London’s International Institute for Strategic Studies… Trita Parsi, president of the Washington-based National Iranian American Council, expressed astonishment at the wide margin in Ahmadinejad’s favour. ‘It is difficult to feel comfortable that this occurred without any cheating,’ he said…

“‘If there was a shadow of hope for a change in Iran, the renewed choice of Ahmadinejad expresses more than anything the growing Iranian threat,’ Israel’s Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said in a statement. ‘The international community must stop a nuclear Iran and Iranian terror immediately.'”

Reports from Iran…

The Iranian state-run publication, Press TV, reported on June 14:

“The landslide victory of Iran’s Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in the June 12 presidential elections has garnered a mixed response in the World political scene. Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez was among the first world leaders to congratulate his Iranian counterpart…

“Pakistan’s President, Asif Ali Zardari, Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani, and Afghan President Hamid Karzai conveyed their separate congratulatory messages to President Ahmadinejad on Sunday. In the Arab world, Arab League Secretary General Amr Moussa congratulated Ahmadinejad on his historic election win, saying that he hopes his re-appointment would promote better relations between Iran and Arab countries.

“The Amir of Qatar, Sheikh Hamad Bin Khalifa Al-Thani, also lauded Ahmadinejad’s re-election as Iranian president. Syrian President Bashar al-Assad sent a congratulatory message to his Iranian counterpart on Saturday, in which he wished the prosperity and wellfare of the Iranian people… Palestine’s Hamas Resistance, and Lebanon’s Hezbollah Movement, hailed President Ahmadinejad on his victory in separate messages…

“The Israeli officialdom, however, was quick to voice concern over Ahmadinejad’s election victory… US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also responded rather cautiously to Ahmadinejad’s landslide win. The European Union… has said it is concerned about the status in Iran…”

To their credit, Press TV also published numerous critical comments from readers. We are bringing you the following interesting samples:

“Iranian Taliban stole the peoples’ vote. This is worst than the Shah regime, and you [are] talking about other cultures? You brag about how much you are better than Israel and Wahabi Arabs! This is the worst theft in the history of Iran! Shah stole money. The Taliban Ahmadi and your so-called supreme leader are stealing the future of a generation of the Iranian people! This is a sad, sad day for Iran! Poor people of Iran!

“Something isn’t adding up and the press was declaring Ahmadinejad the victor less than an hour after the polls closed. It took the Americans days to count 100 million votes, how did we manage to count 40 million in a few hours?

“As an Iranian who lives in Tehran I can see that there is a real fraud in our election. Most of the people vote for Mr Mousavi even in Tehran. Over 10 million vote for him, but look at the result.

“What [is] the Corrupt Regime… going to do next? Taking away the short wave radios from people? Or perhaps disconnecting the telephones thus Internet?

“Mousavi lost in his own hometown? That alone shows this election was a fraud.”

USA Today added on June 18:

“The Iranian government has directly accused the United States of meddling in the deepening crisis. A statement by state-run Press TV blamed Washington for ‘intolerable’ interference. The report, on Press TV, cited no evidence.”

Iran’s Attempts to Control the Media

The Associated Press reported on June 14:

“Iranian authorities have asked some foreign journalists – in Iran to cover the elections – to prepare to leave. Nabil Khatib, executive news editor for Dubai-based news network Al Arabiya, said the station’s correspondent in Tehran was given a verbal order Sunday from Iranian authorities that the office will be closed for one week. No reason was given for the order, but the station was warned several times Saturday that they need to be careful in reporting ‘chaos’ accurately.

“Iran restored cell phone service that had been down in the capitol since Saturday. But Iranians could not send text messages from their phones, and the government increased its Internet filtering in an apparent attempt to undercut liberal voices. Social networking sites including Facebook and Twitter were also not working. The restrictions were likely intended to prevent Mousavi’s supporters from organizing large-scale protests…

“Mousavi’s newspaper, Kalemeh Sabz, or the Green Word, did not appear on newsstands Sunday. An editor, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the sensitivity of the situation, said the paper never left the printing house because authorities were upset with Mousavi’s statements. The paper’s Web site reported that more than 10 million votes in Friday’s election were missing national identification numbers similar to U.S. Social Security numbers, which make the votes ‘untraceable’…”

BBC News added on June 13:

“Riot police have used batons against a crowd of about 3,000 supporters of Mr Mousavi… The authorities had earlier sealed off Mr Mousavi’s campaign HQ, preventing his supporters from holding a news conference. Interior Minister Sadeq Mahsouli said that any demonstrations needed official permission, and none had been given… One opposition newspaper has been closed down and BBC websites also appear to have been blocked by the Iranian authorities.”

Bild Online reported on June 16:

“The Iranian government has begun clamping down on the foreign media. It has banned all foreign journalists from leaving their offices and reporting from the streets of the country. Journalists may only report from their desks and not interview members of the public or send any eyewitness accounts back home. The clampdown follows a ban on websites such as Facebook and the BBC’s Persian service.”

Violence Breaks Out in Iran

The Associated Press reported on June 15:

“In a massive outpouring reminiscent of the Islamic Revolution three decades ago, hundreds of thousands of Iranians streamed through the capital Monday, and the fist-waving protesters denounced President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s claim to victory in a disputed election. Standing on a roof, gunmen opened fire on a group of protesters who had tried to storm a pro-government militia’s compound…

“Angry men showed their bloody palms after cradling the dead and wounded who had been part of a crowd that stretched more than five miles (nearly 10 kilometers) supporting reform leader Mir Hossein Mousavi…”

Iran Orders Partial Re-Count

The Wall Street Journal reported June 16:

“Pro-government and opposition demonstrators poured into the streets of Iran’s capital Tuesday for a fourth day of sometimes-violent rallies, as the country’s religious leaders agreed to a partial recount of Friday’s disputed presidential vote. Amid the unrest, and more shooting by government-backed militia, authorities arrested prominent opposition leaders and clamped down on media covering the crisis.

“The demonstrations came hours after state media reported the top religious oversight council would examine Friday’s vote… Such a recount appears to be unprecedented, and it wasn’t immediately clear when it would begin, or how many voting sites would be included.

“Mr. Mousavi and the other two candidates announced the recount wouldn’t be acceptable to them. Representatives of the three candidates had met with the spokesperson of the Guardian Council on Tuesday morning and asked that the results be annulled and new elections be held. Alternatively, they asked that an independent committee, made of up of clerics, lawmakers and experts, review the charges of vote rigging.”

Mass Demonstrations Against Iran’s Government–While Obama “Plays It Safe”

Reuters reported on June 18:

“Tens of thousands of Iranians, wearing black and carrying candles, marched on Thursday to mourn those killed in mass protests against a presidential election they and defeated candidate Mirhossein Mousavi say was rigged… Chanting ‘Allahu Akbar’ (God is Greatest), they massed in downtown Imam Khomeini Square, responding to Mousavi’s call for people to gather in mosques or at peaceful rallies to show solidarity with the victims and their families.

“Days of public fury over the disputed election led Iran’s top legislative body, the Guardian Council, to invite Mousavi and the two other candidates beaten by hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to discuss their complaints on Saturday. The election has provoked Iran’s biggest and most violent demonstrations since the 1979 Islamic revolution, rocking the world’s fifth biggest oil exporter which is also caught up in a dispute with the West over its nuclear program.

“Iranian state media has reported seven or eight people killed in protests since the election results were published on June 13. Scores of reformists have been arrested across the country and authorities have cracked down on both foreign and domestic media… Other banners told protesters to stay home on Friday, when Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei is due to lead prayers in Tehran, but to gather again the next day in the capital…

“Ahmadinejad supporters are expected to show their strength when Khamenei leads Friday prayers at Tehran University. Iran has denounced foreign criticism of the election, although U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration has muted its comments to keep the door open for possible dialogue.”

Der Spiegel Online added on June 17:

“Barack Obama is taking a cautious approach to the disputed Iranian elections and has even said there is little difference between the candidates. The US president knows the ayatollahs wield the real power in Tehran — and doesn’t want to jeopardize negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program.”

“Permission to Lie About the Election”

The Australian wrote on June 15:

“AN Israeli analyst who had predicted widespread electoral fraud in Iran says the results amounted to the appointment of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad by clerics rather than a victory at the ballot box. ‘This was planned well ahead of time,’ said Menashe Amir, who has monitored the Iranian media for more than 20 years as head of the Persian desk at Israel Radio.

“‘Ahmadinejad was chosen to erase the democratic changes that have occurred in Iran over the years and return the country to the era of the Islamic revolution 30 years ago. ‘Mr Amir quoted a leading ayatollah as saying: ‘It is permitted to lie about the election results to bring victory to Islam.'”

Germany Takes the Lead

CNN reported on June 14:

“Germany is summoning the Iranian ambassador Monday to explain the disputed presidential election in the Middle Eastern nation, particularly the ‘brutal handling’ of protesters, the German foreign minister said. The move is noteworthy because global reaction to the Iranian election has been guarded [This changed subsequently, with the notable exception of President Obama.]

“In addition, Germany is one of Iran’s biggest trading partners and has taken the lead in trying to persuade it from developing a nuclear program. ‘I have already prompted Iran, together with European colleagues today, to quickly shed light on what has happened there — if one can take the announced election results there seriously or not,’ Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier told German public television station ARD on Sunday.”

No Big Difference

Der Stern Online wrote on June 17:

“U.S. President Barack Obama does obviously not have a high opinion of Iranian challenger Mir-Hussein Mussawi. The differences for a political change between Mahmud Ahmadinejad and his challenger are not as big as commonly assumed [according to Obama]. Independent from the outcome of the election, the US would have to face in both cases a regime which is hostile towards the US, which has caused some problems in its neighborhood, and which wants to produce nuclear weapons, Obama told the US channel CNBC.”

With this assessment, Barack Obama might very well be correct. For more information, please view our new StandingWatch program on YouTube, titled, “Will Iran’s 2009 Elections Change Anything?”

Is Improvement in the Middle East Possible?

The Associated Press wrote on June 15:

“The re-election of Iran’s hardline president and a tough speech by Israel’s hawkish prime minister signaled an increasingly difficult road ahead for President Barack Obama’s hopes for ending Tehran’s nuclear threat and brokering peace between Israel and the Palestinians. A setback on either foreign policy front would have been unwelcome in the Obama White House, but difficulties on both issues – which are deeply entangled – were likely to slow progress on the president’s ambition of changing the landscape across the Middle East…

“In Jerusalem, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is in an unusually open dispute with Obama over the path to peace with the Palestinians, the Israeli leader gave a major speech that was bound to have found a disappointed White House audience…

“Hamas is strongly backed by Iran and, like Ahmadinejad, calls for the destruction of Israel. Netanyahu and his backers see Israel as threatened on three fronts, all of them arising in Tehran. The Islamic regime’s perceived drive to build a nuclear bomb is viewed by Netanyahu as an existential threat to Israel. Lesser but more immediate dangers are seen to lie with Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran’s other proxy organization in the region. The two groups have routinely conducted harassing rocket attacks and incursions on Israel from Gaza in the south and Lebanon to the north, respectively.

“Counterbalancing the weekend’s discouraging news, however, was Hezbollah’s major and unforeseen setback in Lebanese elections last week. There also is growing concern in the larger Arab Middle East about Iran’s nuclear program. While both the Arabs and Iranians are Muslims, the Arabs are predominantly Sunni, while the Iranians are nearly all Shiite. Beyond that, Iranians are ethnic Persians and have been historically at odds with the Arabs.”

Hillary Clinton Does Not Rule Out Pre-Emptive Israeli Strike on Iran

The Times reported on June 8:

“Hillary Clinton refused yesterday to rule out a pre-emptive Israeli military strike on Iran. It was the first time that a senior member of the Obama Administration had openly discussed such a possibility. The US Secretary of State… also warned that [Iran] would face retaliation if it launched a nuclear attack on Israel…

“Mrs Clinton appeared ready to unnerve the Iranian leadership with talk of a pre-emptive strike ‘the way that we did attack Iraq’… Mrs Clinton… said that it was US policy that a nuclear attack by Iran on Israel would be seen as an attack on the US.

“’I don’t think there is any doubt in anyone’s mind that were Israel to suffer a nuclear attack by Iran, there would be retaliation,’ she said, though she did not spell out who would retaliate.”

Netanyahu’s Speech Defied Obama’s Demands

The Times reported on June 14:

“Binyamin Netanyahu tonight endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state after weeks of pressure from Washington, but defied President Obama’s demand for a halt to all settlements. In a high-profile speech that the Palestinian administration of Mahmoud Abbas said ‘hobbles all efforts to save the peace process’, the Israeli Prime Minister said that the Palestinians must recognise Israel as a ‘Jewish state’ and that any future Palestinian state had to be demilitarised…

“Mr Netanyahu also ruled out a complete halt to settlement activity and said that Palestinian refugees dating from the 1948 creation of Israel, and their descendants, would not be resettled inside Israel’s borders…

“The former US President Jimmy Carter told the Israeli daily Haaretz on Sunday that Israel risked a head-on collision with Washington over the settlements. Washington provides Israel with $2.4 billion of annual military aid as well as diplomatic support, making the United States its most important ally. Mr Netanyahu faces a delicate balancing act in responding to American pressure, as most in his largely right-wing ten-week-old coalition oppose US demands on settlements and would probably quit the Government if he caves in to the pressure…”

Reactions to Netanyahu’s Speech

The Jerusalem Post wrote on June 15:

“Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak blasted Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech on Sunday saying ‘Netanyahu’s demand that Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state is ruining the chance for peace…’ Mubarak further added that ‘not Egypt, nor any other Arab country would support Netanyahu’s approach.’

“Earlier Monday, a Syrian government newspaper slammed Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s speech, and likened Israel’s policies towards Palestinians to those of the Apartheid government in South Africa towards black people…”

In a related article, the Jerusalem Post reported on June 15:

“Former US president Jimmy Carter, visiting in Israel, said on Monday that Binyamin Netanyahu has placed ‘several obstacles on the road to peace’, in response to the prime minister’s speech Sunday evening… ‘He insists on settlement expansion, demands that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state even though 20% of Israel’s citizens are not Jewish,’ the former US president said…

“Meanwhile, the European Union on Monday joined US President Barack Obama in expressing support for Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s ‘endorsement’ of the goal of establishing a Palestinian state alongside Israel…”

Haaretz reported on June 14:

“The Palestinian Authority on Sunday criticized Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s highly anticipated foreign policy speech, in which he called for immediate peace talks and endorsed the creation of [a] Palestinian state without military capabilities. An aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said that the speech ‘sabotages’ regional peace efforts, due to Netanyahu’s refusal to accept an influx of Palestinian refugees into Israel and his unwillingness to compromise on the status of Jerusalem…

“In the Gaza Strip, Hamas representatives vehemently rejected Netanyahu’s address. ‘In his speech, he … erased the Palestinian refugees’ right of return,’ said senior Hamas leader Ismail Radwan, adding that the prime minister also did not ‘recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the independent Palestinian state… What needs to be done immediately is to sever all ties with Israel.'”

Not Enough for EU

Haaretz reported on June 15:

“European Union foreign ministers welcomed on Monday Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s conditional endorsement of a future Palestinian state, but said it was not enough to raise EU-Israel ties to a higher level. The ministers… questioned conditions cited by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for backing a Palestinian state and also his defence of Jewish settlements on occupied land…

“‘That’s good but it’s only a first step,’ Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, whose country [takes] over the EU presidency in July, said before the talks in Luxembourg. French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner said it was ‘not sufficient. Nothing was said on the settlements … but this stopping of the settlements is essential,’ said Kouchner, who in an earlier statement rejected any pre-conditions to peace negotiations.

“The EU and Israel have agreed in principle to upgrade an ‘association agreement’ defining their ties, a move that would bring trade benefits for both sides. But the 27-nation bloc has put the upgrade on ice and says it wants a firm commitment from Israel to seek a so-called two-state peace accord with the Palestinians.

“‘We must say quite clearly today there can only be talk of an upgrade when the peace process is on its way, and for that we need a few steps more,’ said Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn. Asked if Netanyahu’s move was sufficient for the EU to upgrade ties with Israel, Finnish Foreign Minister Alexander Stubb said: ‘No’…

“U.S. President Barack Obama called Netanyahu’s shift on Palestinian statehood an important step forward. But aides to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the speech sabotaged negotiations by restating Israel’s refusal to share the city of Jerusalem or accept Palestinian refugees.”

North Korea Defiant–Threatens with Nuclear War

The Guardian wrote on June 13:

“North Korea declared it would turn its plutonium stocks into weapons material and threatened military action against the US and its allies after the UN security council imposed new sanctions to punish Pyongyang for last month’s underground nuclear test.

“The country’s foreign ministry today acknowledged for the first time that North Korea was developing a uranium enrichment programme and said it would be ‘impossible’ to abandon its nuclear ambitions. [When enriched to a high degree, uranium can be used for weapons-grade material. Plutonium can be used in atomic bombs]…

“The warning came a few hours after the security council unanimously passed a resolution banning all weapons exports from North Korea and the import of all but small arms [The resolution also authorized searches of North Korean ships suspected of transporting illicit ballistic missile and nuclear materials] …

“The regime is believed to have enough plutonium for at least six nuclear bombs… ‘An attempted blockade of any kind by the US and its followers will be regarded as an act of war and met with a decisive military response,’ the regime said.

“There was no attempt to expand the sanctions to exports and imports of non-military goods. This is partly because China and Russia would have been opposed, but also because of fears a collapse of the North Korean economy would result in a flood of refugees into South Korea.”

Will North Korea Fire a Missile Toward Hawaii?

The Associated Press reported on June 18:

“North Korea may fire a long-range ballistic missile toward Hawaii in early July, a Japanese news report said Thursday, as Russia and China urged the regime to return to international disarmament talks on its rogue nuclear program. [Subsequent reports in Mail-On-Line, dated June 18, state that the missile may be fired on Independence Day, July 4, 2009].

“The missile, believed to be a Taepodong-2 with a range of up to 4,000 miles (6,500 kilometers), would be launched from North Korea’s Dongchang-ni site on the northwestern coast… The missile launch could come between July 4 and 8, the paper said. While the newspaper speculated the Taepodong-2 could fly over Japan and toward Hawaii, it said the missile would not be able to hit Hawaii’s main islands, which are about 4,500 miles (7,200 kilometers) from the Korean peninsula.”

The “Gay Rights Movement” in the USA

On June 3, 2009, Christian Today India reported the following:

“President Obama has declared June ‘Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender Pride Month,’ becoming the first U.S. president to include bisexual and transgender in the proclamation’s title. In a difficult-to-find declaration posted on the White House Web site on June 1, Obama praised LGBT Americans for their continual ‘great and lasting contributions’ that ‘strengthen the fabric of American society.’

“He vowed to support measures to ‘bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans,’ including enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions, ensuring gay adoption rights, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, and ending the current ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy in the military…

“Obama follows in the footsteps of former President Bill Clinton who also issued a similar proclamation in 1999 and 2000. But Clinton did not use the term transgender in his version. He did, however, reference bisexuals. President George W. Bush, in contrast, did not issue any LGBT proclamation during his eight years in office.

“Several Christian leaders have criticized the proclamation, including Bob Stith of the Southern Baptist Convention. Stith told Baptist Press that the proclamation encourages ‘pride in what God clearly says is sin’…

“June is traditionally recognized by the homosexual community as ‘Gay Pride Month’ in commemoration of the Stonewall Inn incident in June 1969. On June 28, 1969, gays and lesbians fought against a police raid that took place at Stonewall Inn in New York City. The incident is widely held to be the first time that the gay community fought against a government entity in American history, and is considered the starting point of the gay rights movement in the United States and around the world.

“In the proclamation, President Obama lauded the LGBT rights movement for their determination that has allowed more LGBT Americans to live openly today than ever before. He also said he is ‘proud’ to be the first president to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration.”

The Associated Press reported on June 16:

“President Barack Obama, under growing criticism for not seeking to end the ban on openly gay men and women in the military, is extending benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees… The decision is a political nod to a reliably Democratic voting bloc that in recent weeks has grown frustrated with the White House’s slow movement on their priorities.

“Several powerful gay fundraisers withdrew their support from a June 25 Democratic National Committee event where Vice President Joe Biden is expected to speak. Their exit came in response to a June 12 Justice Department brief that defended the Defense of Marriage Act, a prime target for gay and lesbian criticism. Justice lawyers argued that the law allowed states to reject marriages performed in other states or countries that defy their own standards.

“The legal arguments — including citing incest and sex with minors — sparked rebellion among gay and lesbian activists who had been largely biting their tongues since Obama won election…

“In the meantime, the administration has tried to make small, quiet moves to extend benefits to gays and lesbians. The State Department has promised to give partners of gay and lesbian diplomats many benefits, such as diplomatic passports and language training.”

The Associated Press added on June 17:

“President Barack Obama signaled to gay rights activists Wednesday that he’s listening to their priorities by extending some benefits to same-sex partners of federal employees. But he didn’t give them even close to everything they want, bringing growing anger against the president to the surface.

“Obama aides urged gays and lesbians to have patience with the new White House’s slow-and-steady approach to the politically charged topic. But his critics – and there were many – saw Wednesday’s incremental move to expand gay rights as little more than pandering to a reliably Democratic voting bloc, with the primary aim not of making policy more fair but of cutting short a fundraising boycott…

“Obama has refused to take any concrete steps toward a repeal of a policy that bans gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military, even though as a candidate he pledged to scrap the Clinton-era rules. He similarly has refused to step in and block the dismissal of gays and lesbians who face courts martial for disclosing their sexual orientation.”

The “Gay Rights Movement” in Israel

Der Stern Online reported on June 13:

“The biggest gay parade in the Middle East was conducted in Tel Aviv. Ten thousands of gays, lesbians, bi-sexuals and onlookers marched through the streets of Tel Aviv. The Branch of Tourism declared Tel Aviv in its advertisements as the Gay Capital. The religious Schas Party had asked the local government to prohibit the Gay Parade…

“[Also, Interior Minister Eli Yishai had called unsuccessfully on Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Tel Aviv Mayor Ron Huldai to cancel the parade.] In 2001, Israel, as the only country in the region, adopted an ‘anti-discrimination’ law. Marriages of homosexual couples, which were conducted in foreign countries, can be registered and acknowledged in Israel.”  

Haaretz wrote on June 13:

“Five gay couples wed Friday in a ceremony held on the Tel Aviv beach at the end of the city’s 11th annual Gay Pride Parade which saw thousands of people from all walks of life join in celebration on the city’s streets. The… same-sex couples walked up to the Chuppah, the Jewish wedding altar, while gay Israeli pop star Ivri Lider sang.

“The ceremony was performed according to Jewish marriage rites, with each couple exchanging rings and Hebrew vows before breaking the glass as the crowd erupted in applause. MK Nitzan Horovitz (Meretz), the Knesset’s first openly gay parliamentarian attended the wedding, where he told Haaretz, ‘I hope that from this day, weddings like this can happen in every place in Israel and not just in Tel Aviv. Weddings for everyone, man and woman, man and man, and woman and woman, and this will be the end of the monopoly of the ultra-Orthodox over our lives in Israel.’

“Gay Israeli filmmaker Eytan Fox… told Haaretz, ‘It’s a very important and historic day. It’s very exciting and in the end the good guys won.'”

How Some Democrats Want to “Improve” Healthcare…

Bloomberg reported on June 13:

“Health-care overhaul legislation being drafted by House Democrats will include $600 billion in tax increases and $400 billion in cuts to Medicare and Medicaid… The measure’s cost is reaching well beyond the $634 billion President Barack Obama proposed in his budget request to Congress as a 10-year down payment for the policy changes.

“Asked whether the cost of a health-care overhaul would be more than $1 trillion over a decade, [Committee Chairman Charles] Rangel said, ‘the answer is yes.’ Some Senate Republicans… say the costs will likely exceed $1.5 trillion… Democrats in the House and Senate are crafting legislation that would require all Americans to have health insurance, prohibit insurers from refusing to cover pre-existing conditions and place other restrictions on the industry…

“The legislation would establish online exchanges for individuals to purchase insurance and would require employers to provide health benefits to workers or pay a penalty… Rangel said Democrats are still considering options for tax increases that might be in the bill, including a possible end to the income tax exclusion for employer-paid health benefits…

“Rangel said that while House Democrats will likely release more details about health policy changes in their legislation next week, the package of offsetting tax increases and spending cuts likely will come later. Democrats, he said, want to put forth the more-positive aspects of an overhaul first. ‘We have a problem in not wanting to attract enough negative attention to the bill in terms of the pay-fors,’ he said.”

… While Other Democrats and Republicans Oppose Healthcare Proposals

Reuters wrote on June 14:

“President Barack Obama’s health secretary on Sunday pushed for a new government-run healthcare program, an idea facing skepticism even in his own party, and a senior Senate Democrat flatly said votes are lacking in Congress for the proposal. In addition, Vice President Joe Biden opposed proposals being discussed by some lawmakers to tax health insurance benefits provided to people by employers…”

“Doctors’ Boos Show Obama’s Tough Road”

The Associated Press reported on June 15:

“For all the young president’s popularity, the response he got Monday from doctors at an American Medical Association meeting was a sign his road is only going to get rockier as he tries to sell his plan to overhaul the nation’s health care system. The boos erupted when Obama told the doctors in Chicago he wouldn’t try to help them win their top legislative priority—limits on jury damages in medical malpractice cases… The doctors were only Obama’s first house call. He’ll be making his case to the other groups—and to the nation at large—in an increasingly energetic campaign to get a bill passed by the end of his first year in office…

“Doctors have special reasons to be wary of the president’s plans to overhaul the health care system. Not long ago, doctors’ decisions were rarely questioned. Now they are being blamed for a big part of the wasteful spending in the nation’s $2.5 trillion health care system. Studies have shown that as much as 30 cents of the U.S. health care dollar may be going for tests and procedures that are of little or no value to patients.

“The Obama administration has cited such findings as evidence that the system is broken. Since doctors are the ones responsible for ordering tests and procedures, health care costs cannot be brought under control unless they change their decision-making habits… But Obama did not blame the doctors. Instead, he tried to woo them, much as he has done with recalcitrant foreign leaders.”

That wasteful prescriptions and unnecessary tests ordered by doctors ARE partially responsible for outrageous healthcare costs is a FACT and cannot be denied. Whether President Obama’s proposals will solve this problem without creating new ones is the issue of hot debate.

No Senate Consensus on Health Care Reform

The Associated Press reported on June 17:

“Hoping to make history, the Senate set off on its major overhaul of the nation’s health care system Wednesday, but its first steps were quickly overtaken by fresh cost concerns and partisan anger. An ambitious timetable that called for completing committee action in early summer seemed in danger of slipping away…”

How ABC Plays Politics

The Drudge Report wrote on June 16:

“On the night of June 24, the media and government become one, when ABC turns its programming over to President Obama and White House officials to push government run health care — a move that has ignited an ethical firestorm…

“ABCNEWS anchor Charlie Gibson will deliver WORLD NEWS from the Blue Room of the White House. The network plans a primetime special — ‘Prescription for America’ — originating from the East Room, EXCLUDE OPPOSING VOICES ON THE DEBATE… Late Monday night, Republican National Committee Chief of Staff Ken McKay fired off a complaint to the head of ABCNEWS:

“‘…As the national debate on health care reform intensifies, I am deeply concerned and disappointed with ABC’s astonishing decision to EXCLUDE OPPOSING VOICES on this critical issue on June 24, 2009. Next Wednesday, ABC News will air a primetime health care reform ‘town hall’ at the White House with President Barack Obama. In addition, according to an ABC News report, GOOD MORNING AMERICA, WORLD NEWS, NIGHTLINE and ABC’s web news ‘will all feature special programming on the president’s health care agenda’…

“‘Today, the Republican National Committee requested an opportunity to add our Party’s views to those of the President’s to ensure that all sides of the health care reform debate are presented. OUR REQUEST WAS REJECTED… I find it OUTRAGEOUS that ABC would PROHIBIT our Party’s opposing thoughts and ideas from this national debate, which affects millions of ABC viewers.

“‘In the absence of opposition, I am concerned this event will become a glorified infomercial to PROMOTE THE DEMOCRATIC AGENDA… President Obama does not hold a monopoly on health care reform ideas or on free airtime. The President has stated time and time again that HE WANTS A BIPARTISAN DEBATE. Therefore, the Republican Party should be included in this primetime event, or the DNC should pay for your airtime…’

“ABCNEWS Senior Vice President Kerry Smith on Tuesday responded to the RNC complaint, saying it contained ‘false premises’:

“‘… ABCNEWS alone will select those who will be in the audience asking questions of the president. Like any programs we broadcast, ABC News will have complete editorial control. To suggest otherwise is quite unfair to both our journalists and our audience.'”

To add insult to injury, according to an article in the Drudge Report, dated June 16, “ABC is refusing to air paid ads during its White House health care presentation… including a paid-for alternative viewpoint!”

More Money for War

The Washington Post wrote on June 16:

“The House today passed a $106 billion bill funding the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan through September, as House Democrats backed President Obama despite misgivings among the ranks about his strategy in Afghanistan.

“The 226 to 202 vote came after Obama and Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner had called some reluctant Democrats during the day imploring them to back the bill, and Speaker Nancy Pelosi… had strongly pressed her colleagues in a closed-door meeting to vote for the bill in a show of support for Obama, even if they oppose his strategy for increasing troops in Afghanistan.

“In the end, 221 Democrats voted for the bill, while 32 opposed it. All but five Republicans opposed the bill… 19 House Democrats backed the bill who had opposed it the first time, although some cited loyalty, not agreement with Obama’s plans, as their reason.”

How to Spend Stimulus Money

The Associated Press reported on June 13:

“The United States is about to spend $50 million in stimulus money on fish food… The money could provide algae to nourish clam and oyster larvae along the Pacific coast, fill the bellies of tilapia in Arizona and feed catfish, trout and gamefish in the Midwest and South…

“Much of the money is likely to end up in Mississippi, Alabama and Arkansas — the nation’s largest catfish producers. Catfish accounts for one-third of the nation’s $1.4 billion aquaculture industry.”

Saving Money by Bulldozing 50 U.S. Cities

The Telegraph wrote on June 12:

“Dozens of US cities may have entire neighbourhoods bulldozed as part of drastic ‘shrink to survive’ proposals being considered by the Obama administration to tackle economic decline… The radical experiment is the brainchild of Dan Kildee, treasurer of Genesee County… Having outlined his strategy to Barack Obama during the election campaign, Mr Kildee has now been approached by the US government…

“Mr Kildee said he will concentrate on 50 cities… as potentially needing to shrink substantially… They include Detroit, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, Baltimore and Memphis. In Detroit, shattered by the woes of the US car industry, there are already plans to split it into a collection of small urban centres separated from each other by countryside.”

This proposal is interesting in light of the fact that cities in the Millennium, under God’s rule, MIGHT be designed in this way.

British Airways in Deep Trouble

CNN reported on June 16:

“British Airways is asking thousands of its staff to work for free for up to four weeks… In an e-mail to all its staff, the airline offered workers between one and four weeks of unpaid leave — but with the option to work during this period. British Airways employs just more than 40,000 people in the United Kingdom. Last month, the company posted a record annual loss of £400 million ($656 million)…

“‘I’m 30 years in this business and I’ve never seen anything like this. This is by far the biggest crisis the industry has ever faced,’ said Willie Walsh, British Airways’ chief executive. A spokesman for one of Britain’s biggest unions said its workers could not afford to work for free for a month… Walsh said British Airways’ woes were inextricably linked to the downturn in the global economy and that there had been no sign of any ‘green shoots’ of recovery.”

Swine Flu Virus in Humans Long Before Outbreak

ScienceDaily wrote on June 13:

“A new analysis of the current swine-origin H1N1 influenza A virus suggests that transmission to humans occurred several months before recognition of the existing outbreak. The work… provides evidence that new genetic elements in swine can result in the emergence of viruses with pandemic potential in humans…

“Dr Oliver Pybus of Oxford University’s Department of Zoology [said:] ‘Our results show that this strain has been circulating among pigs, possibly among multiple continents, for many years prior to its transmission to humans.’… The team conclude that ‘despite widespread influenza surveillance in humans, the lack of systematic swine surveillance allowed for the undetected persistence and evolution of this potentially pandemic strain for many years.'”

The Bible uses this particular term only once, in Luke 21:24. It is important to notice the context.

Christ had been asked by some of His disciples when the temple would be destroyed (Luke 21:5-7). In reviewing the parallel passage in Matthew 24:1-3, we learn that they had also asked Him when the end of the age–the end of this present evil civilization–would occur, and when He would return–apparently believing that all of these events would be interconnected.

Christ began to warn of coming religious deception, wars, rumors of wars, famines, earthquakes, pestilences, and fearful sights and great signs from heaven. He explained that all these were the beginning of sorrows–the beginning of the end.

He continued to warn about the coming Great Tribulation–a time of war and persecution of God’s people and the modern descendants of the physical nations of Israel and Judah (For information on the modern identity of these ancient peoples, please read our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America.”). Christ said that Jerusalem would be destroyed or made desolate AT THAT TIME; that is, at the time of the Great Tribulation.

This is important to realize because some have erroneously concluded that Christ, when speaking about the destruction of Jerusalem and the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles, was referring to the Roman invasion of the city in 70 A.D., when the ancient temple was destroyed–or of the many subsequent incidents in the past when Jerusalem was attacked by Gentile armies and occupied by Gentile nations. However, those invasions, and especially the one by the Romans in 70 A.D., were just mild and partial forerunners of what is prophesied to happen in the future.

We must realize that Christ speaks of the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles IN THE CONTEXT of the GREAT TRIBULATION.

Notice Luke 21:20-24:

“But when you see Jerusalem surrounded by armies, then know that its desolation is near. Then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains, let those who are in the midst of her depart, and let not those who are in the country enter her. For these are the days of vengeance, that ALL THINGS which are written may be FULFILLED. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies in those days! For there will be GREAT DISTRESS [i.e., Great Tribulation] in the land and WRATH [the wrath of Satan, compare Revelation 12:12] upon this people. And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations. And Jerusalem will be trampled by Gentiles UNTIL THE TIMES OF THE GENTILES ARE FULFILLED.”

In the parallel account, in Matthew 24, it is even more obvious that the context of Christ’s statement regarding the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles is still future and related to the time of the Great Tribulation. Beginning in Matthew 24:15, we read Christ’s words, as follows:

“Therefore when you see the ‘abomination of desolation,’ spoken of by Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place (whoever reads, let him understand), then let those who are in Judea flee to the mountains. Let him who is on the housetop not go down to take anything out of his house. And let him who is in the field not go back to get his clothes. But woe to those who are pregnant and to those who are nursing babies IN THOSE DAYS! And pray that your flight may not be in winter or on the Sabbath. 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. And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elects’ sake those days will be shortened… Immediately AFTER the TRIBULATION of THOSE DAYS the sun will be darkened, and the moon will not give its light; the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. THEN the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will SEE the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory” (Matthew 24:15-30).

Regarding the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles, notice the following excerpts from our free booklet, “Is That in the Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation!”:

“We read in Revelation 11:1–2 that an angel of God tells John: ‘Rise and measure the temple of God, the altar, and those who worship there. But leave out the court which is outside the temple, and do not measure it, for it has been given to the Gentiles. And they will tread the holy city underfoot for forty-two months [or 3-1/2 years].’

“Some rightly point out that the term ‘temple’ or ‘temple of God’ in the New Testament can refer to God’s Church [compare Ephesians 2:19–22; 1 Corinthians 3:16–17]. They claim that the reference in Revelation 11:1–2 speaks exclusively to the Church. Although the Church might be included here, the more obvious and intended meaning is a reference to a literal temple in Jerusalem. After all, the Gentiles will tread the holy city (!) underfoot for 3-1/2 years, and the court, which is outside the temple, will be given to those Gentiles. It is difficult to see how all of these references could just exclusively refer to the Church.

“Also, a distinction is made in Revelation 11:1–2 between the temple and those who worship there. If the temple were meant to exclusively describe the Church, it would be difficult to determine who those would be who worship there.

“The Nelson Study Bible comments: ‘John is given a reed like a measuring rod, much like that used by Ezekiel (see Ezek. 40: 3, 5) in his vision of the measuring of the temple (see Ezek. 40–48)… This is the temple of the tribulation period that will eventually be desecrated (see 13:14, 15; Dan. 9:27; Luke 21:24; 2 Thess. 2:4)… Luke 21:24 prophesies that the Gentiles will tread the holy city underfoot until “the times of the Gentiles are fulfilled.” Apparently the period of forty-two months is the conclusion of “the times of the Gentiles.” “Gentile” here may also be translated “nations” (v. 9; 10:11).'”

Some have speculated whether or not the times of the Gentiles–the times of Gentile rule over the world–have already begun, and in what year they began, or, rejecting the concept that they have begun, they have tried to figure out when they will begin. Both attempts are rather futile.

It is true, of course, that throughout human history, Gentile kingdoms have ruled this world, as discussed in the book of Daniel and in the book of Revelation. The prophets Daniel and John describe the appearance of four world-ruling Gentile kingdoms on this earth (the ancient Babylonian Empire, the Medo-Persian Empire, the Greco-Macedonian Empire and the Roman Empire). They add that the Roman Empire would experience ten revivals after the fall of ancient Rome. History confirms that nine of those ten revivals have already occurred (under three “Barbarian” powers; under Justinian; under Charlemagne; under Otto the Great; under Charles V; under Napoleon I; and under Hitler and Mussolini). We also note that the final revival–a United States of Europe, ultimately being led by ten nations or groups of nations–is forming in this present time (For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”).

But it is also true that powerful nations of Israelite descent (especially of the ancient and modern house of Israel, including the British Commonwealth and the United States of America), have ruled, at times, over parts of the world. We can therefore not say–and the Bible does not proclaim this at all–that only Gentile nations ruled the world since the ancient Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar.

Christ’s statement of the fulfillment or conclusion of the times of powerful Gentile rule is still future–relating to the time when ALL “the kingdoms of this world have become the kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ, and He shall reign forever and ever” (Revelation 11:15). This prophecy does not refer just to Gentile kingdoms, but to ALL the human kingdoms of this world–past, present and future–whether of Gentile or non-Gentile origin.

When Christ returns, He will set up the Kingdom of GOD here on this earth. Feeble and incompetent, misleading and misled human beings will no longer rule this world. Rather, God the Father will give to Jesus Christ “dominion and glory and a kingdom, That ALL peoples, nations, and languages should SERVE HIM. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, Which shall not pass away, And HIS KINGDOM the one Which shall not be destroyed” (Daniel 7:14).

But God will NOT rule ALONE. Rather, He will rule with His “saints”–His people–true and converted Christians who by that time will be changed to immortal Spirit beings and become BORN-AGAIN members of the Family of God. It is THEN that “the saints of the Most High shall receive the kingdom, and possess the kingdom forever, even forever and ever… and the time came for the saints to possess the kingdom… THEN the kingdom and dominion, And the greatness of the kingdoms under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people, the saints of the Most High. His kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, And all dominions shall serve and obey Him” (Daniel 7:18, 22, 27).

Christ’s statement of the fulfillment of the times of the Gentiles primarily refers to the end-time revival of the ancient Roman Empire and its occupation of the city of Jerusalem for about three-and-a-half years, prior to the return of Jesus Christ. When Christ returns, He will make an end of Gentile, as well as non-Gentile rule. THEN–and NOT before then–the times of the Gentiles will be fulfilled.

Christ’s specific reference to the times of the Gentiles is primarily connected with the FUTURE, when Gentiles will trample and occupy Jerusalem–and the FULFILLMENT of the times of the Gentiles is obviously future as well. Even though Gentiles might have occupied Jerusalem in the past, these were not the END TIME events Christ was talking about in Matthew 24 and Luke 21. Christ spoke of a FUTURE occupation of Jerusalem through Gentile powers, which will occur AT THE TIME of the Great Tribulation. Then, the times of the Gentiles will find their fulfillment.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Our newest booklet, “The Book of Zechariah–Prophecies for Today,” has been sent to the printer and posted on the Web.

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch and YouTube. It is titled, “Will Iran’s 2009 Elections Change Anything?”

In the program, Norbert Link asks the questions, Did President Obama’s speech in Cairo bring about a better relationship between the USA and Iran? Will Israel attack Iran? Will the rift between the USA and Israel continue to widen? Will the State of Israel experience a military defeat? Does the Bible give us answers to any of those questions?

A new German sermon (“Bekehrung Anderer?”) was recorded this week, asking the question whether we are to try to convert others, and what is the commission of God’s Church today.