On Saturday, April 11, 2009, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “Proofs for God’s Existence”.

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.

On Wednesday, April 15, 2009, is the Last Day of Unleavened Bread. Norbert Link will give the sermon in the afternoon from California.

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 9:00 am and 1:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 11:00 am and 3:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

 

Many today do not like to conform. They like to be “different,” but so many can fall into a particular non-conformist category that they actually do conform to that particular group or rebellious ideal! Conformity is going along with the group, and peer pressure is a manifestation of this.  

Wikipedia defines peer pressure as follows: “Peer pressure refers to the influence exerted by a peer group in encouraging a person to change his or her attitudes, values, or behavior in order to conform to the group.” There are those who may be too shy or retiring or want to avoid ridicule that they conform and give into such pressure. These are problems that we can all face.

But when we become church members, we do become different from the world (James 4:4), because the church is not of the world. It is not whether or not we WANT to be different – we are left with no alternative!

We have just kept the Passover and are now keeping the Days of Unleavened Bread. The world has no idea what this is all about. Had anyone entered our services where we were footwashing, they could have easily wondered what we were doing. And not eating leaven for seven days? Whether we like it or not, our calling makes us different – but we are different, not for personal, egotistical or rebellious reasons – but purely and simply for the right reasons.

We should thank God that we are different; otherwise, we would not be on the road to eternal life in God’s Kingdom. It is a privilege to be different.   We are different because we have a marvelous calling. It is according to God’s instructions, and because we are happy to follow that lead.

Being different–for the right reasons–should suit us just fine!

The Week in Review

Our lead article deals with this week’s powerful earthquake in Italy, 70 miles northeast of Rome–just a day before this year’s Feast of Passover. Sadly, the Bible reveals that a most powerful earthquake will strike and utterly devastate Rome in the not-too-distant future.

Powerful earthquakes also struck this week on the political scene, even though some of them were not that clearly recognized. The G-20 summit was not only an utter failure for the USA, but its decisions could have set in motion worse things to come. Turkey’s blackmail approach and President Obama’s meddling have angered Europeans, including Germany and France.

In addition, Mr. Obama’s non-committal towards a U.S. missile defense system in Europe; his acknowledgment of Europe’s leadership role in the world; his paralysis regarding the North-Korean launch of a rocket; his inability to convince Europeans to play a more active role in Afghanistan; his hint that he might give in to Iranian demands; his talks on nuclear disarmament; and his statement of appreciation for Islam have further raised not a few eyebrows abroad and in the USA.

A German law authorizing nationalization of banks brought back painful memories of the Nazi era, and both Tony Blair and Angela Merkel have shown strong interest in becoming the first permanent EU President.

Turning our attention to the USA, governmental “scrutiny” is now directed towards compensation of nonprofit organizations’ executives, while the U.S. Taxpayer cost for bailout is much larger than first announced. The Iowa Supreme Court reinterpreted the Iowa Constitution regarding marriage, and the US is warned not to repeat Argentina’s embrace of socialism, which, as a consequence, went from being one of the richest to one of the poorest countries under the Perons.

We conclude with revealing quotations from widely-accepted sources regarding the origins and customs of Easter.

Powerful Earthquake Strikes Central Italy

Der Spiegel Online reported on April 6:

“A powerful earthquake struck central Italy early Monday morning. At least 90 bodies [on Wednesday, April 8, the number was reported as at least 250] have been recovered from beneath the rubble and authorities are warning that at least 50,000 may have been left homeless. [This estimated number was later reduced to about 17,000.] Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has declared a state of emergency.

“A massive earthquake caught many in their sleep in Italy on Monday morning in the city of L’Aquila at 3:32 a.m. People scrambled in panic into the streets and buildings several stories tall toppled like houses of cards. Hours after the disaster, survivors wandered about in a trance-like state, covered in blankets as they made their way through streets that had been completely destroyed. Many have lost everything: relatives and friends, a roof over their head as well as their belongings…

“The earthquake hit around 70 miles (110 kilometers) northeast of Rome, and the epicenter was reported to be near L’Aquila, a city in the mountainous Abruzzo region with a population of 70,000. The US Geological Survey put the quake’s magnitude at 6.3 on the Richter scale, although Italian seismologists said it was 5.8.

“Thousands of buildings have been severely damaged or destroyed and many are believed to be at risk of collapsing… The earthquake didn’t last longer than 30 seconds, but it was still enough to completely destroy L’Aquila’s historic city center. Eyewitnesses said the sound of the buildings crumbling was like ‘a bomb exploding’… Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi… canceled a planned visit to Russia to focus on the crisis…

“The quake is Italy’s worst since a 1980 temblor in the south of the country which killed 2,735 people. Earthquakes in Italy often have particularly severe impacts due to the large numbers of centuries-old buildings.”

Several aftershocks occurred, including some with the magnitude of 5.7 on the Richter Scale.

Why the G-20 Summit Is Responsible for the Next Bigger Crisis

Der Spiegel Online wrote on April 3:

“The G-20 has agreed on plans to fight the global downturn. But its approach will only lay the foundation for the next, bigger crisis. Instead of ‘stability, growth, jobs,’ the summit’s real slogan should have been ‘debt, unemployment, inflation.’ Now they’re celebrating again. An ‘historic compromise’ had been reached, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said at the conclusion of the G-20 summit in London, while US President Barack Obama spoke of a ‘turning point’ in the fight against the global downturn…

“When the celebrations have died down, it will be easier to look at what actually happened in London with a cool eye. The summit participants took the easy way out. Their decision to pump a further $5 trillion (€3.72 trillion) into the collapsing world economy within the foreseeable future, could indeed prove to be a historical turning point — but a turning point downwards. In combating this crisis, the international community is in fact laying the foundation for the next crisis, which will be larger. It would probably have been more honest if the summit participants had written ‘debt, unemployment, inflation’ on the wall.

“The crucial questions went unanswered because they weren’t even asked. Why are we in the current situation anyway? Who or what has got us into this mess?…

“There are — even in the modern world — two things that no private company can do on its own: wage war and print money. Both of those things, however, formed Bush’s response to the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Many column inches have already been devoted to Bush’s first mistake, the invasion of Baghdad. But his second error — flooding the global economy with trillions of dollars of cheap money — has barely been acknowledged. No other president has ever printed money and expanded the money supply with such abandon as Bush. This new money — and therein lies its danger — was not backed by real value in the form of goods or services…The US had begun to hallucinate…

“The addiction to new cash injections was chronic. The US had allowed itself to sink into an abject lifestyle. It sold more and more billions in new government bonds in order to preserve the appearance of a prosperous nation. To make matters worse, private households copied the example of the state. The average American now lives from hand to mouth and has 15 credit cards. The savings rate is almost zero…

“The president and the head of the Federal Reserve, Alan Greenspan, knew about the problem very well. Perhaps the Americans even knew just how irresponsible their actions were — at any rate, they did everything they could to hide them from the world. Since 2006, figures for the money supply — in other words, the total number of dollars in circulation — have no longer been published in the US…

“Only on the basis of independent estimates can the outside world get a sense of the internal erosion of what was once the strongest currency in the world. These estimates report a steep rise in the amount of money in circulation. Since the decision to keep the figures confidential, the growth rate for the expansion of the money supply has tripled. Last year alone, the money supply increased by 17 percent… Barack Obama has continued the course towards greater and greater state debt — and increased the pace. One-third of his budget is no longer covered by revenues. The only things which are currently running at full production in the US are the printing presses at the Treasury.

“At the summit in London, delegates talked about everything — except this issue. As a result, no attention was given to the fact that the crisis is being fought with the same instrument that caused it in the first place. The acreage for cheap dollars will now be extended once again…

“The International Money Fund was authorized to double, and later triple, its assistance funds — by borrowing more. The World Bank is also being authorized to increase its borrowing. All the participating countries want to help their economies through state guarantees, which, should they be made use of, would result in a huge increase in the national debt.”

“With Obama’s Approval, Europe Has Done It”

On his Website, DickMorris.com, Dick Morris wrote on April 6:

“On April 2, 2009, the work of July 4, 1776 was nullified at the meeting of the G-20 in London. The joint communiqué essentially announces a global economic union with uniform regulations and bylaws for all nations, including the United States. Henceforth, our SEC, Commodities Trading Commission, Federal Reserve Board and other regulators will have to march to the beat of drums pounded by the Financial Stability Board (FSB), a body of central bankers from each of the G-20 states and the European Union…

“The FSB is… charged with ‘implementing…tough new principles on pay and compensation and to support sustainable compensation schemes and the corporate social responsibility of all firms.’ That means that the FSB will regulate how much executives are to be paid and will enforce its idea of corporate social responsibility at ‘all firms’…

“Obama, perhaps feeling guilty for the US role in triggering the international crisis, has, indeed, given away the store. Now we may no longer look to presidential appointees, confirmed by the Senate, to make policy for our economy. These decisions will be made internationally.

“And Europe will dominate them. The FSF [“Financial Stability Forum”] and, presumably, the FSB, is now composed of the central bankers of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Japan, Netherlands, Singapore, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and the United States plus representatives of the World Bank, the European Union, the IMF, and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).

“Europe, in other words, has six of the twelve national members. The G-20 will enlarge the FSB to include all its member nations, but the pro-European bias will be clear. The United States, with a GDP three times that of the next largest G-20 member (Japan), will have one vote. So will Italy.

“The Europeans have been trying to get their hands on our financial system for decades. It is essential to them that they rein in American free enterprise so that their socialist heaven will not be polluted by vices such as the profit motive. Now, with President Obama’s approval, they have done it.”

Obama Acknowledges Europe’s Leading Role in the World

USA Today reported on April 3:

“In office just over two months, Obama was in the midst of his first European trip as president as he sought to strengthen the United States’ standing in the world while working with foreign counterparts to right the troubled global economy. Obama said the United States shares blame for the crisis, but that ‘every nation bears responsibility for what lies ahead — especially now.’

“Back home, his administration was trying to weather the fallout of another dismal monthly jobs report that was announced as Obama spoke in France. The jobless rate jumped to 8.5%, the highest since late 1983, as a wide range of employers eliminated a net total of 663,000 jobs in March…

“Obama bluntly said the relationship between the United States and Europe has gone adrift, with blame on both sides. In America, he said, ‘there’s a failure to appreciate Europe’s leading role in the world. There have been times when America’s shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive,’ Obama said. Yet in Europe, he said, there is an anti-America attitude that seems casual but can also be insidious. He said America can be unfairly blamed for many problems.”

“Obama Fails to Win NATO Troops He Wants for Afghanistan”

The Times wrote on April 4:

“Barack Obama made an impassioned plea to America’s allies to send more troops to Afghanistan, warning that failure to do so would leave Europe vulnerable to more terrorist atrocities. But though he continued to dazzle Europeans on his debut international tour, the Continent’s leaders turned their backs on the US President.

“Gordon Brown was the only one to offer substantial help. He offered to send several hundred extra British soldiers to provide security during the August election, but even that fell short of the thousands of combat troops that the US was hoping to prise from the Prime Minister. Just two other allies made firm offers of troops. Belgium offered to send 35 military trainers and Spain offered 12. Mr Obama’s host, Nicolas Sarkozy, refused his request.”

Obama Intervenes at NATO’s 60th-Anniversary Summit–but at What Cost?

The Associated Press reported on April 4:

“The alliance risked arousing hostility in the Muslim world by choosing the prime minister of Denmark as secretary-general after overcoming Turkish objections over Anders Fogh Rasmussen’s support of a Danish newspaper’s right to publish cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad…

“Turkey said Obama was essential to negotiations that overcame its objections to Fogh Rasmussen and ended with all 28 NATO leaders unanimously approving the Danish Prime Minister as the new civilian leader of the alliance.

“Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said his government’s requests had included the closure of a Kurdish satellite television broadcaster based in Denmark; the establishment of contacts between NATO and Islamic countries; appointment of a Turk as an aide to Fogh Rasmussen and senior NATO command positions for Turkish generals.”

The EUObserver added on April 4:

“NATO on Saturday (4 April) named Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen as its new secretary general, overcoming Turkish opposition during difficult talks which caused fresh tension in EU-Turkey relations… The stalemate saw EU enlargement commissioner Olli Rehn suggest to Finnish state broadcaster YLE that Ankara may be unfit to join the EU because it does not respect freedom of speech… Politicians in the circle of German Chancellor Angela Merkel also attacked Turkey. ‘Whoever puts Islamic propaganda above the future of NATO and our European system of values, has nothing to look for in the EU,’ Alexander Dobrint, the secretary general of Ms Merkel’s sister party, the Christian-Social Union, told German press.

“Turkish President Abdullah Gul did not take kindly to the remarks, calling the EU commissioner’s intervention ‘unfortunate’ and ‘unpleasant’ and warning that it would increase anti-EU sentiment in Turkey… The Turkish president explained that promises made by US President Barack Obama, rather than the veiled threats on EU accession, finally secured Ankara’s approval for the Danish appointment…”

Obama Angers Europeans By Pushing for Turkey Membership in EU

The Wall Street Journal wrote on April 5:

“President Barack Obama arrived in Turkey late Sunday, after riling the European Union by urging its leaders to accept the large and mainly Muslim nation as a member. Washington has long supported EU membership for Turkey, a prickly yet strategic U.S. ally. Mr. Obama said Sunday at an EU-U.S. summit in Prague that pushing forward with membership would ‘ensure we continue to anchor Turkey firmly in Europe.’

“But coming just a day after Turkey forced a series of concessions from fellow members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization before accepting their choice of a Dane to head the alliance, Mr. Obama’s appeal drew a sharp response from French President Nicolas Sarkozy. ‘I have been working hand in hand with President Obama, but when it comes to the European Union it’s up to member states of the European Union to decide’ on membership, Mr. Sarkozy told French television from Prague. ‘I have always been opposed to this entry, and I remain opposed.’

“Turkey has started membership talks with the EU, but the process has been partially frozen because of opposition from members including France, Germany and Cyprus. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, otherwise effusive about Mr. Obama’s performance in Prague on Sunday, also said coolly that there were ‘different opinions’ on how to strengthen the relationship between Turkey, a nation of 70 million, and the EU…

“A European Union diplomat familiar with the talks said the attitude of EU members toward Turkish membership had darkened noticeably after the NATO dispute. Some EU countries’ leaders saw that as confirmation of their suspicion that Turkey wouldn’t act as a team player once inside the EU. ‘More and more EU countries have doubts about Turkish accession,’ said the diplomat. ‘The mood at the table was grumpy.'”

Deutsche Welle added on April 5 that “Obama hits French and German nerves over Turkey’s EU bid.” It continued: “The US stance that Turkey belongs firmly in the EU took some of the gloss off a largely harmonious EU-US summit in Prague with France flatly rejecting the idea and Germany voicing reservations about it.”

Germany Unhappy With Obama Over Turkey

Der Spiegel Online wrote on April 7:

“US President Barack Obama says Turkey’s future is in the European Union. Not everyone agrees. Numerous politicians in Germany have gone on the attack, and even French President Sarkozy is unimpressed. Turkey’s role at the NATO summit has soured the mood…

“On Monday, a number of politicians, particularly in Germany, went on the offensive. ‘It is a meddling in the internal affairs of Europe,’ Bernd Posselt, a member of the European Parliament from Bavarian’s conservative Christian Social Union (CSU), blustered in an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE. ‘The EU is not Obama’s plaything. … He should accept Turkey as America’s 51st state instead,’ he continued.

“Markus Ferber, the CSU’s lead candidate in European Parliament elections set for early June, echoed his party colleague. ‘There is no question that the US has a voice in NATO. But when it comes to membership in its own club, the EU decides by itself,’ he said. ‘We don’t need any tutoring from abroad.’

“Party head Horst Seehofer said that Europe’s ‘internal harmony’ is dependent on ‘common cultural and spiritual roots.’ He went on to say that ‘Turkey, as self-proclaimed representative of the Muslim world, clearly doesn’t fit in’…”

Obama’s “Turkey” in Turkey

The New York Post wrote on April 8:

“The real climax of President Obama’s Spring Apologies Tour wasn’t his photo op with our troops in Baghdad or even his ‘American Guilt’ concerts in Western Europe. While fans in the press cheered wildly at every venue, the real performance came in Turkey. And it was a turkey… the road to embassy takeovers and strategic humiliation is paved with good intentions — coupled with distressing naivete.

“On every stage, Obama draped Lady Liberty in sackcloth and ashes, drawing plentiful applause but no serious economic or security cooperation in return. Then, in Turkey, he surrendered our national pride, undercut our interests and interfered in matters that aren’t his business. On the latter point: Suppose the European Union president went to Cuba and insisted that the world’s sunniest concentration camp should be welcomed into NAFTA? That’s the equivalent of what our president did in Ankara on Monday when he declared that he supports Turkey’s bid for EU membership.

“The Europeans don’t want Turkey in their club. Because Turkey isn’t a European state, nor is its culture European. And it isn’t our business to press Europe to embrace a huge, truculent Muslim country suffering a creeping Islamist coup. The Europeans were appalled by Turkey’s neo-Taliban tantrum on-stage at last week’s NATO summit. The Turks fought to derail the appointment of a great Dane, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, as the new NATO secretary general. Why? Because he didn’t stone to death the Danish cartoonist who caricatured Mohammed.

“Which brings us to the even bigger problem: Obama has no idea what’s going on in Turkey. By going to Ankara on his knees, he gave his seal of approval to a pungently anti-American Islamist government bent on overturning Mustapha Kemal’s legacy of the separation of mosque and state.

“Turkey’s ruling Justice and Development Party, the AKP, means headscarves, Korans, censorship and stacked elections. The country’s alarmed middle class opposes the effort to turn the country into an Islamic state. Obama’s gushing praise for the AKP’s bosses left them aghast. Obama’s embrace of Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan (now orchestrating show trials of his opponents) was one step short of going to Tehran and smooching President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

“What was Obama thinking? He wasn’t. He relied on advice from State Department appeasement artists who understand neither Turkey, Islam nor the crises raging between the Bosporus and the Indus… Insisting that America’s always guilty, Obama omitted any mention of Turkey’s wartime betrayals of our troops, its continuing oppression of its Kurd minority or the AKP’s determination to turn a state with a secular constitution into a Wahhabi playground. When it came to the Armenian genocide, Obama bravely ducked…”

Obama Appreciates Islamic Faith

On April 6, The Associated Press reported the following:

“Barack Obama, making his first visit to a Muslim nation as president, declared Monday the United States ‘is not and will never be at war with Islam.’

“Calling for a greater partnership with the Islamic world in an address to the Turkish parliament, Obama called the country an important U.S. ally in many areas, including the fight against terrorism. He devoted much of his speech to urging a greater bond between Americans and Muslims, portraying terrorist groups such as al Qaida as extremists who did not represent the vast majority of Muslims… ‘America’s relationship with the Muslim world cannot and will not be based on opposition to al Qaida,’ he said. ‘… We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over so many centuries to shape the world for the better, including my own country,’ Obama said.”

Obama Might Give in to Iran

The Financial Times wrote on April 3:

“US officials are considering whether to accept Iran’s pursuit of uranium enrichment, which has been outlawed by the United Nations and remains at the heart of fears that Iran is seeking nuclear weapons capability. As part of a policy review commissioned by President Barack Obama, diplomats are discussing whether the US will eventually have to accept Iran’s insistence on carrying out the process, which can produce both nuclear fuel and weapons- grade material.

“’There’s a fundamental impasse between the western demand for no enrichment and the Iranian dem­and to continue enrichment,’ says Mark Fitzpat­rick, a former state depart­ment expert now at the International Institute for Strategic Studies. ‘There’s no obvious compromise bet­ween those two positions’…

“’There is a growing recognition in [Washington] that the zero [enrichment] solution, though still favoured, simply is unfeasible,’ says Trita Parsi, president of the National Iranian American Council. ‘The US may still have zero as its opening position, while recognising it may not be where things stand at the end of a potential agreement.'”

Nuclear Disarmament?

The Wall Street Journal wrote on April 6:

“What Mr. Obama wants to kill specifically is the Reliable Replacement Warhead, which the Bush Administration supported over Congressional opposition, and which Mr. Obama now opposes despite the support of Defense Secretary Robert Gates and the military… The irony is that Mr. Obama’s opposition is making substantial reductions in the total U.S. arsenal that much riskier…

“The thinking here is that somehow the American example will get Russia, as well as North Korea, Pakistan and perhaps Iran, to reject nuclear weapons. In fact, a U.S. nuclear arsenal that is diminished in both quantity and quality would be an incentive for these countries to increase their nuclear inventories, since the door would suddenly be opened to reach strategic parity with the last superpower. Mr. Medvedev, for one, recently announced Russia would pursue ‘large-scale rearmament’ of its army and navy, including nuclear arsenals. France also plans to deploy new sea-based nuclear missiles next year, even as it reduces the overall size of its arsenal.”

USA and EU Condemn North Korea’s “Provocative Act”

Deutsche Welle reported on April 6:

“North Korea’s launch of a long-range rocket has drawn a ‘strong condemnation’ from the European Union. The UN Security Council ended an emergency session without agreeing to an immediate response to the missile launch… The EU called on Korea to ‘immediately suspend all activities related to its ballistic missile program and abandon all nuclear weapons and existing nuclear programs in a complete, verifiable and irreversible manner…’

“The North Korean rocket launch will test US President Barack Obama, who announced soon after his arrival in France on Friday that he wanted to move towards ‘a world without nuclear weapons’… Obama blasted the rocket launch on Sunday morning and promised he would push for action at the upcoming Security Council meeting. ‘With this provocative act, North Korea has ignored its international obligations, rejected unequivocal calls for restraint, and further isolated itself from the community of nations,’ Obama said.”

Russia and China Prevent Sanctions Against North Korea

On April 8, RIA reported:

“Moscow is concerned by Pyongyang’s recent rocket launch, but believes that imposing sanctions against North Korea would be counterproductive, the Russian foreign minister said on Wednesday.

“North Korea launched a multistage rocket that it said was carrying a communications satellite on Sunday morning, defying pressure from the United States, Japan, South Korea and other countries, which suspect the launch was a cover for a test of a Taepodong-2 long-range missile…

“The 15-member Security Council convened for an emergency meeting late on Sunday at Japan’s request, to discuss sanctions against Pyongyang following the launch, but strong opposition from Russia and China prevented the adoption of even a preliminary statement of condemnation…

“The U.S. and other countries argued for sanctions against Pyongyang, saying that the launch violated Security Council Resolution 1718, which was passed after North Korea’s 2006 nuclear test, but Russia and China called for restraint on the grounds that the resolution does not prohibit the launch of satellites.”

No Clear U.S. Commitment for Missile Defense System in Europe

The EUObserver reported on April 5:

“US President Barack Obama gave no clear commitment to building missile defence bases in Europe… The US leader thanked a ‘courageous’ Poland and Czech Republic for agreeing with the previous White House administration to host US anti-missile facilities despite Russian opposition. But he repeated doubts over the value of the multi-billion dollar scheme and linked construction to the evolution of a ballistic threat from Iran.

“‘As long as the threat from Iran persists, we will go forward with a missile defence system that is cost effective and proven,’ Mr Obama said. ‘If the Iranian threat is eliminated …the driving force for missile defense construction in Europe at this time will be removed.'”

Why Obama’s Policies Won’t Work

The Guardian wrote on April 6:

“History may one day record it as a stark irony… that on the very day that Barack Obama was sketching out to an adoring throng in Prague his vision of a post-nuclear world, North Korea launched a rocket that may one day give it the capacity to fire a nuclear warhead as far as 3,700 miles. This means, to get down to brass tacks, that it could hit Alaska…

“Many people want to believe… that Obama can change the world dramatically in the next four years. It’s been a long time since a US president has been so admired. And it’s never been the case that a president so admired has directly succeeded a president so reviled. So the idea has taken root, in America and to a considerable extent elsewhere, that the rest of the world should be so grateful to be dealing with Obama and not Bush that they’ll at least come to the table and see reason…

“North Korea, like any state, has national interests… the North Koreans are going to do what they think they need to do… they couldn’t care less who the American president is.

“Neither could the Iranians, and neither, probably, could the Syrians… Neither [could] the Pakistanis and the Indians. Nor [could] Likud and Hamas. And we learned last week that adoration has its limits even among the closest of friends. Europe is not helping out much militarily on Afghanistan. This isn’t because Obama wasn’t persuasive enough. It’s because nations have interests as they perceive them, and they will act to protect those interests (and because democratic societies have public opinion, which is strongly against such assistance across Europe)…”

Tony Blair–the Next European President?

The Independent wrote on April 5:

“Tony Blair has emerged as the leading candidate to become the first permanent president of the European Union after Gordon Brown gave his grudging blessing to the plan. The former prime minister has stepped up his campaign for the job, which he wants to use to build a bridge between Europe and the new Obama administration. His return to the global stage would be a shock to his critics over the Iraq war and dismay many in Europe… Other European leaders are also broadly supportive because they want a high-profile figure to represent the 27-nation bloc in the new alliance with the US administration. Mr Blair remains a popular figure in the US.

“After initially trying to block Mr Blair as a possible candidate last year, the French President, Nicolas Sarkozy, has thrown his weight behind the former prime minister. As the eyes of the world were on London’s G20 summit last Wednesday, Mr Blair held private talks with the European Commission President José Manuel Barroso in Brussels. The talks focused on his work as Middle East envoy to the quartet of world powers, but it is almost certain that the two men discussed his candidacy. The former premier also visited Sweden last week, where he shared a platform with Bill Clinton at a climate change conference.

“The presidency job is dependant on Ireland voting ‘yes’ to the Lisbon Treaty, which creates the position. The Irish referendum will take place in the autumn. But Mr Blair’s plans could still be scuppered if Angela Merkel loses the German general election in September. She is thought to have a strong desire for the job in the event of defeat.”

Painful Memories of Nazi Seizures

Thelocal.de reported on April 3:

“Germany adopted a highly controversial emergency law on Friday allowing the government to nationalise stricken banks by seizing investors’ shares if necessary. It was passed by the Bundesrat, the country’s upper house of parliament after being passed last month by the Bundestag, Germany’s lower house…

“Berlin has stressed it would only forcibly seize… shares ‘as a last resort’ and would compensate investors based on the share’s stock market value, but some critics say the legislation has stoked painful memories of Nazi seizures of Jewish property in the 1930s and communist moves following World War II.”

And Now–Compensation of U.S. Nonprofit Executives Under Scrutiny

The Wall Street Journal wrote on April 6:

“An Internal Revenue Service official warned nonprofits to be mindful of executive-compensation practices amid public ire over large bonuses at insurer American International Group Inc. and other Wall Street firms that have received federal aid.

“Lois Lerner, the IRS’s director of tax-exempt organizations, told a gathering of lawyers representing charities Monday that scrutiny of nonprofits’ pay practices is likely to increase. Nonprofit leaders should be sure to practice due diligence in making sure their executive pay can be justified through data on comparable practices at similar organizations, she said…

“Nonprofit pay packages pale in comparison to some of those doled out to Wall Street executives. But a series of charity scandals in the past few years has focused attention on executive pay… Ms. Lerner of the IRS said the agency’s redesign of charities’ annual tax form – known as Form 990 – will make it easier for people to find information on executive pay… The new form, redesigned for the first time in some 20 years, triggers detailed disclosures of various compensation perks under certain circumstances, such as when an employee makes more than $150,000. Among the compulsory disclosures: First-class air travel, expense accounts, housing allowances and the use of bodyguards, chauffeurs and personal lawyers.

“Ms. Lerner urged charities to make certain governance practices public, to assure Americans they’re using their tax-exempt money appropriately. Ms. Lerner added that the IRS’s exempt organizations division is about to get more staff, who will provide guidance to nonprofits on complying with new regulations, among other things. The staff… also decides whether to grant tax-exempt status to organizations. Critics have long pointed to staff shortages at the IRS as one reason some charities fail to comply with various rules.”

“Estimated U.S. Taxpayer Cost for Bailout Jumps”

Reuters wrote on April 4:

“U.S. congressional budget analysts have raised their estimate of the net cost to taxpayers for the government’s financial rescue program to $356 billion, an increase of $167 billion from earlier estimates… The additional cost, which applies to TARP spending for fiscal years 2009 and 2010, was included in the CBO’s March projection of a $1.8 trillion deficit for fiscal 2009, which ends September 30.”

Marriage Not Limited to One Man and One Woman in Iowa

The Des Moines Register reported on April 3:

“The Iowa Supreme Court this morning unanimously upheld gays’ right to marry. ‘The Iowa statute limiting civil marriage to a union between a man and a woman violates the equal protection clause of the Iowa Constitution,’ the justices said in a summary of their decision. The court rules that gay marriage would be legal in three weeks, starting April 24… The decision makes Iowa the first Midwestern state, and the fourth nationwide, to allow same-sex marriages.”

Is America Copying Argentina’s “Disastrous Path”?

The Washington Times wrote on April 4:

“The disastrous path on which America is currently embarked was tried in another country. A fact not well known is that Argentina, prior to World War II, was an economic powerhouse. Beginning in the 1880s and continuing through the 1920s and 1930s, it was regarded as one of the most prosperous and advanced nations in the world. Then Juan Peron and his wife, Eva, took control in the 1940s until a coup in 1955 ousted them from power.

“Argentina had a strong industrial base, thriving agricultural exports, huge cattle ranches, and a broad and expanding middle class. Like America, it served as a magnet for immigrants from all over the world, especially Italians. Within 15 years under the Perons, Argentina, however, went from being one of the richest to one of the poorest countries. To date, it has never fully recovered.

“Upon coming to office, Peron, along with his popular beautiful wife, Eva, created a state characterized by lavish social spending, elaborate welfare programs, protectionism, confiscatory taxation, and runaway deficits. Juan Peron used class warfare rhetoric. He attacked big business, the banks, the private corporations, and the propertied class. He gave the labor unions power and made them pivotal allies of his regime. Then Peron expanded the bloated government bureaucracy to intervene in every aspect of business and life, which led to internal corruption.

“Peron’s central socialist economic planning destroyed industrial productivity and growth. The world’s investment capital fled. Taxes, inflation, unemployment, and interest rates soared and the middle class was wiped out. Finally, an independent judiciary and media ceased to exist. Eva’s cult of supporters fostered a climate of violence and political enemies of the regime were exterminated. Argentina degenerated into the typical debt-ridden Latin American country that it still is today.

“The failure of Argentina under Peron should serve as a warning to us. Socialism and a sky-rocketing debt can permanently impoverish even the  wealthiest of nations and America is not immune from the laws of economics. Obama is taking the first dangerous steps toward an American version of Peronism. His followers see him as a political messiah and a revolutionary change agent. He and the Democrats are plundering the country, using it as a vehicle to reward supporters and punish foes. They plan to confiscate wealth by taxing the rich and successful business class. Obama’s plan to do away with secret ballets will strengthen the labor unions. His wife, Michelle, is the Eva Peron of our time, a glamorous, chic, socialist fashion trend-setter who is beloved by the media.

“Just remember, ‘Those who fail to learn from history are condemned to repeat it.'”

Interesting Facts on Easter and Its Customs

The Encyclopedia Britannica wrote in its 27th edition, 1959, volume 7, about Easter:

“The English word, ‘Easter’… corresponding to the German Ostern, reveals Christianity’s indebtedness to the Teutonic tribes of central Europe. Christianity, when it reached the Teutons, incorporated in its celebrations of the great Christian feast many of the heathen rites and customs which accompanied their observance of the spring festival… The customs and symbols associated with the observance of Easter have ancient origins, not only in the Teutonic rites of spring but also far back in antiquity… the conception of the egg as a symbol of fertility and of renewed life goes back to the ancient Egyptians and Persians, who also had the custom of colouring and eating eggs during their spring festival… Like the Easter egg, the Easter hare… came to Christianity from antiquity… 

“And those families who, by custom, eat ham on Easter Sunday are unwittingly following an old practice of the Roman Catholics of England, who ate a gammon of bacon on Easter to show their contempt for the Jews, to whom pork is forbidden…

“In England… the Puritans… refused to celebrate Easter. Thus at first in the U.S… Easter was not observed. It was not until the latter part of the 19th century, particularly during the Civil War, that the Protestant churches, other than the Lutheran and the Episcopalian, began to mark this day by special services… The Protestant churches also followed the [pagan] custom of holding sunrise services on Easter morning.”

The Reader’s Digest Publication, “Why in the World,” copyright 1994, states the following about Easter and its customs, on pages 199-201:

“Originally, Easter had nothing to do with the Christian calendar. Our word for the festival comes from Eastre or Ostara, the goddess of spring among Germanic tribes of northern Europe. Pagan tribes rejoiced at the coming of spring, which is why many of our Easter customs, such as the giving of eggs, have pagan not Christian origins…

“Hares are born with their eyes open and are nocturnal. Because of this, the Egyptians made them sacred to the Moon. Later, ancient Britons gave the hare magical powers, using it in rites such as fortune-telling. Some villagers in Ireland refused to kill or eat hares, believing that they carried the souls of their grandparents. Later, Germanic tribes who worshipped Eastre (or Ostara), associated the fecund hare with her, their goddess of life and spring…

“Just as pagan customs figure in our Christmas festival, so too they have become associated inextricably with Easter. Long before the beginnings of Christianity, Egyptians and Romans gave gifts of eggs as symbols of life. Easter was originally a pagan festival to celebrate the coming of spring, which marked the rebirth of life in plants, a time when many birds mated and produced young. The hen’s egg, from which new life could spring, was a potent sign of regeneration. Often its shell was decorated with colours representing certain flowers and aimed at encouraging their regrowth…

“Traditionally, hot cross buns are eaten on Good Friday, but their origins, like many Eastertide and Christmas customs, go back to pagan times… The baking of special bread, flavoured with spices, was part of pagan celebrations to greet the spring and worship the sun. The ancient Greeks stamped their festival bread with a horned emblem in honour of Astarte, their goddess of love and fertility. The word ‘bun’ comes from ‘boun,’ an ancient word for a sacred ox. Cakes stamped with horns became buns marked with a cross.”

It is a Catholic custom to abstain from eating meat on “Good Friday” and to eat fish instead. Where did this custom originate?

First, let us examine the precise nature of this custom.

We are quoting from an Internet Website:

“Prior to reforms in the [Catholic] Church in the 1960s, Catholics were expected to refrain from consuming meat on all Fridays throughout the year and in advance of certain holy days. However, in 1966, Pope Paul VI limited the number of days that required fasting and abstinence and allowed local bishops to modify certain details. In the U.S. it is still expected that all Fridays are [days] observed with abstinence, but one may be permitted to replace abstaining from meat with another form of penitence or by performing some spiritual act. During Lent [which lasts for forty days, beginning with “Ash Wednesday” and ending with “Holy Saturday,” preceding “Easter Sunday”], which is the most penitential season of the year, the obligation to abstain from meat may not be substituted.

“It is common practice for Catholics to substitute fish for meat in their Friday meals. In Islam and Judaism, as well as Christianity, fish is not regarded as meat, thus the popular custom of fish fries throughout Lent… As a result of this identification of ‘meat’ based upon its behavioral characteristics, all manner of animals, including shellfish, beavers, and alligators, are classified as ‘fish’ for the purposes of dietary laws… Pope Pius XII granted American Catholics a dispensation from abstinence on the Friday after Thanksgiving to allow them to consume the leftovers from the day before.”

Another Website quotes the Catholic Code of Canon Law 1250, 1251, as follows:

“‘The penitential days and times in the universal Church are every Friday of the whole year and the season of Lent. Abstinence from meat, or from some other food as determined by the Episcopal Conference, is to be observed on all Fridays, unless a solemnity should fall on a Friday. Abstinence and fasting are to be observed on Ash Wednesday and Good Friday’… The application of this precept varies from country to country. For example, American bishops allow individual Catholics to substitute another penance if they could not abstain from meat.”

The Catholic publication, “The New Question Box,” 1988, states on page 367:

“In most places in the United States today, Catholics over 14 years of age must abstain from meat (and soup or gravy made from meat) on Ash Wednesday and all Fridays of Lent. On two days–Ash Wednesday and Good Friday–those over 18 and under 59 should fast. This means only one full meal, and only liquids like milk and fruit juices between meals.”

The idea of fasting during Lent stems from the concept that Christians would have committed sinful practices during Carnival (ending with “Ash Wednesday”) and needed therefore to repent or give penance during the subsequent time until Easter.

The reason for “fasting” on Good Friday is explained by “The New Question Box” in the sense that “Friday commemorated the day of Jesus’ death.”

However, as we explain in our free booklet, “Jesus Christ–a Great Mystery,” Christ was NOT crucified on Friday. Further, spiritual fasting, according to the Bible, is observed quite differently than how it is taught by the Catholic Church. For more information on that important issue, please read our free booklet, “The Meaning of God’s Fall Holy Days,” Chapter 2–The Day of Atonement, beginning with page 17.

The real origins of Catholic “fasting” during Lent, including on Good Friday, and the custom to eat fish instead, especially on Good Friday, are to be found in antiquity.

Alexander Hislop writes in “The Two Babylons,” on pages 104-106:

“The forty days’ abstinence of Lent was directly borrowed from the worshippers of the Babylonian goddess (Astarte or Ishtar)… Such a Lent of forty days was observed in Egypt… Among the Pagans this Lent seems to have been an indispensable preliminary to the great annual festival in commemoration of the death and resurrection of Tammuz, which was celebrated by alternate weeping and rejoicing [compare Ezekiel 8:13-14]… [T]o conciliate the Pagans to nominal Christianity, Rome, pursuing its usual policy, took measures to get the Christian and Pagan festivals amalgamated… Originally, even in Rome, Lent, with the preceding revelries of the Carnival, was entirely unknown.”

Ralph Woodrow writes in “Babylon, Mystery Religion,” copyright 1981, on pages 142 and 143:

“… each Friday, many Catholics abstain from meat–substituting fish in its place–supposedly in remembrance of the Friday crucifixion. Roman Catholics in the United States are no longer required by their church to abstain from meat on Fridays (as formerly)–except during Lent–nevertheless many still follow the custom of fish on Friday.

“Certainly, the Scriptures never associate fish with Friday. On the other hand, the word ‘Friday’ comes from the name of ‘Freya,’ who was regarded as the goddess of peace, joy, and FERTILITY, the symbol of her fertility being the FISH. From very early times the fish was a symbol of fertility among the Chinese, Assyrians, Phoenicians, the Babylonians, and others. The word ‘fish’ comes from ‘dag’ which implies increase or fertility…

“The goddess of sexual fertility among the Romans was called Venus… Friday was regarded as her sacred day because it was believed that the planet Venus ruled the first hour of Friday and this was called dies Veneris. And… the fish was also regarded as being sacred to her…

“The fish was regarded as sacred to Ashtoreth… In ancient Egypt, Isis was sometimes represented with a fish on her head… Considering that Friday was named after the goddess of sexual fertility, Friday being her sacred day, and the fish her symbol, it seems like more than a mere coincidence that Catholics have been taught that Friday is a day of abstinence from meat, a day to eat fish!”

But there is even more historical evidence for the custom of eating fish on Friday–especially on “Good Friday,” when Christ ALLEGEDLY was killed–according to Roman Catholic tradition, that is.

Woodrow explains, on pages 84 and 85, the following about the fishgod DAGON:

“Dagon was actually but a mystery form of the false Babylonian ‘savior.’ The name Dagon comes from ‘dag’ (a word commonly translated ‘fish’ in the Bible) and means fishgod. Though it originated in the paganism of Babylon, Dagon worship became especially popular among the heathenistic Philistines…

“Layard, in Babylon and Nineveh, explains that ‘the head of the fish [depicted as being worn by the fishgod Dagon on Mesopotamian sculptures] formed a mitre…’ A famous painting by Moretto shows St. Ambrose (in the sixteenth century) wearing a mitre shaped like the head of a fish.”

Woodrow also shows in his book pictures of Pope Paul VI, wearing the fish-shaped mitre.

To summarize, the Catholic custom to eat fish on Good Friday is not Scriptural. It is clearly derived from pagan customs and concepts and is also connected with the wrong teaching that Christ was crucified on a Friday–which He was not.

Of course, it would not be wrong to eat fish on any day of the week–including on a Friday–as long as it is not done with the false idea that eating fish on “Good Friday” honors God or Christ in any way. As Paul explained, we could even eat meat sacrificed to idols–as idols are nothing–as long as we don’t do it “with consciousness of the idol” (1 Corinthians 8:7), thereby giving a wrong impression that we agree with the correctness of those pagan customs, or by defiling the conscience of others (compare verses 10, 12; 1 Corinthians 10:28-29).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

A new StandingWatch program, titled, “A Single Nuclear Bomb Could Destroy America,” was posted on StandingWatch, GoogleVideo and YouTube. In the program, Norbert Link asks the question whether the Obama Administration is still willing to provide American leadership to the Western World. How should we explain Mr. Obama’s giving in to German-French demands at the G-20 summit? How should we understand Mr. Obama’s acknowledgment of Europe’s leading role in world affairs? And how should we interpret Robert Gates’ comments regarding North Korea and Iran? But do we understand that a nuclear attack on America with the potential of killing 90% of all Americans is a distinct possibility?

A German program was recorded, titled, “Ist Amerika noch bereit zu führen?” [“Is America Still Willing to Lead?”]. It discusses the G-20 summit, North Korea’s satellite, Robert Gates’ comments on North Korea and Iran, and the fact that the EU will fill the vacuum left by the USA. It is posted on our Website (“AufPostenStehen.de”) and on You Tube.

On Saturday, April 4, 2009, Dave Harris will give the sermon, titled, “Willing to Yield.”

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.

On Tuesday evening, after sunset, April 7, 2009, is Passover, followed by the Night to Be Much Observed on Wednesday evening, April 8, after sunset.

On Thursday, April 9, 2009, is the First Day of Unleavened Bread. Rene Messier will be giving the sermon in the morning from Oregon, and Norbert Link will give the sermon in the afternoon from California.

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 9:00 am and 1:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 11:00 am and 3:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

For those of our scattered baptized brethren who need to partake of the Passover at home, we are giving pertinent information in this Update, under Feasts.

Towards the end of their time in captivity, as the Israelites endured their slavery in Egypt, they had no idea that their physical deliverance or “salvation” was around the corner. In fact, their dwelling in the land got “darker before the dawn” as they went through some of the plagues with the Egyptians. 

But in reality God was very near and was implementing His plan to deliver the Israelites from bondage. 

The events of the end-time will play out in much the same way for the physical descendants of Israel.  We know that circumstances will become more dire in the few years preceding the return of Christ.  We know that this will be a sign that His return is near and that their physical deliverance or “salvation” is around the corner.

It seems that at this time of the year, Passover particularly, our personal lives parallel these historical and future occurrences. Great trial and tribulation come upon us… or at least great in our mind and our lives.  They come because God is working in and with us.  He is leading us to our spiritual Salvation and is doing what is necessary to get us there.

Just as God led the Israelites out of sin in the past, He will do so again in the future. But this time, God will offer Israel not just physical, but also spiritual Salvation. And as we go through these days, we should also focus on the certainty that God will guide us–spiritual Israel–out of our troubles as well.  We can learn the lessons that God is trying to teach us and look forward to leaving them behind as we realize that our Salvation is just around the corner.

The Week in Review

The Bible has prophesied thousands of years ago that in these last days, the United States of America will be utterly defeated in war and that it will be totally destroyed. It is remarkable that more and more voices in the political field are being heard these days warning that this distinct possibility exists NOW. For one example, please read our lead article excerpting statements from Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

The Bible has also prophesied that America would lose its willingness to fight in war and to represent its own interests. The incredible interview with Defense Secretary Robert Gates regarding North Korea exemplifies the utter helplessness and paralysis of America in the face of a potentially volatile situation. (Mr. Gates made equally problematic comments regarding Israel and Iran.)

In addition, President Obama’s strategy in Pakistan and Afghanistan does not seem to show any improvement to the failed policies of the Bush Administration. Mr. Obama’s popularity is definitely diminishing both in this country and abroad. As we have stated from the outset, Mr. Obama is not the “savior” the media has made him out to be, and this country will wake up to this fact with bitter disappointment. However, as one article shows, it has become dangerous to criticize Mr. Obama’s policies, as many supporters respond to such criticism with damnable charges of being a racist.

President Obama traveled to Europe to join the G20 gatherings. But Germany and France have shown their disagreement with Britain and the USA and are blaming the Anglo-Saxons for the worldwide recession. And while all the G20 summit leaders claimed success, they “papered over divisions between Europe and the USA” and “offered little new on monetary policy action” (Financial Times, April 2). In the end, the French and the Germans got basically everything they asked for, and the USA just gave in. In other news, it was reported that Italy and Israel are moving to the far right, and Iran continues with its war-mongering activities in the Middle East.

For more information about what is prophesied for the USA, Britain, continental Europe and the Middle East, please read our free booklets, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America,” and “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.”

We end with a piece of good news: There is an increasing number of Germans who begin to express doubts about the ungodly concept of Darwin’s Evolution Theory. One interesting project in the making is a Bible-themed fun park in Germany, including a replica of Noah’s Ark. Scientists and even mainstream Christianity have opposed this endeavor–shame on them–but it is hoped that in spite of this ungodly opposition, it may still materialize. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Theory of Evolution–A Fairy Tale for Adults.”

Total Destruction of America

On March 29, Newsmax.com published an intriguing and eye-opening article by Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, titled, “A Single Nuke Could Destroy America.” In the article, it was pointed out:

“A sword of Damocles hangs over our heads. It is a real threat that has been all but ignored. On Feb. 3, Iran launched a ‘communications satellite’ into orbit. At this very moment, North Korea is threatening to do the same. The ability to launch an alleged communications satellite belies a far more frightening truth. A rocket that can carry a satellite into orbit also can drop a nuclear warhead over any location on the planet in less than 45 minutes.

“Far too many timid or uninformed sources maintain that a single launch of a missile poses no true threat to the United States, given our retaliatory power. A reality check is in order and must be discussed in response to such an absurd claim: In fact, one small nuclear weapon, delivered by an ICBM can destroy the United States by maximizing the effect of the resultant electromagnetic pulse upon detonation.

“An electromagnetic pulse (EMP) is a byproduct of detonating an atomic bomb above the Earth’s atmosphere. When a nuclear weapon is detonated in space, the gamma rays emitted trigger a massive electrical disturbance in the upper atmosphere. Moving at the speed of light, this overload will short out all electrical equipment, power grids and delicate electronics on the Earth’s surface. In fact, it would take only one to three weapons exploding above the continental United States to wipe out our entire grid and transportation network…

“One to three missiles tipped with nuclear weapons and armed to detonate at a high altitude… would create an EMP ‘overlay’ that triggers a continent-wide collapse of our entire electrical, transportation, and communications infrastructure.

“Within weeks after such an attack, tens of millions of Americans would perish. The impact has been likened to a nationwide Hurricane Katrina. Some studies estimate that 90 percent of all Americans might very well die in the year after such an attack as our transportation, food distribution, communications, public safety, law enforcement, and medical infrastructures collapse.”

America–The Helpless Sleeping Giant?

Fox News reported on March 29 about a ridiculous interview with Defense Secretary Robert Gates about the situation with North Korea. While America is trying to present a nice front to show their worries about North Korean warlike tendencies–even sending warships in the region–Gates let the cat out of the bag when stating that America can and will do nothing to stop North Korea. The great sleeping giant–helpless and paralyzed? What a picture of confusing, disillusioning and contradictory messages.

The article stated:

“The United States can do nothing to stop North Korea from breaking international law in the next 10 days by firing a missile that is unlikely to be shot down by the U.S. or its allies, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said Sunday. Appearing on ‘FOX News Sunday,’ Gates said North Korea ‘probably will’ fire the missile, prompting host Chris Wallace to ask: ‘And there’s nothing we can do about it?’ ‘No,’ Gates answered, adding, ‘I would say we’re not prepared to do anything about it.’

“Last week, Admiral Timothy Keating, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, said the U.S. is ‘fully prepared’ to shoot down the missile. But Gates said such a response is unlikely. ‘I think if we had an aberrant missile, one that was headed for Hawaii, that looked like it was headed for Hawaii or something like that, we might consider it,’ Gates said. ‘But I don’t think we have any plans to do anything like that at this point.'”

Obama Is Repeating Bush Mistakes

In its March online edition, Foreign Policy wrote the following:

“President Barack Obama’s sobering speech on Afghanistan and Pakistan has been well, if cautiously, received by commentators so far… But amid all of the commentary on the depth and wisdom of the new proposed strategy, it is important to consider some facts and recent history from the ground that should elicit caution and concern for the would-be optimists.

“… the United States is not putting any troops on the ground in Pakistan. The U.S. military will continue to rely on drones, even though their use has led to politically damaging civilian casualties and very little in the way of top al Qaeda leader ‘kills.’ Obama spoke of the $1.5 billion proposed in aid each year over the next five years… That amount is certainly not more than Bush spent on Pakistan; it may even be less, as funding during the previous administration averaged $1.6 billion per year. Comments that Obama is now ‘fully resourcing’ the war in South Asia are completely ungrounded.

“But the biggest flaw in Obama’s strategy for Pakistan is not funding; it is the complete misportrayal of Pakistani politics. Obama denies a fundamental and inescapable choice that he will have to face: the trade-off between Pakistani ‘democracy’ and Pakistani government cooperation in fighting the Taliban and al Qaeda. Pakistani government action against al Qaeda and the Taliban is and will remain inherently unpopular with a significant proportion of the population. If this or any Pakistani government takes serious action against al Qaeda or the Taliban, it will be doing so in the face of significant domestic opposition. It would be difficult enough for a pro-American autocrat with robust financial and military backing to do what the United States is asking. It is a fantasy to think that a democratic government — one that is dependent on popular support — could ever move decisively against the militants. And certainly, $1.5 billion a year is not enough to motivate either type of regime toward much of anything…

 “Likewise, when Obama turns from Pakistan to Afghanistan, he takes on the wrong problem. Obama describes Afghanistan — nearly eight years after the overthrow of the Taliban — as a largely failed state… The Taliban gains support as a direct result of the central government’s failure to provide a minimal level of physical security… Until Obama and his advisors come up with a strategy that will improve security conditions for everyday Afghans, the Taliban will continue to gain ground…

“To be sure, one of former President George W. Bush’s biggest post-September 11 mistakes was to pull U.S. forces out of Afghanistan before they were able to finish destroying al Qaeda. But Obama’s ‘new’ stabilization plan is not fundamentally different from Bush’s ‘democracy as panacea.’ Now, just as Bush had to do, Obama will be forced to decide whether he is really prepared to embrace a security strategy that relies on regional warlords rather than the central government. The Bush administration never resolved this question in its own policies, and the consequence was incoherence and ineffectiveness.

‘”Obama stands to suffer the same fate. Relying on local warlords is extremely problematic in terms of promoting national cohesion, human rights, and other issues of concern to the United States…

“Facing a daunting task, Obama wants to draw on the expertise of an international contact group that includes the United States’ ‘NATO allies and other partners, but also the Central Asian states, the Gulf nations and Iran; Russia, India and China.’ This idea is good only in principle. It is hard to see how such an internally conflicted assembly — including India, Pakistan, Gulf Arab states, and Iran — could accomplish very much…

“The bottom line: The Obama administration’s much-anticipated strategy for Pakistan and Afghanistan offers little that is really new or that squarely addresses the long-standing contradictions and deficits in U.S. policy.”

“FROM MANIA TO MISTRUST– Europe’s Obama Euphoria Wanes”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on March 30:

“Europe was ecstatic when Barack Obama got elected, but the enthusiasm has dampened since he took office in January. On the eve of his first visit to Europe as president, some here are wondering how seriously he takes the Continent…

“When Obama arrives in London on Tuesday for the start of his one-week visit to Europe, he’ll come as a friend, but as one who is still in some ways a stranger. Europe backed his election campaign more enthusiastically than most other parts of the world. But the White House has been too preoccupied coping with domestic crises to devote much attention to this region in the first two months of Obama’s presidency.

“… it has become clear that the most contentious issues have been shelved… it’s plain to see that Obama’s team has yet to become accustomed to dealing with Europe. And a worry voiced during the campaign has returned: that Obama — who spent his childhood years in Indonesia and who has shown a lot of interest in Africa — knows little about Europe.

“Even the British, proud of their ‘special relationship’ with Washington, have been wondering why Gordon Brown was handed nothing more than a box of DVDs as a present during his recent visit. Brussels was pleased that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton devoted so much time to her recent trip there, but the fact that she chose to visit Asia first has been noted…”

Anger Against Obama Within the USA

The Associated Press reported on March 30:

“Many assembly line autoworkers reacted with skepticism and anger Monday to the Obama administration’s tough tactics, which stoked long-simmering feelings that the people who put the country on wheels get treated differently than the wizards of Wall Street… Many workers — not generally known for their affection toward executives — even sympathized with Rick Wagoner, who was forced to step down as chief executive of General Motors Corp. He was by turns called a ‘sacrificial lamb,’ ‘scapegoat’ and ‘fall guy.’

“‘We knew someone was going to have to take the proverbial ‘bullet,’ and it would have made it a lot easier to accept that had the CEOs of the banks also been required to give up their jobs,’ said Jim Graham, president of a union local in Lordstown, Ohio…

“Obama said the administration will offer GM ‘adequate working capital’ during the next 60 days to produce an acceptable reorganization plan. The government gave Chrysler LLC 30 days to overcome hurdles to a merger with Fiat SpA, the Italian automaker. Many workers say the government hasn’t dictated such terms to insurance giant AIG or the banks in which it’s taken an ownership stake. Obama’s actions come amid public outrage over bonuses paid to business leaders and American International Group executives.”

Is Anti-Obamaism Being Racist?

On March 30, Fox News published an interesting piece about a Hollywood actress who is labeled as a racist because she does not agree with President Obama’s policies. Sadly, these prejudicial accusations have become more common in the “land of the free,” which prides itself of granting the right of free expression to its citizens. The article pointed out:

“Angie Harmon (“Law and Order”) is not afraid to come out and say she doesn’t like how President Obama is handling the job — but she’s sick of having to defend herself from being deemed a racist.

“Here’s my problem with this, I’m just going to come out and say it. If I have anything to say against Obama it’s not because I’m a racist, it’s because I don’t like what he’s doing as President and anybody should be able to feel that way, but what I find now is that if you say anything against him you’re called a racist,’ Harmon [said]…’But it has nothing to do with it, I don’t care what color he is. I’m just not crazy about what he’s doing… If I’m going to disagree with my President, that doesn’t make me a racist… it is ridiculous.'”

Germany Stops Britain and Opposes USA

The Telegraph wrote on March 29:

“GORDON BROWN’S carefully laid plans for a G20 deal on worldwide tax cuts have been scuppered by an eve-of-summit ambush by European leaders. Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, last night led the assault on the prime minister’s ‘global new deal’ for a $2 trillion-plus fiscal stimulus to end the recession. ‘I will not let anyone tell me that we must spend more money,’ she said.

“The Spanish finance minister, Pedro Solbes, also dismissed new cash being pledged at Thursday’s London summit…

“The attacks on Brown’s ambitions for the G20 to inject more money into the world economy come at the end of a week where the prime minister has travelled to three continents to build support for his proposals… The assault by European Union leaders also represents a defeat for President Barack Obama, who is desperate for other big economies to copy his $800 billion stimulus plan… Adding to the disarray, a draft of the agreement Brown hopes to secure was leaked to a German news magazine…

“George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, yesterday warned Brown against further tax cuts in the budget. ‘When it comes to your plans for a second fiscal stimulus, I say this Gordon Brown: enough is enough,’ he said in a speech. ‘We will not let you play roulette with the public finances yet again’…

“Merkel’s criticism drew an angry response from Labour MPs. Denis MacShane, the former Europe minister, said: ‘Who does Mrs Merkel think is going to buy Mercedes and BMWs if she . . . says putting demand into the economy is a bad thing?’ Another Labour MP said: ‘One has to ask who had something to gain from the leak of [Brown’s] communiqué. This feels like a dirty trick.'”

France Threatens Britain, Blames USA

On March 31, The Times reported the following:

“President Sarkozy yesterday threatened to wreck the London summit if France’s demands for tougher financial regulation are not met. France will not accept a G20 that produces a ‘false success with language that sounds good but contains no commitments’, his advisers said… The French threat dramatically raised the temperature hours before President Obama arrives in London today. If carried through, it would ruin a summit for which Mr Brown and Mr Obama have high ambitions, believing it vital to international recovery…

“Mr Sarkozy, who blames the ‘Anglo-Saxons’ for causing the economic crisis, told his ministers last week that he would leave Mr Brown’s summit ‘if it does not work out’… France wants a global financial regulator, an idea fiercely opposed by the United States and Britain. Mr Brown has described the notion as ridiculous.

“Germany and other nations are reported to be against a global regulator and sources said that President Sarkozy must know that the proposal would not make progress… British officials said it looked as if Mr Sarkozy was picking a fight he could present as a victory back home.”

France and Germany vs. GB and USA

Times On Line wrote on April 2:

“France and Germany delivered a late threat to derail Gordon Brown’s efforts to secure a global recovery deal last night by demanding new concessions from the United States on financial regulation.

“In a classic show of eve-of-summit brinkmanship, Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy joined forces to give warning that they would refuse to sign any agreement that did not meet their ‘red lines’ on tax havens, hedge fund regulation, tracing ‘securitised’ assets sold around the world and capping bankers’ remuneration. They also wanted the ‘naming and shaming’ of tax havens that refused to go along with tougher regulatory rules, which is being opposed by the United States.

“In a reminder of former confrontations between America and the countries of Old Europe, Mr Sarkozy suggested that Europe would not take economic direction from the US. He appeared to suggest that America would have to compromise, adding pointedly: ‘The crisis didn’t spontaneously erupt in Europe, did it?’

“The firm stance of Mr Sarkozy and Ms Merkel and the language used in a joint press conference took negotiators by surprise as they prepared to work through the night on the communiqué to be released today. Although Mr Brown and President Obama appeared confident of an agreement throughout yesterday’s talks in London, it was clear last night that Mr Obama would have to make more concessions if differences were to be smoothed over…

“Mr Sarkozy… said last night that the German-Franco demands on regulation were ‘non-negotiable’… he indicated that France and Germany would be ready to discuss other issues only if they felt that their priority of tougher regulation was being adequately dealt with…

“The tone of the two leaders differed sharply from that adopted by Mr Brown and Mr Obama earlier in the day. Mr Brown spoke of leaders being ‘within a few hours’ of agreeing a global plan for economic recovery…”

“G20 Leaders Claim Summit Success”

The Financial Times reported on April 2:

“World leaders on Thursday heralded the G20 summit as the day the world ‘fought back against the recession’ as they put on a show of unity that lifted global markets and mapped out a new future for financial regulation

“Gordon Brown, host of the summit, said the meeting marked the emergence of a ‘new world order’, as he unveiled what leaders claimed was a $1,100bn package of measures to tackle the global downturn, including support for lower income countries and a $250bn plan to boost the international money supply.

“Close inspection showed some of the $1,100bn pledged included reannouncements and half-done deals. However, even before the summit ended, equity markets rose sharply around the world on hopes that the global economy was stabilising…

“The leaders papered over divisions between the US and Europe over whether the world could afford a new fiscal stimulus, with US president Barack Obama describing the summit’s measures as ‘bolder and more rapid than any international response that we’ve seen to a financial crisis in memory’ and predicted they would mark ‘a turning point in our pursuit of global economic recovery’.

“France’s president Nicolas Sarkozy, meanwhile, said the summit’s agreement on a new regulatory regime and crackdown on tax havens showed ‘a page has been turned’ on an era of post-war ‘Anglo Saxon’ capitalism.

“Although the summit ended with smiles, a row between China and France over the blacklisting of tax havens – including possibly Hong Kong and Macao – continued behind the scenes well into the day. US officials say that Barack Obama helped broker a compromise over offshore tax savings between Hu Jintao of China and Nicolas Sarkozy of France, who had threatened to walk away from the summit… In the end they agreed [to] a compromise in which the G20 would only ‘take note’ of the OECD’s list, rather than endorse it.

“The summit text included commitments to curb ‘risky’ bank pay and bonuses, but offered little new on monetary policy action or efforts to clean up bank balance sheets. Of the $500bn of money pledged to the IMF to bolster struggling economies, some had already been announced and $250bn was a pledge of future funds.”

“Merkel and Sarkozy Got Everything They Asked For”

Der Spiegel Online reported on April 2:

“On Wednesday, eyebrows were raised when German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy went before the press to demand in no uncertain terms that the G-20 do more to strengthen regulation of global financial markets. On Thursday, the two leaders appeared to be getting everything they asked for…

“Merkel and Sarkozy had rejected earlier drafts of the statement for lacking bite when it came to financial oversight. Now, the G-20 has agreed to the creation of blacklists of tax havens in addition to measures to tighten rules pertaining to hedge funds and credit rating agencies. An oversight body will also be created. Chancellor Merkel praised the outcome of the summit for reaching a ‘very, very good, almost historic compromise.’ She said ‘we have agreed on the development of a clear financial architecture.'”

Italy Moves to the Far Right

The EUObserver wrote on March 27:

“The populist right-wing party of Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi on Friday officially merges with the post-fascist Alleanza Nazionale at the founding congress of Il Popolo della Liberta, the powerful new rightist bloc that is not only set to dominate Italian politics for the foreseeable future, but will also wield considerable power in the European Parliament after the June elections…

“The Alleanza Nazionale was formed by Mr Fini out of the Italian Social Movement (MSI), the former neo-fascist party, together with a handful of conservative ex-Christian Democrats and Liberals. Despite once having called Italy’s fascist leader, Benito Mussolini, the greatest statesman of the 20th century, Mr Fini has since tried to distance himself from his far right past, making numerous trips to Israel and even criticising elements of the recent hardline security package that targets immigrants and minorities.”

Of course, even Adolf Hitler backed down from persecuting Jews openly, when he ran for power. He showed his true colors, however, when he WAS in power.

Iran’s Warmongering in the Middle East

Der Spiegel Online wrote on March 30:

“Iran is reportedly increasing its military aid to both Hezbollah and Hamas, according to Israeli intelligence sources…

“The findings of other intelligence agencies in the Middle East also indicate that Iran is sending weapons and explosives to Hezbollah in Lebanon and to the Palestinian radical group Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip…

“Meanwhile, the Israelis have carried out aerial attacks in Sudan in an attempt to halt the delivery of weapons to Hamas — including rockets with a range of 70 kilometers, far enough to reach Tel Aviv from the Gaza Strip…

“The level to which Iran is intervening politically in the region is made evident by the failure of attempts so far to achieve reconciliation between the rival Palestinian factions. The moderate Fatah movement of President Mahmoud Abbas, which controls the West Bank, is locked in a bitter conflict with the radical Islamist group Hamas, which forced Fatah out of the Gaza Strip in June 2007… even the veteran Egyptian mediators had underestimated Iran’s influence.”

Israel Moves to the Right

The Financial Times wrote on March 30:

“Benjamin Netanyahu will be sworn in as Israel’s prime minister, marking a decisive shift to a more rightwing, hawkish government, just as the country is facing mounting international criticism.

“The Likud party leader, prime minister between 1996 and 1999, will preside over a broad but potentially fractious coalition. Mr Netanyahu’s alliance includes the far-right Yisrael Beiteinu party, the centre-left Labour party and the ultra-orthodox religious Shas group. His government may eventually comprise six parties with strongly diverging policies on issues from foreign policy to Israel’s religious-secular divide. The new prime minister faces discontent within his own party over the number of senior cabinet posts for his party affiliates…

“Mr Netanyahu has so far refused to back the idea of an independent Palestinian state – the cornerstone of all recent diplomatic efforts to end the 60-year Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Compounding the difficult international environment faced by the new government is the backlash over Israel’s recent assault on the Gaza Strip, which has sparked calls for a war crimes tribunal and strained relations with neighbouring Egypt. The Arab world, in particular, has been aghast at the appointment of Avigdor Lieberman as Israel’s foreign minister.

“Mr Lieberman, leader of Yisrael Beiteinu, is known for anti-Arab outbursts, and an election campaign this year that targeted Israel’s Palestinian minority. However, fears that Mr Netanyahu could become dependent on Mr Lieberman and other far-right groups have receded since last week, when he managed to bring the Labour party on board. The coalition agreement will allow Ehud Barak, the Labour leader and a former prime minister himself, to continue in his job as defence minister.

“It is unclear, however, to what degree Labour will be in a position to counterbalance the rightwing forces in the coalition. The party only controls five out of 30 cabinet posts and will have fewer deputies than either Likud or Yisrael Beiteinu. The decision to join a government dominated by rightwing and religious parties is likely to have antagonised many Labour voters, potentially reducing Mr Barak’s readiness to force an early election over policy disagreements.”

Israel Warns USA and Iran

The Jerusalem Post reported on April 1:

“The primary imperative for the United States and President Barack Obama is to put an end to Iran’s nuclear race, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said before his swearing-in Tuesday, adding that if the US failed to do so Israel might be forced to resort to a military strike on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear installations.

“‘The Obama presidency has two great missions: fixing the economy, and preventing Iran from gaining nuclear weapons,’ Netanyahu told The Atlantic. The Iranian drive for a nuclear weapon was a ‘hinge of history,’ he said, emphasizing that all of ‘Western civilization’ was responsible for preventing an Iranian bomb.

“‘You don’t want a messianic apocalyptic cult controlling atomic bombs,’ Netanyahu said of the Iranian regime. ‘When the wide-eyed believer gets hold of the reins of power and the weapons of mass death, then the entire world should start worrying, and that is what is happening in Iran.'”

“Israel Might Attack Iran”

Press TV wrote on April 1:

“Top US commander in the Middle East, General David Petraeus says Israel might choose to attack Iran as a move to halt its nuclear program. ‘The Israeli government may ultimately see itself so threatened by the prospect of an Iranian nuclear weapon that it would take preemptive military action to derail or delay it,’ Petraeus told the US Congress on Wednesday.

“The head of the US Central Command also accused Iran of failing ‘to provide the assurances and transparency necessary for international acceptance and verification’ of the peaceful nature of its program. Tehran’s ‘obstinacy and obfuscation have forced Iran’s neighbors and the international community to conclude the worst about the regime’s intention,’ Bloomberg quoted Petraeus as telling the Senate Armed Services Committee.

“Ken Katzman, a Middle East military analyst for the non- partisan Congressional Research Service in Washington, said Petraeus’ remarks about a prospective Israeli attack against Iran ‘was extremely significant, particularly for what he did not say — that the United States would act to restrain Israel or talk it out of conducting such a strike.’

“Israel, which is believed to possess the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenals, accuses Iran of trying to develop nuclear arms. Tehran however says its nuclear program is only aimed at meeting the country’s energy needs.”

U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates’ Ill-Advised Comments

According to Haaretz.com in an article, dated April 2, “U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates told the Financial Times on Wednesday that Israel is unlikely to launch military operations against Iranian nuclear installations this year in a bid to derail the Islamic regime’s drive to attain atomic weapons.”

Again, as was the case with his previous comments regarding North Korea, Robert Gates’ new comments must also be viewed as ill-advised and politically dangerous.

The article continued:

“Upon taking office this week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has indicated that a nuclear-armed Iran would pose a strategic threat to Israel, and that neutralizing that threat is a top priority of his new administration… Gates said he believed that Iran would not cross the nuclear threshold, or ‘red line’, this year. He estimated that it would take Tehran between one to three years to reach the point it possessed enough know-how to produce nuclear weapons.

“Gates’ assessment is at odds with that offered by Israel’s defense establishment. Last month, Military Intelligence chief Amos Yadlin told lawmakers that Iran has ‘crossed the technological threshold’ for making a nuclear bomb. He told the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that the Islamic Republic has developed surface-to-surface missiles that can carry nuclear warheads.”

Israel Opposes Annapolis

The Wall Street Journal wrote on April 2:

“Sounding a defiant tone on his first day as foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman said Israel wouldn’t abide by commitments it made to pursue Palestinian statehood at the U.S.-sponsored Annapolis peace summit in 2007.

“The comments suggested a potential early friction point between the newly sworn-in government of Benjamin Netanyahu and the Obama administration, and stood in sharp contrast to a more conciliatory tone struck by Mr. Netanyahu at his swearing-in ceremony Tuesday night.

“‘There is one document that obligates us — and that’s not the Annapolis conference, it has no validity,’ Mr. Lieberman said at a news conference Wednesday. He said Israel would instead abide by the so-called ‘road map’ for peace developed in 2002, which delays discussion of Palestinian statehood until after Palestinians clamp down on terror and meet other conditions. ‘Those who think that through concessions they will gain respect and peace are wrong,’ he added. ‘It’s the other way around; it will lead to more wars.’ Many in Mr. Netanyahu’s own party share Mr. Lieberman’s views, but Mr. Netanyahu has been trying to moderate his image…

“U.S. State Department spokesman Gordon Duguid avoided responding directly to Mr. Lieberman’s comments, instead telling reporters the White House is committed to the two-state solution and ‘moving forward’ from Annapolis, and is awaiting ‘the final position of the Israeli government.'”

Some Germans Are Questioning Evolution Theory

Netzeitung wrote on March 26:

“Many Evangelical Americans might consider Europe a godless place, but… questioning the theory of evolution and teaching Creationism is on the rise in Germany. Herald Janssen reckons that if people could only see a replica of Noah’s Ark, they might be swayed toward the Biblical story of creation. ‘It was as big as an oil-tanker,’ he says. ‘If you could see it, you’d start to think, “Wow, it might have fit all the animals in there.”‘

“Articulate and obviously well-read, Janssen… sits on the board of a Swiss non-profit group that wants to build a Bible-themed fun park in Germany… Creationism – the belief that Genesis and other books of the Bible explain life on Earth – is gaining strength in Germany.

“A recent survey at the University of Dortmund found that more than one-fifth of students who wanted to become teachers had misgivings about Darwin’s theory of evolution. Some 17 percent of students who’d studied basic biology doubted evolution, as did nearly eight percent who were studying a higher degree in biology…

“A real litmus test for the movement will be whether the Biblical theme park planned by the Swiss group Genesis Land gets off the ground. The original location near Heidelberg has been abandoned due to opposition from locals and mainstream Protestants. Genesis Land is now in talks with planning authorities in three other locations, though Herald Janssen won’t say where.

“They need about EUR 80 million to open the park and another EUR 120 million to complete it. So far, they have raised less than half a million, though Mr Janssen points out they are awaiting planning approval before they begin their proper fundraising drive. ‘Sure,’ he says. ‘We have a long way to go.'”

No. In John 10:35 it states that “the Scripture cannot be broken,” and so we must look for another explanation.

In John 18:13 Jesus was described as being brought to Annas, who was the father-in-law of the high priest at that time–Caiaphas. According to Josephus, Annas had been deposed of the high priesthood in 15 CE by Valerius Gratus, and Caiaphas was the high priest from 18 to 36 CE. However, other sources, as quoted below, state that Annas was dismissed as high priest in AD 23.

There are those who have suggested re-arranging the order of events, as described in the book of John, but this is not supported by the majority of manuscripts. Rather, it is indeed correct that both Annas and Caiaphas are quite legitimately referred to as “high priest” in the Bible, and for important reasons.

The New Bible Commentary states:

“Jesus is bound and taken before Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas (Annas had been deposed from the High Priesthood by Valerius Gratus, Pilate’s predecessor as procurator, but continued to exercise control from the background). The account of this examination before Annas is not given in the synoptist narrative, and it was probably an informal inquiry at Annas’ house.”

In Matthew Henry’s Commentary, these comments are made:

“This Annas was father-in-law to Caiaphas the high priest; this kindred by marriage between them comes in as a reason either why Caiaphas ordered that this piece of respect should be done to Annas, to favour him with the first sight of the prisoner, or why Annas was willing to countenance Caiaphas in a matter his heart was so much upon. Note, acquaintance and alliance with wicked people are a great confirmation to many in their wicked ways… The power of Caiaphas intimated (v. 13). He was high priest that same year. The high priest’s commission was during life; but there were now such frequent changes, by the Simoniacal artifices of aspiring men with the government, that it was become almost an annual office, a presage of its final period approaching; while they were undermining one another.”

These comments show that the high priest’s commission was during life but were subject to “Simoniacal artifices”–which are defined as “the skill in the crime of buying or selling ecclesiastical preferment; the corrupt presentation of any one to an ecclesiastical benefice for money or reward.” When a minister in the Church of God today is ordained, that ordination is not to be taken lightly nor discarded at a later date. It is a lifetime appointment in the service of God and “no one having put his hand to the plow, and looking back, is fit for the Kingdom of God.” As this applies to our calling, it can also be correctly applied to the ministry. Of course, a person can disqualify himself–or can be dismissed–from a ministerial office for biblical and scriptural reasons.

And so, Annas, a former high priest, could also still have that title applied to him. Annas, his five sons, and his son-in-law Caiaphas, all held the Jewish High-Priesthood during the first century AD.

In Luke 3:2 it states that “Annas and Caiaphas being high priests…” And Acts 4:6 reads, “as well as Annas, the high priest, Caiaphas, John and Alexander, and as many as were of the family of the high priest, were gathered together at Jerusalem.” Luke, who authored both of these verses, referred to both Annas and Caiaphas as “high priests,” for the reasons explained above.

As a similar example today, in the United States’ governmental elections in 2008, Mr. Obama was elected President while Mr. George W Bush was still in office. One man was still President while the other was President-elect. Mr. Bush is one of a number of ex-Presidents still alive at this time, and he is still being referred to as “President Bush” today, even though he is no longer fulfilling the functions of a President. The same is true for President Carter or President Clinton or President Ford or President Bush Sen.–and we even refer to those men who have died by now as Presidents, such as President Washington or President Lincoln or President Reagan.

The Treasury of Scriptural Knowledge comments:

“Annas was dismissed from being high priest, A.D. 23 after filling that office for fifteen years; but, being a person of distinguished character, and having had no fewer than five sons who had successively enjoyed the dignity of the high-priesthood, and the present high priest Caiaphas being his son-in-law, he must have possessed much authority in the nation. It was at the palace of Caiaphas where the chief priests, elders, and scribes were assembled the whole of the night to see the issue of their stratagem.”

Caiaphas was actually in office as High Priest, but it appears that his father-in-law, Annas, being a former High Priest, either held the title for life, or was still viewed by the Jews as “high priest,” even though not in a functioning capacity. It therefore appears that the answer to this conundrum that has provoked so much controversy and discussion over many years is that Annas was still seen as a high priest even though his son-in-law Caiaphas now occupied that position.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale

Norbert Link’s new German sermon, titled, “Gottesbeweise–Gibt Es Sie Wirklich?” (“Are There Really Proofs for God’s Existence?”) dated April 1, 2009, was posted on Google Video.

The new booklet on the Prophecies of the Book of Zechariah has entered the second review cycle.

On Saturday, March 28, 2009, Kalon Mitchell and Michael Link will give split sermons, titled, respectively, “The Beatitudes” and “Are You Prepared?”.

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.

On Tuesday evening, after sunset, April 7, 2009, is Passover, followed by the Night to Be Much Observed on Wednesday evening, April 8, after sunset.

On Thursday, April 9, 2009, is the First Day of Unleavened Bread. Rene Messier will be giving the sermon in the morning from Oregon, and Norbert Link will give the sermon in the afternoon from California. Further announcements will be given in next week’s Update.

For those of our scattered baptized brethren who need to partake of the Passover at home, we are giving pertinent information in this Update, under Feasts.

In less than two weeks, baptized members of the Church of God will be partaking of the Passover service. It commemorates the Lord’s death and the tremendous sacrifice He made, not only for those called and chosen now, but for the whole of mankind.

Most of the world will be carrying on as usual on that day, oblivious to the supreme sacrifice made by our Savior some two thousand years ago. For those called now, it is a solemn and sober occasion–an annual commemoration of Christ’s death (compare 1 Corinthians 11:26). 

Before partaking of the Passover symbols, Church members should ask themselves questions like these: How has their relationship been with God and Christ the past year? How has their relationship been with fellow brethren and the rest of the world?

Paul admonishes us in 1 Corinthians 11:27, not to take the Passover in an unworthy manner. In one sense of the word, nobody is really worthy, but Church members are enjoined to partake of it worthily. Paul tells us in verse 28: “But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of the bread and drink of the cup.” This requires prior self-examination (compare also 2 Corinthians 13:5), to make sure that when the hour of the Passover comes, they will be worthy.

Even though all of us have trials and tests, hopefully none of us will have to go through that kind of suffering, abuse, torture and mocking that Christ had to endure. Although He did ask that this cup pass from Him if it were possible (compare Matthew 26:39), He totally submitted to the Will of the Father. He understood that it was the only way for mankind to eventually be called and forgiven, and to receive the Holy Spirit, so that they could ultimately become born-again members of the God Family. All of us need to deeply appreciate the great sacrifice that was made on our behalf, even while we were still in our sins, as well as for the entire world (compare John 3:16-17).

Converted and baptized Church members must carefully examine themselves, so that they can partake worthily of the Passover, knowing that in the not-too-distant future, they will be able to partake of this service in the full presence of their Lord and Savior Jesus Christ–when the Kingdom of God is established here on this earth (compare Luke 22:14-18).

The Week in Review

In light of questionable U.S. lawmaking and financial politics, the National Post and the Financial Post ran a provocative article, titled, “Is This the End of America?” Questions are also justified in light of a perceived agenda by the Obama Administration to enact mandatory national service for all Americans (see our new StandingWatch program, titled, “Beware of the GIVE Act,”) and to seize more powers from institutions other than banks.

There are also concerns that the hypocritical actions of Congress to impose a 90% tax on bonuses (even though the AIG bonuses were included in the stimulus package which Congress adopted without reading it) may lead to a mass exodus of American bankers to Europe. This new law might very well be unconstitutional, but it is felt that the courts would not rule this way, given their historical deference to the actions of Congress.

Recently, former Vice-President Dick Cheney stated in an interview that the USA accomplished everything in Iraq that they had intended to do. This is hardly the case. As Der Spiegel reported this week, religious persecution of Christians in Iraq and other minorities is on the rise. Afghanistan proves to be another debacle. Even though President Obama wants to continue the war in Afghanistan by sending more troops, that war has been an utter disaster, and additional troops won’t improve the situation.

Poland has voiced deep concerns about Mr. Obama’s decision to place the missile shield program on hold, stating that, “We hope we don’t regret our trust in the United States.” And a rift between Mexico and the USA, as well as a transatlantic rift between Washington and Brussels, are widening.

The world also watches with anxiety a real possibility of a war with North Korea, and the attempts of Prime Minister designate Benjamin Netanyahu to form a government in Israel, fearing for the continuation of the ill-fated “peace process” in the Middle East.

Turning to Germany, retailers made the correct decision to take violent video games off their shelves, following a horrific school shooting last week. And finally, we are told that Arabs are willing to invest heavily in Germany, which could lead to events described in Daniel 11. (For more information, please read our free booklets, “Europe in Prophecy” and “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.”)

The End of America?

The National Post and the Financial Post ran a provocative article, titled, “Is This the End of America?” In the article, dated March 19, it was stated:

“Helicopter Ben Bernanke’s Federal Reserve is dropping trillions of fresh paper dollars on the world economy, the President of the United States is cracking jokes on late night comedy shows, his energy minister is threatening a trade war over carbon emissions, his treasury secretary is dithering over a banking reform program amid rising concerns over his competence and a monumentally dysfunctional U.S. Congress is launching another public jihad against corporations and bankers.

“As an aghast world — from China to Chicago and Chihuahua — watches, the circus-like U.S. political system seems to be declining into near chaos. Through it all, stock and financial markets are paralyzed. The more the policy regime does, the worse the outlook gets. The multi-ringed spectacle raises a disturbing question in many minds: Is this the end of America?

“Probably not, if only because there are good reasons for optimism… It’s happened many times before, except for once, when it took 20 years to rise out of the Great Depression.

“Past success, however, is no guarantee of future recovery, especially now when there are daily disasters and new indicators of political breakdown. All developments are not disasters in themselves. The AIG bonus firestorm is a diversion from real issues , but it puts the ghastly political classes who make U.S. law on display for what they are: ageing self-serving demagogues who have spent decades warping the U.S. political system for their own ends. We see the system up close, law-making that is riddled with slapdash, incompetence and gamesmanship.

“One test of whether we are witnessing the end of America is how many more times Americans put up with congressional show trials of individual business people and their employees, slandering and vilifying them for their actions and motives. And for how long will they tolerate a President who berates business and corporations as dens of crime and malfeasance? If the majority of Americans come to accept the caricatures of business as true, then America is closer to the end of its life as a global leader, as a champion of markets and individualism.

“But America is at risk in other ways, especially in the technical business of setting and executing policy. The presidency of Barack Obama has set out on a course that has no precedent in U.S. history…

“Reform of health care, environmental policy, education, energy, banking, regulation — every nook and cranny of the U.S. economy has been put on alert for major change. Expansion of government spending, plunging the U.S. into unprecedented deficits, is without parallel. In economic policy, through regulation and control of energy output, financial services and monetary expansion, the U.S. government has embarked on a fundamental reshaping of America. It is designed, in short, to bring on the end of America…

“Under the chairmanship of Ben Bernanke, the Federal Reserve is in the midst of a giant economic experiment, flooding the world with U.S. dollars, hoping that flood will stimulate economic activity… For the rest of the world, however, the worry is that America is at risk of becoming the fountainhead of a new inflationary outburst. The U.S. dollar is now in decline, gold is moving sharply higher, and new global currency turmoil is on the horizon.”

Mass Exodus of American Bankers to Europe?

The Financial Times wrote on March 20:

“Bankers on Wall Street and in Europe have struck back against moves by US lawmakers to slap punitive taxes on bonuses paid to high earners at bailed-out institutions. Senior executives on both sides of the Atlantic on Friday warned of an exodus of talent from some of the biggest names in US finance, saying the ‘anti-American’ measures smacked of ‘a McCarthy witch-hunt’ that would send the country ‘back to the stone age.’

“… ‘Finance is one of America’s great industries, and they’re destroying it,’ said one banker at a firm that has accepted public money. ‘This happened out of haste and anger over AIG, but we’re not like AIG…’ Bankers at Deutsche Bank said it could benefit from the proposed legislation by poaching its US rivals’ most talented employees.”

Bonus Law Probably Unconstitutional… But Do the Courts Care?

Bloomberg wrote on March 20:

“Courts probably will uphold Congress’s effort to tax employee bonuses at American International Group Inc. and other companies receiving federal bailout funds, several legal experts said… The measure raises a number of legal questions, and New Hampshire Republican Senator Judd Gregg yesterday [as well as former Governor of Massachusetts Mitt Romney and former Governor of Arkansas Mike Huckabee] said the legislation was unconstitutional. Still, any legal challenge will meet a significant obstacle: the historic reluctance of the Supreme Court to second-guess Congress on tax issues…

“The House took several steps to shield the measure from that argument, said Laurence Tribe, a constitutional law professor at Harvard Law School [and legal advisor to President Obama]… The measure doesn’t single out employees at AIG and instead uses general language affecting all companies receiving more than $5 billion in federal bailout money. Bonuses for employees at Bank of America Corp., Citigroup Inc., JPMorgan Chase & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley would be affected.

“Tribe also pointed to a provision in the measure exempting executives at companies that repay enough bailout funds to reduce the government’s investment below $5 billion. That provision ‘makes it clear that the goal is not to punish corporate executives generally, but is simply to ensure the appropriate use of government funds,’ Tribe said in an e-mail…

“‘Courts have been fairly deferential to Congress if the language is written in sufficiently general terms,’ said Jonathan Adler, a law professor and director of the Center for Business Law and Regulation at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law in Cleveland.

“McCaffery, who teaches at USC’s Gould School of Law in Los Angeles, said opponents also would be able to press a legitimate — if not ultimately successful — argument against the measure based on the Constitution’s due-process clause… Opponents would have to show that Congress imposed punishment, bypassing the criminal court system… Even so [this might be the case], he said, ‘you’re swimming upstream because of the general tendency of the courts to stay out of tax legislation…'”

Beware of the GIVE Act

Fox.news reported on March 18:

“The House of Representatives passed a measure Wednesday that supporters are calling the most sweeping reform of nationally-backed volunteer programs since AmeriCorps. But some opponents are strongly criticizing the legislation, calling it expensive indoctrination and forced advocacy. The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act, known as the GIVE Act… was approved by a 321-105 vote and now goes to the Senate.

“… the bill’s opponents — and there are only a few in Congress — say it could cram ideology down the throats of young ‘volunteers,’ many of whom could be forced into service since the bill creates a ‘Congressional Commission on Civic Service.’

“The bipartisan commission will be tasked with exploring a number of topics, including ‘whether a workable, fair and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed and how such a requirement could be implemented in a manner that would strengthen the social fabric of the nation.’

“…some critics on the right suggest that the president’s push for national service goes too far, and the recent congressional steps toward expanding the federal role in volunteerism and ‘civilian service’ smacks of a larger agenda. They point to a campaign speech the president made last July in which he suggested national security could be entrusted to a civilian force.

“‘We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that is just as powerful, just as strong, just as well funded,’ Obama… said during a Colorado Springs rally.”

Senate Rubberstamps the GIVE Act

In the meantime, the Senate approved this Act as well.

Note the following “enthusiastic” article by the New York Times, dated March 23:

“Following overwhelming House passage last week, the Senate tonight voted 74 to 14 on a procedural move that essentially guarantees a major expansion of a national service corps, a cornerstone of volunteerism that dates back to the era of President Kennedy. It’s akin to a call to arms by President Obama, who has harkened back to those early days to demand giving back by those who voted for him.

“In fact, Senator Edward M. Kennedy, the senior Democrat from Massachusetts whose battle with brain cancer has oft kept him absent from the Senate these days, appeared on the floor to welcomes all around as he cast his approving vote as a co-sponsor. From President Kennedy’s days to the creation of Americorps by then President Bill Clinton, the notion of public service has become a rallying cry. Tonight’s vote, propelled by President Obama’s urging of an expansion, would mean a growth in such work from 75,000 community service jobs to 250,000.

“According to the Congressional Budget Office, the cost of the Senate bill at least would be an outlay for the fiscal year 2010 of $418 million to about $5.7 billion from 2010 through 2014. It’s an historic vote in the sense that a national service corps, an army dispersed to help with education, health services and the environment, would vastly enlarge the notion of ‘community organizing,’ and allow, as Senator Barbara Mikulski, Democrat of Maryland, said tonight, for about 7 million people to be engaged in such work.

“The bill enjoyed extraordinary bipartisan support, including namely the major co-sponsor, Senator Orrin Hatch, Republican of Utah, who tonight even recommended reading the biography of R. Sargent Shriver, relative by marriage to the Kennedys and who directed the original Peace Corps from 1961 to 1966. In addition, Senator Hatch mentioned that the Rev. Rick Warren, the evangelical minister of Saddleback Church… was an enthusiastic supporter of this effort, as was Senator John McCain, the former Republican presidential nominee…

“Eleven senators did not cast a vote. The 14 Republicans, some of whom cited the cost in voting against the proposal, are: Senators Sam Brownback of Kansas, James Bunning of Kentucky, Tom Coburn of Oklahoma, Michael Crapo of Idaho, Jon Kyl of Arizona, James Inhofe of Oklahoma, John Ensign of Nevada, Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, Jim Risch of Idaho, Pat Roberts of Kansas, Richard Shelby and Jeff Sessions, both of Alabama, Tom DeMint of South Carolina and John Thune of South Dakota.”

However, there are DEEP concerns with this bill.

As Infowars.com reports on March 24:

“A passage contained in section 6104 of the original House version entitled ‘Duties,’ in subsection B6, states that a commission will be set up to investigate, ‘Whether a workable, fair, and reasonable mandatory service requirement for all able young people could be developed.’ This language has been dropped from the version passed by the Senate.

“However, Section 120 of the bill discusses the ‘Youth Engagement Zone Program’ and states that ‘service learning’ will be ‘a mandatory part of the curriculum in all of the secondary schools served by the local educational agency.’ This part remains in the version passed by the Senate.

“Roles which will be staffed by members of the programs, labeled ‘Required National Service Corps,’ include ‘criminal justice,’ ‘environmental stewardship,’ and ‘public safety.’ Aside from the programs aimed at college students and young people, others will be specifically targeted towards, ‘Retired and other former law enforcement, fire, rescue, and emergency personnel, and other individuals with backgrounds in disaster preparedness, relief, and recovery.’”

Please make sure to watch Norbert Link’s new StandingWatch program, titled, “Beware of the GIVE Act.”

Sen. Judd Gregg–Hopelessly Confusing

The Associated Press reported on March 22 about a blatantly inconsistent statement by Republican Senator Judd Gregg, pertaining to the Obama financial policy. The article stated:

“The top Republican on the Senate Budget Committee says the Obama administration is on the right course to save the nation’s financial system. But Sen. Judd Gregg of New Hampshire also says President Barack Obama’s massive budget proposal will bankrupt the country. Gregg says he has no regrets in withdrawing his nomination to become commerce secretary. He pulled out after deciding he could not fully back the administration’s economic policies. The senator said Obama’s spending plan in the midst of a prolonged recession would leave the next generation with a country too expensive to live in.”

Americans in Dire Financial Need

News Seattle Times reported on March 21:

“A MetLife study released last week found that 50 percent of Americans said they have only a one-month cushion — roughly two paychecks — or less before they would be unable to fully meet their financial obligations if they were to lose their jobs. More disturbing is that 28 percent said they could not make ends meet for longer than two weeks without their jobs…”

More Power to the Government?

The Washington Post wrote on March 24:

“The Obama administration is considering asking Congress to give the Treasury secretary unprecedented powers to initiate the seizure of non-bank financial companies, such as large insurers, investment firms and hedge funds, whose collapse would damage the broader economy, according to an administration document. The government at present has the authority to seize only banks.”

“Washington-Brussels Divide”

Der Spiegel Online reported on March 24:

“As the G-20 club of the world’s wealthiest nations prepares to meet in London on Apr. 2, observers have focused increasingly on an alleged clash between the US and Europe about how to deal with the global financial crisis…

“US-style domestic stimulus would have only limited effect in export-oriented economies such as Germany, the Netherlands, Scandinavia, and many Eastern European countries…

“To be sure, [European Central Bank President Jean-Claude] Trichet fueled talk of a US-Europe rift when he seemed to tell the Wall Street Journal that American policymakers should put their money where their mouths are.”

America’s Stimulus Package a “Road to Hell”

The Associated Press reported on March 25:

“The president of the European Union slammed President Barack Obama’s plans to have the U.S. spend its way out of recession as ‘a road to hell,’ underscoring European differences with Washington ahead of a crucial summit next week on fixing the world economy. Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek, whose country currently holds the rotating EU presidency, told the European Parliament on Wednesday that Obama’s massive stimulus package and banking bailout ‘will undermine the liquidity of the global financial market.’

“Other European politicians kept their distance from the blunt remarks, with some reproaching the Czech leader for his strong language and others reaffirming their good diplomatic ties with the U.S. European governments, led by France and Germany, say the focus should be on tighter financial regulation, while the U.S. is pushing for larger economic stimulus plans — but nobody has so far escalated the rhetoric to such strident levels.

“Topolanek’s remarks are the strongest criticism so far from a European leader as the 27-nation bloc sticks to its position that its member countries are already spending enough to stimulate demand… Topolanek, whose government lost a vote of confidence Tuesday but who will remain EU president until a new Czech government is established, bluntly said that ‘the United States did not take the right path.'”

England Can’t Afford Another Stimulus Package

The Times wrote on March 25:

“The Governor of the Bank of England laid bare tensions between Gordon Brown and the Treasury yesterday by warning that Britain could not afford a second economic stimulus in the Budget.

“Mervyn King… spoke as the Prime Minister, beginning an international tour to co-ordinate measures for next week’s G20 gathering in London, called on leaders to do ‘whatever it takes to create growth and the jobs we need.’ President Obama, Mr Brown’s main stimulus ally, writes in the same vein in The Times today, saying that America is ready to lead the world out of recession, while calling for swift and robust action to stimulate growth ‘until growth is restored.'”

Strain in US-Mexico Relations

The Wall Street Journal wrote on March 25:

“Mexico’s economy is being dragged down by the recession to the north. American addicts have turned Mexico into a drug superhighway, and its police and soldiers are under assault from American guns. Nafta promised 15 years ago that Mexican trucks would be allowed on American roads, but Congress said they were unsafe.

“United States-Mexican relations are in the midst of what can be described as a neighborly feud, one that stretches along a lengthy shared fence. That border fence, which has become a wall in some places, is another irritant.

“Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton arrives in Mexico on Wednesday for what will be the first in a parade of visits by top administration officials, including President Obama himself next month, to try to head off a major foreign policy crisis close to home. They will find a country mired in a deepening slump, miffed by signs of protectionism in its largest trading partner, and torn apart by a drug war for which many in Mexico blame customers in the United States…

“Mr. Obama, like President George W. Bush before him, is finding that these foreign challenges touch on some of the thorniest issues in domestic politics, including immigration, free trade and gun control. The Bush administration disturbed relations by failing to deliver on its promise of immigration reform. And the Obama administration, in its first weeks in office, has set off new tensions with a series of conflicting signals and false starts…

“The bloody drug war, which has caused 7,000 deaths in 16 months, has become the principal sore point between the countries… 90 percent of the guns used by Mexican drug cartels originated in the United States…

“The suggestion by Mr. Obama that American troops might be moved toward the border to combat drug cartels prompted Gen. Guillermo Galván, Mexico’s defense secretary, to assert that no deployment of foreign soldiers would be allowed on Mexican soil. History was at the root of the concern here, as even Mexican schoolchildren know of the war a century and a half ago in which the United States seized half of Mexico’s territory…”

Mission Accomplished in Iraq?

Der Spiegel wrote on March 20:

“Europe is opening its doors to the first of a 10,000-strong group of mostly Christian Iraqis… They’ve been chased and threatened, exiled and robbed… Many of the families are Christians for whom living in Iraq has become extremely dangerous. Churches have been bombed, bishops murdered and anyone wearing a cross can quickly become a target. The Christians are too small a minority in the Muslim country to protect themselves…

“The refugees include people like Rita, who once owned a hair salon but had to give it up after receiving death threats. She lived a life of fear until, like many other Christians, she fled the country with her family. Now she has nothing to return to — her house has been occupied and her neighborhood has been ‘ethnically cleansed.’ Rita’s father was kidnapped because he is a Christian. His wife searched for him for one month and then fled to Syria. Police freed him after eight weeks, but it took him nine months to find out where his family had gone.

“Indeed, many of the Iraqi refugees survived horrible events and are traumatized. Sixteen-year-old Muhanad, for example, was kidnapped on his way to school at the age of 14. His kidnappers held him captive until his parents were able to raise $10,000 in ransom by selling jewellery and getting help from other family members. They took the money and dumped the boy in the street with two broken legs. ‘I cried for two weeks, but now everything is okay,’ he says. Muhanad’s family belongs to a Mandaean minority group, which like Christians and Yazidis, became the target of terrorism early on…

“The persecution was far from limited to religious minorities — it was also perpetrated against Muslims like a young man named Mohamed, who was terrorized by the Sunni terror network al-Qaida on one side and the brutal Shiite Mahdi Army on the other… There were loud calls for heightened political pressure on Iraq to respect basic human rights…

“Even though the Americans and the Brits are not without guilt in this matter, Iraq was already a state which showed little respect for human rights. Saddam Hussein and his Baath Party were unpredictable in their treatment of minorities…”

The Afghan Disaster

Der Spiegel Online reported on March 20:

“Afghanistan is on the brink of chaos… The elected government… can no longer compete with the Taliban…

“Internal reports by the NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) and the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA) paint grim pictures of the situation. US generals say that they are seeing a ‘significant challenge from insurgents’ in Wardak, and their commander-in-chief, President Barack Obama, recently responded with a simple ‘no’ to the question of whether the United States and its allies are currently winning the war in Afghanistan…

“Instead of progress, NATO is constantly forced to report setbacks, even in areas that seemed to have been turned around after the Taliban regime was toppled in the fall of 2001… Peace has proven elusive after the supposed military victory over the Taliban seven years ago. Officials in the world’s capitals must now contemplate the terrible possibility of failure, the likelihood of defeat for NATO, the UN, the European Union and the United States…

“Obama’s announcement of his intention to negotiate with the ‘moderate’ Taliban looks like the move of a commander-in-chief who no longer believes in victory. His words are those of a leader who sees his position as so weakened that he must make concessions to the enemy. And they demonstrate that the world was misled over the situation in Afghanistan for years…

“Day after day, foreign soldiers are killed and Afghan policemen are murdered… In the east, along the supply routes in the Afghan-Pakistani border region, bridges are constantly being blown up and roads covered in rubble. Convoys are attacked on the Afghan side or destroyed by the enemy in Pakistan before they can even reach the border.”

Will Poland Be Disappointed by the USA?

Deutsche Welle reported on March 22 about the intention by the USA to reconsider the planned deployment of a anti-missile shield in Poland:

“‘We hope we don’t regret our trust in the United States,’ Polish Foreign Minister Radoslaw Sikorski said… Russia was enraged by the US missile plans — which the last administration under George W. Bush said was needed to counter a threat from Iran — but has welcomed the review ordered by President Barack Obama.

“I am afraid Russian generals and even the Russian president continue to threaten us with the deployment of medium-range missiles,” Sikorski said…

“Russia has been bitterly opposed to the deployment of a US anti-missile system in Poland and the Czech Republic ever since it was proposed by the former US President George W. Bush… But it was assuaged by Obama’s decision to order a review of the multi-billion dollar project…

“But Sikorski stressed that Poland had taken ‘something of a political risk’ in signing an agreement with the previous US administration. ‘When we started discussing this with the United States, the US assured us they would persuade the Russians that it was purely defensive and it would be a non-controversial decision,’ he said.”

North Korea Threatens War

The Associated Press reported on March 26:

“Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Wednesday warned North Korea that firing a missile for any purpose would be a ‘provocative act’ that would have consequences. North Korea is loading a rocket on a launch pad in anticipation of the launch of a communications satellite between April 4 and 8.”

The Telegraph added on March 26:

“The US has deployed two warships with anti-missile capabilities in the waters off Japan as tensions mount over North Korea’s plans to test-fire a long-range ballistic missile capable of striking Alaska… North Korea, which has informed international agencies of its plan to fire the missile between April 4 and 8, says the launch is a ‘satellite test’ which it is entitled to make under international law… Japan has threatened to shoot down the missile if it crosses over Japanese territory, a move which Pyongyang has already said it would consider an ‘act of war.'”

Reuters stated on March 26:

“North Korea said on Thursday that if the international community punishes it for next month’s planned missile launch it will restart a nuclear plant that makes weapons grade plutonium… The planned launch… is the first big test for U.S. President Barack Obama in dealing with the prickly North, whose efforts to build a nuclear arsenal have long plagued ties with Washington.”

Developments in Israel

Die Welt reported on March 24:

“Prime Minister designate Benjamin Netanyahu made a coalition agreement with Labour Chief Ehud Barak Tuesday… On Monday, Netanyahu sealed a coalition deal with the Orthodox Jewish Shas party. He had already signed up the Yisrael Beitenu party led by ultranationalist Avigdor Lieberman.

“But while enlisting those partners following Israel’s Feb. 10 election, Netanyahu made clear he preferred a broad-based coalition — a government of ‘national unity’. A sharp turn to the right within Israel’s government could raise international concern already heightened by Netanyahu’s promise to appoint Lieberman foreign minister.

“Lieberman has proposed transferring land where many of Israel’s 1.5 million Arab citizens live to a future Palestinian state in return for Jewish settlements in the occupied West Bank, and wants all Israelis to take a loyalty oath.

“Netanyahy could significantly widen his parliamentary majority if the centrist Kadima party, led by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, changes its mind about going into the opposition. Netanyahu has not met her demand for a commitment to Palestinian statehood and a rotation agreement that would make her prime minister for part of the next government’s term.”

Arab Investments in Germany

Der Spiegel Online reported on March 25:

“Abu Dhabi’s stake in Daimler [secured by a payment of €1.95 billion] may herald a wave of Arab investments in German companies that are now available at bargain prices in the economic crisis. However, the new investors are likely to want a bigger say in corporate strategy than German executives have been used to.

“… there are strong signs that Arab investors will become increasingly active in Germany and Central Europe in the near future. Despite the financial crisis, they have ample cash. Besides, the stock value of major companies has nosedived and governments are so busy trying to rescue their economies that their resistance to supposedly dangerous foreign investors has evaporated…

“If the trend is confirmed, the times when Arab investors simply nodded through decisions by German management boards will be over… Arab investors will continue to focus on Europe and Germany, analysts say. In Europe, investors are interested in a broad range of industries, from machine production to carmaking.

“Another European advantage is the euro. ‘Many funds try to prevent the dollar share of their portfolios from getting too big,’ said Deutsche Bank’s Kern…

“The German government last year introduced legislation to give it the power to block major acquisitions of German firms by foreign investors from outside the EU… But the new rule, which allows the government to prevent foreign purchases of more than 25 percent of a firm’s voting rights if it deems the investment ‘a threat to public order and security,’ is unlikely to be used in these times of crisis. Given that many companies are badly in need of capital, authorities are unlikely to throw up any hurdles to acquisitions.”

Violent Video Games Off the Shelve

Der Spiegel Online reported on March 20:

“Following a horrific school shooting, German retailer Galeria Kaufhof has decided to pull violent video games from its shelves. A political debate on instituting an outright ban has also erupted… Beginning in April, the company announced this week, games with 18-plus ratings will no longer be sold in its department stores…

“On March 11, 17-year-old Tim Kretschmer shot 12 people to death at the Albertville secondary school — including nine pupils — before killing three more during his escape attempt. Investigators say the teenager was fond of playing ‘Counter Strike’ and had played ‘Far Cry 2’ on the night before his brutal rampage. Both games are considered excessively violent and cannot be sold to anyone under the age of 18… [He also possessed a huge collection of violent Horror movies.]

“‘It’s well known that, in every case of school shootings, the perpetrator has exhibited a pronounced proclivity towards playing violent videogames,’ Heini Schmitt, the head of the police federation of Hessen told a regional radio station. ‘The means and ways in which these people commit crimes sometimes bares a striking resemblance to those of their virtual role models.’

“Germany already has one of the strictest ratings systems for violent games in Europe. The video game company Sega hasn’t even applied in Germany to sell its recently released ‘fight to the death’ Wii game Mad World, which requires players to mimic physically violent motions like carving out an opponent’s heart with a chainsaw.”

As a first step in answering this puzzling question, we must understand that all of God’s commandments were given for the good of mankind! King David extolled God and continually praised Him for His Way: “…For all Your commandments are righteousness” (Psalm 119:172).

Very specifically, God chose the descendants of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, for a unique relationship with Him. Note what He offered to Israel:

“‘Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine. And you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation…’” (Exodus 19:5-6).

As a part of the covenants (binding agreements) God made with His nation Israel, He included the laws written in the Ten Commandments along with other statutes and judgments by which to administer His government. Some of these had a very specific application for the time and especially for the conduct of the “holy nation” of Israel, even though their overall application was not limited to ancient times.

Let’s consider the sin of adultery as a case in point. One of the overarching commandments of God as found in the Ten Commandments is, “‘You shall not commit adultery’” (Exodus 20:14). The penalty for such a transgression was for the offenders to be put to death (Compare Leviticus 20:10). In establishing the way to administer this law in Israel, God showed that this kind of immoral act was to be dealt with very severely, and He explained the reason: “‘…So you shall put away the evil from among you’” (Compare Deuteronomy 22:21, 22, 24).

Laws concerning agriculture, health practices, public policies and much more were to be administered by the leaders of Israel under God’s direct guidance. Among these is the law concerning mixed fabrics. Here is what is stated:

“‘You shall keep My statutes. You shall not let your livestock breed with another kind. You shall not sow your field with mixed seed. Nor shall a garment of mixed linen and wool come upon you’” (Leviticus 19:19).

“You shall not wear a garment of different sorts, such as wool and linen mixed together’” (Deuteronomy 22:11).

In the context of these statutes, we see from Leviticus 19:19 that God very specifically drew lines of separation—i.e., for livestock, for planting and for garments—clothing made, in this case, from an animal by-product and that made from plant derivatives. Also, in the context of Deuteronomy 22, verses 9 and 10 further elaborate the command by God to keep like things together.

In His recreation of life on the earth, God established plants and animals of tremendous variety, and of these, the Word of God states that each was to reproduce “‘according to its kind’” (Compare Genesis 1:11-12, 21, 24-25).

To quote from our booklet, “And Lawlessness Will Abound…”:

“Let us briefly review a few examples of Old Testament laws, which are clearly still binding today, as neither the letter, nor spiritual principles of the New Testament, nor any ritual character of such laws would indicate otherwise.

“For instance, Deuteronomy 22:5 prohibits cross-dressing. A man is not to wear women’s clothes and vice versa. This law deals with transvestism.

“Deuteronomy 22:9 forbids sowing a vineyard with different kinds of seed. The principle is to plant seeds together that will each continue to reproduce after its own kind, in order to avoid substandard products or hybrids. There is nothing wrong, then, with planting peas or beans among corn, or planting two pasture grasses together. On the other hand, cucumbers should not be planted with watermelons because they will cross and produce a perversion. Likewise, various members of the muskmelon and cantaloupe family should not be planted near pumpkins or certain types of squash, as they will mix.

“Finally, Deuteronomy 22:11 prohibits, correctly translated, the wearing of a garment ‘of different sorts, wool and linen mixed together.’ [The words, ‘such as’ have been added and do not appear in the original Hebrew.] Leviticus 19:19 contains the same prohibition. Wool is an animal product, while linen is a plant product. Such products should not be combined, as an improper blend, as they produce clothes of lesser quality.”

From the standpoint of practicality, mixing wool and linen together for the purpose of clothing degrades the quality. [From a spiritual or symbolic standpoint, wool is very warm on our bodies, but linen is cold. A combination of the two would result in wearing something which gives a “luke-warm” effect, compare Revelation 3:15-16].

Wool and linen both have unique characteristics in clothing and can each be crafted into garments of extremely high quality. As we consider this statute from God, let us also remember that He created the sheep and the flax plant with the knowledge that they would serve as a source of clothing. What He stipulates in both Leviticus and Deuteronomy is the proper use.

At the time of Israel’s emergence as God’s nation, cloth was made from raw materials that were spun into threads and woven on looms. Historical references cite silk, hemp, camel hair and goat hair, while cotton seemed less of a commodity in that part of the world. Animal skins were also commonly processed for clothing. With all of these choices available, God specifically limited the co-mingling of the threads of wool and linen to create garments worn by the people of Israel.

However, we also see that God commanded that special holy garments be made for Aaron and his sons “‘…for glory and for beauty’” (Compare Exodus 28:1-4). This priestly clothing was made according to God’s instructions:

“‘They shall take the gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and the fine linen, and they shall make the ephod of gold, blue, purple, and scarlet thread, and fine woven linen, artistically worked’” (Exodus 28:5-6). NOTE: The italicized word thread is also rendered as material by the NASB and yarns by the TANAKH.

The variety of materials used in preparation for the Tabernacle and for the clothing to be worn by Aaron and his sons is also described in Exodus 35, verses 20 to 29. Additionally, in Exodus 39, further description of the materials is given. Please note that gold was also woven into these priestly garments as stated in verse 3.

While the exact appearance is not known, copies have been constructed in modern times—especially by organizations in Israel who seek to re-establish Temple worship. From these we see that both animal and plant materials were used for these garments that were only to be made for or worn by the priests of God. It is evident that the construction involved layers of clothing and unique appliqués.

Today, we might consider the wearing of a wool suit coat over a cotton shirt adorned by a silk tie as an example of wearing diverse clothing that each are made of pure materials BUT NOT MIXED TOGETHER IN THEIR FABRICATION. As we saw from the accounts in Exodus, though, the interweaving of some materials—such as gold—was allowed.

In recent times different materials have been developed for making clothing.

Nylon, Polyester, Spandex, and Acrylic are examples of petroleum-based synthetic materials that now make up some of our apparel; also, Rayon (or Viscose) is a cellulose-based semi-synthetic fiber made from wood pulp. Oftentimes these may be used with natural fibers—either as blends or as supporting parts.

As we are not to mix together animal and plant products, it would appear that linen (a plant product) should not be mixed together with an animal product. However, this prohibition does not apply to artificial products, so that combinations such as linen or wool with synthetic and semi-synthetic materials would not be problematic.

How then do we actually apply the restrictions in our apparel as commanded by God? Let’s consider the context of these rules. Understand that these statutes were given to the NATION of Israel that had the totally unique relationship of God’s direct rule through His appointed servants. However, God rejected both Israel and Judah because of their rebellion and their refusal to live by His laws.

When Jesus came as representative of God’s Kingdom and its future establishment on the earth, His disciples wanted to know if He would “‘…at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?’” (Acts 1:6).

That did not nor has it yet happened!

Consider the example of the woman caught in adultery. When the scribes and Pharisees brought her before Jesus, they said, “‘Now Moses, in the law, commanded us that such should be stoned. But what do You say?’” (John 8:5).When the accusers left without condemning her, Jesus said, “‘Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more’” (John 8:11).

At that time, Jesus did not enforce the PENALTY of God’s laws as given to the nation of Israel; However, He did UPHOLD THE LAW by admonishing the woman not to sin—which is the breaking of God’s law (Compare 1 John 3:4).

In the future, when God’s Kingdom is established on the earth, God’s laws will be used to govern the earth. Penalties will be exacted (Compare Zechariah 13:3).

In addition, we find that priestly clothing is again specified for the future in the restored Temple of God:

“‘And it shall be, whenever they enter the gates of the inner court, that they shall put on linen garments; no wool shall come upon them while they minister within the gates of the inner court or within the house. They shall have linen turbans on their heads and linen trousers on their bodies; they shall not clothe themselves with anything that causes sweat. When they go out to the outer court, to the outer court to the people, they shall take off their garments in which they have ministered, leave them in the holy chambers, and put on other garments; and in their holy garments they shall not sanctify the people’” (Ezekiel 44:17-19).

We see then, that God’s statutes, as well as its penalties, will be used to govern His future Kingdom, but how are we Christians to look upon the administration of God’s government NOW?

Christians are to abide by the laws of the Old Testament, as well as the New Testament, unless the New Testament shows clearly, by letter or in the spirit, that certain Old Testament laws are no longer binding. For example, the New Testament shows that physical circumcision is no longer necessary.

We find an example in the issue of circumcision that arose as uncircumcised Gentiles were being converted to Christianity. Circumcision was strictly enforced among the Israelites; however, note how James and the other elders responded to the Gentile converts:

“‘They wrote this letter by them: The apostles, the elders, and the brethren, To the brethren who are of the Gentiles in Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia: Greetings. Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”–to whom we gave no such commandment–it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality. If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well. Farewell’” (Acts 15:23-29).

Paul further shows the application of God’s laws in the deeper, spiritual sense. Using the principle of Deuteronomy 22:10 as a basis, he taught the Church of God, “Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers” (2 Corinthians 6:14).

Christians today are not to carry out the physical penalties of the Old Testament (such as stoning) against others.

On the other hand, no New Testament passage indicates that those Old Testament laws, as set forth in Leviticus 19:19 or Deuteronomy 22:11, are no longer binding.

We should all make diligent effort to apply the spirit of the administrative statutes and judgments given to the nation of Israel. We need to take steps to avoid the inferior quality of blended fabrics used for clothing—including that of wool mixed with linen.

Lead Writers: Dave Harris and Norbert Link

A new StandingWatch program, titled, “Why Most Americans Disapprove of Obama Administration,” was posted on StandingWatch, GoogleVideo and YouTube. In the program, Norbert Link points out that Mr. Obama’s approval rating is dropping. As the Wall Street Journal revealed, the overwhelming majority of Americans disagrees with his course of action, and this was even before the most recent scandal involving AIG bonuses. But many don’t even realize that the Obama Administration has begun attacking protection of speech, individual conscience and free exercise of religion.

An additional new StandingWatch program, titled, “Beware of the GIVE Act,” was posted on StandingWatch, GoogleVideo and YouTube. In the program, Norbert Link explains that on March 18, 2009, the House of Representatives approved “The Generations Invigorating Volunteerism and Education Act,” or the “GIVE Act.” Why should America be concerned? What is this Act all about? Is it a move towards socialism, as some claim? Is it part of a frightening agenda of the Obama Administration to indoctrinate our young people and compel them to perform mandatory national service, as others fear?

Norbert Link’s new sermon, titled, “Bible Study–It’s Easter Time Again,” dated March 21, 2009, was posted on our Website and on Google Video.

Norbert Link’s new German version of the above-mentioned sermon, titled, “Warum kein Ostern in der fruehen Kirche” (“Why no Easter in the early Church”), dated March 24, 2009, was posted on Google Video.