Friday evening, April 22, 2005, is Passover. If you won’t be able to attend local services (which are being held in the USA in California, Colorado and Oregon, starting at 7:30 pm local time), and want to keep the Passover at home, please read the special announcements in this Update, under “Feasts.”

On Saturday, April 23, 2005, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “Rejoice Always!”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Saturday night, April 23, 2005, is the Night to Be Much Observed.

Sunday, April 24, 2005, is the First Day of Unleavened Bread. Rene Messier will give the sermon in the morning from Oregon. His sermon is titled, “The Anatomy of Sin.” Edwin Pope will give the sermon in the afternoon from San Diego. His sermon is titled, “We Must Walk Out of Egypt.”

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.

Several years ago, I saw an interesting movie. Its real message wasn’t evident until the last three minutes. It involved a man with two sons who, over the years, because of major issues between the two sons, had drifted apart.

The man who lived on the west coast was the owner of an automobile on the east coast which needed to be driven to his new residence. This was no ordinary car. It was a beautiful fully restored older vehicle — I believe, a Cadillac — and it looked just like a new car. He asked his eldest son to pick up the car with his younger brother.

As the two young men drove five days across the nation, they got into all kinds of problems. They were bickering at first because of the animosity between them, but it slowly changed. By the third day, the younger brother got into a squabble with a few other men at a bar, and the older brother came to his rescue. They had to flee the scene with their dad’s car, and they were chased by the other men, resulting in damage to the car — scratches on the paint job and dents in the fender.

However, the brothers had finally developed a deep bond for each other. When they arrived at the west coast, the eldest brother went alone to deliver the car to his dad. He knocked at the door with a bit of fear and trepidation. The father came out, walked towards his car, and the son was very apologetic about the damage on the car. To his complete surprise the father said: “Never mind the car, how was the trip with your brother?” The eldest son indicated it went well and that although it started off a bit rough, they had bonded as brothers. The only reply from the father was: “That’s great, that’s just great.”

The father died from cancer three months later, and that’s when the eldest son realized why the father wasn’t concerned about his restored car as much as the relationship between the brothers. To the father, the relationship between the two of them was more important than the car, as he did not want to die while there were bad feelings between his sons.

This movie reminded me of Matthew 5:23-24, where we read: “Therefore if you bring your gift to the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar, and go your way. First be reconciled to your brother, and then come and offer your gift.”

We are keeping the Passover on Friday night. How is our relationship with God and with our brethren? Have we reconciled with God, since it is His law that we transgress when we sin, and reconciliation is through the blood of His beloved Son Jesus Christ? Passages such as 2 Corinthians 5:18-20, and Romans 5:10-11 make this very clear.

Christ, as our elder brother, was willing to die for our sins so we could be reconciled to God. In this life we can get caught up in the physical things and get our focus on wrong and unimportant matters. However, we read what is really important, in 1 John 4:7-11:

“Beloved, let us love one another, for love is of God; and everyone who loves is born [better: begotten] of God and knows God. He who does not love does not know God, for God is love. In this the love of God was manifested toward us, that God has sent His only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through Him. In this is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us, and sent His Son to be the propitiation for our sins. Beloved, if God so loved us, we also ought to love one another.”

The Passover season is a time to get focused on the important things and to be truly reconciled to God and, as much as depends on us, to our brethren, with the realization that reconciliation through the sacrifice of Christ is far more important than anything else.

So let us keep this Passover with a deep feeling of appreciation for the sacrifice which Christ made for all of us.

Turmoil at the Temple Mount

As WorldNetDaily reported on April 18, 2005, “A group that led a Jewish protest at the Temple Mount last weekend in hopes of reclaiming the site from its Islamic custodians told WorldNetDaily this morning it will hold monthly protests until Jewish sovereignty is restored, while over 100,000 Indonesian Muslims rallied yesterday for continued Islamic dominance over the Mount. ‘The police blocked most of the people we tried to bring to the Temple Mount last week, so we will continue every month until Jews have a right to pray again at our holiest site,’ said David Ha’ivri, director of Revava, a group with the stated mission of ‘restoring self-esteem to the state of Israel by restoring national pride and values.’

“Revava had announced plans to bring 10,000 Jews to the Mount April 10, prompting Palestinian groups, including Hamas and the Islamic Movement, to threaten violence if a large group of Jews ascended the holy site. Only about 200 Jewish protestors were allowed past intense security, which included over 3,500 Israeli police stationed at checkpoints and entrances throughout the Old City, the walled section of Jerusalem that houses the Temple Mount… Still, over 10,000 Palestinians, including a top Hamas terrorist, made it last week to the Al Aqsa Mosque, where Muslim leaders vowed violent confrontations with any Jews who ascended the Mount. Islamic Jihad issued a press release claiming Jews were planning to ‘attack’ the Mount, which they said would explode the entire region and open an unprecedented confrontation with the ‘Zionist entity.’ … ‘The situation is simply intolerable,’ said Ha’ivri. ‘This is a Jewish state. The Temple Mount is the most holy Jewish site. We’re not going away until Jews can once again pray there unrestricted.”

Haider’s New Party

As the BBC reported on April 17, 2005, “Far-right politician Joerg Haider has launched a new party in Austria after a split in the Freedom Party he once led which threatened the ruling coalition. The new Alliance for Austria’s Future elected Mr Haider as its leader in Salzburg, and it looks set to remain in office with the majority conservatives. All Freedom Party cabinet ministers have defected to the new party…. Chancellor Wolfgang Schuessel, leader of the conservative People’s Party, said he had received sufficient guarantees to work with the new Alliance.”

European Constitution

As the EUobserver reported on April 15, 2005, French president Jacques Chirac is facing opposition to the Constitution from within his own ranks, as well as fighting an uphill battle to win the sympathy of the French people. ‘If this Constitution wins, it is the end of Europe,’ Niclolas Dupont-Aignan, a French MP from Chirac’s own UMP party, declared in Copenhagen on Friday (15 April)…. ‘The system has been built without the will of the people and they will revolt within ten years if this [treaty] is passed. We see it already with the Bolkestein directive and with Turkey’s possible entry into the EU,’ he warned. ‘The EU must adapt to the new world. We don’t want a return to nationalism, but we need a Europe based on democracy.'”

The AFP reported on April 16, 2005, that “The European Union struggled to contain mounting alarm at signs that French voters could reject the EU constitution, in what would be a devastating blow for the expanding bloc… The constitution, which aims to streamline decision-making in the expanded 25-member European Union, must be ratified by all member states. A rejection in France, one of the EU’s largest countries, would effectively kill the treaty. French President Jacques Chirac, alarmed at a series of polls indicating a ‘no’ vote [on May 29], launched a personal effort to persuade voters this week, warning on television that France would be turned into the ‘black sheep’ of Europe.”

In the meantime, Greece ratified the EU Constitution on Wednesday. It was the fifth country to do so (following, for example, Italy and Hungary). Spain was the first country in which the Constitution was accepted via referendum, but the Parliament still has to ratify it. In Germany, the Parliament will vote on May 12, after it was argued that a referendum of the people was “unconstitutional.”

The New Pope

Cardinal Ratzinger (the German “Panzerkardinal,” who was in charge of the office formerly known as the Inquisition) was elected as the new pope. A German paper reportedly stated recently that if Ratzinger was elected, the Inquisition would start again. As reported in this article, Ratzinger talked on Monday about the worst enemies of the Catholic Church, listing “sects” as number 1. Ratzinger recently wrote a paper, stating that one must belong to the Catholic Church in order to be saved, and that all the Protestant “daughter” churches must return to the fold of the “mother church.” He also stated that the core issues of orthodox Christianity are the observance of Sunday and Christmas.

It is also noteworthy that Benedict XV was elected just prior to World War I. Ratzinger adopted the name of Benedict XVI. According to the Washington Post, he elected the name to honor “Saint Benedict, the patron saint of Europe, and Benedict XV, the pope who tried to stop the First World War.”

Also, the late pope, John Paul II, had recently stated, that Satan had been cast down from heaven, and that the Great Tribulation was about to begin.

As AFP had already reported, prior to the election, on April 16, 2005, “Vatican intrigue intensifies as conclave looms to elect new pope.” The article continued: “Ratzinger, who turned 78 on Saturday, was John Paul II’s prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith — his theological ‘enforcer.’ He has come from behind in the sweepstakes as a potential new pope, despite his age, uncertain health and a bloc of cardinals, including fellow Germans, who consider him too conservative…The identity of the next pope is critical to the Church as it struggles to retain influence in an increasingly secular world. John Paul II took a strongly conservative position on issues ranging from abortion, divorce, contraception and euthanasia to the ordination of women. Many in the Church, however, want his successor to adopt a more liberal stance in line with changing social values, notably on contraception — particularly in the fight against AIDS — and women.”

The Associated Press had added on April 18, 2005: “German Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, considered a top contender to be the next pope, lashed out Monday at what he called threats to the fundamental truths of the Roman Catholic Church as he sought to set a conservative tone for the conclave to elect a new pope…. It was a clear message that Ratzinger wanted his fellow 114 cardinal electors to pick a new pope who will hold fast to the strict doctrinal line that John Paul charted and that he upheld as the powerful prefect of the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith. Ratzinger ticked off the threats facing the church and the next pontiff: sects and ideologies like Marxism, liberalism, atheism and agnosticism, collectivism, and what he called ‘radical individualism’ and ‘vague religious mysticism.'”

Finally, on Tuesday, April 19, 2005, it was announced that Joseph Ratzinger had been elected the new pope. The Associated Press reported:

“Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger of Germany, the Roman Catholic Church’s leading hard-liner, was elected the new pope Tuesday in the first conclave of the new millennium. He chose the name Benedict XVI and called himself ‘a simple, humble worker.’… Benedict XV, who reigned from 1914 to 1922, was a moderate following Pius X, who had implemented a sharp crackdown against doctrinal ‘modernism.’ He reigned during World War I and was credited with settling animosity between traditionalists and modernists, and dreamed of reunion with Orthodox Christians… Ratzinger served John Paul II since 1981 as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith. In that position, he has disciplined church dissidents and upheld church policy against attempts by liberals for reforms…It was one of the fastest elections in the past century: Pope Pius XII was elected in 1939 in three ballots on one day, while Pope John Paul I was elected in 1978 in four ballots in one day. The new pope was elected after either four or five ballots over two days. ‘It’s only been 24 hours, surprising how fast he was elected,’ Vatican Radio said.”

The Times on Line wrote on April 19, 2005:

“In 1981 he became Prefect of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, formerly the Inquisition, where he earned the nickname ‘The Enforcer,’ and Dean of the College of Cardinals in 2002. He and the late Pope were referred to as ‘intellectual bedfellows.’ … Pope Benedict XVI is the eighth German pope. His accomplishments are many, he speaks ten languages and likes to play Beethoven on the piano. But it is in his enforcement of Church doctrine that he has made so many enemies around the world. He said it was ‘an enormous mistake’ to allow Turkey to join the European Union, has described rock music as a ‘vehicle of anti-religion’ and believes cloning is a more serious threat to humanity than weapons of mass destruction. He believes the ban on women priests is necessary to safeguard doctrine, is against multiculturalism and believes that the Church of England is not a proper church. Other religions he regards as deficient and homosexuality in his view is an ‘intrinsic moral evil.'”

In a related article of The Associated Press, it was pointed out:

“… opinion about [Ratzinger] remains deeply divided in Germany, a sharp contrast to John Paul, who was revered in his native Poland. A recent poll for Der Spiegel news weekly said Germans opposed to Ratzinger becoming pope outnumbered supporters 36 percent to 29 percent, with 17 percent having no preference… Many blame Ratzinger for decrees from Rome barring Catholic priests from counseling pregnant teens on their options and blocking German Catholics from sharing communion with their Lutheran brethren at a joint gathering in 2003…”

At the same time, as Bild Online reported, German political leaders welcomed the election of Ratzinger. German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, a Protestant, and Angela Merkel, Protestant leader of the CDU-opposition party, remarked that the fact that a German was elected pope “fills us with honor and pride,” and that it was “a great honor for our country.” The German tabloid Bild Online, originally very critical of Cardinal Ratzinger, wrote on the front page, in big letters: “We Are Pope!” According to Der Spiegel Online, American Catholics are not overwhelmingly enthusiastic about the election of Ratzinger (As a CNN report showed, the reasons can be seen in Ratzinger’s conservative position and his remarks of an alleged conspiracy within the US press regarding the recent U.S. sexual child abuse scandal, involving Catholic priests). In Russia, according to the magazine, they don’t like him, either. The magazine added that the relationship between the Roman Catholic Church and the Russian-Orthodox Church is “chilly,” and that it will remain that way. In addition, the magazine wrote that many British papers are “fuming.”

The Independent in the UK wrote on April 20, 2005:

“… the softly spoken, courteous, Bavarian cardinal is the iron fist in Catholicism’s velvet glove. Nicknamed ‘God’s rottweiler’ and the ‘Panzerkardinal’ he takes the same unyielding stance on issues such as artificial contraception, abortion and homosexuality — which he has personally called ‘intrinsically evil.’ He called for pro-abortion politicians to be denied communion during the US election campaign. He has argued that Europe should be re-Christianized and that Turkey should not be admitted into the European Union.

“In many areas he is more hardline than his predecessor. He undermined Pope John Paul II’s attempts at reconciliation with the Orthodox churches. After the last pope visited Athens to apologize for the Great Schism of the 11th century, Cardinal Ratzinger issued a document insisting that the Catholic Church was the ‘mother’ of other Christian denominations as opposed to a ‘sister,’ the more common description in ecumenical circles. It wa
s typical of his stance as a more rigid outrider to the positions adopted by John Paul II.”

MSNBC stated on April 20: “The line between religion and politics isn’t clear, but the papacy of Benedict XVI could erase it altogether… If the denial of Communion — the central sacrament of Catholicism — was a weapon used only occasionally before,… it will be more widely used now. In his writings and interviews, the former Cardinal Ratzinger declared that politicians who support abortion rights should be turned away — and that it is a sin for Catholic voters to support a pro-choice candidate if their main reason for doing so is the candidate’s abortion views. We are eons away from the days when John Kennedy wanted to assure voters that the Vatican would hold no sway over his actions. Now everyone frankly acknowledges the Holy See’s role in the American public square. The question is: How will the electorate view the advent of a new Church Militant?”

Der Spiegel Online published an interesting article about the German popes — pointing out that none of Ratzinger’s predecessors were too fortunate on the Roman Catholic throne. Gregory V (996-999), the first German pope, had to flee from Rome naked and without financial means. Shortly after he returned, he died of Malaria. Clemens II (1046-1047) died of poisoning within a year. Damasus II (1048) died within 23 days of Malaria. Leo IX (1049-1054) was captured by the Normans, and under his rule, the Catholic Church split into the Eastern and Western Churches. Victor II (1055-1057) was compelled by the emperor to become pope, but he never gave up his office of bishop in Germany. Stephen IX (1057-1058) died within eight months, while traveling. Finally, Hadrian VI (1522-1523) was unable to prevent the Reformation under Martin Luther.

The future will show how close we have now come to the return of Jesus Christ. Surely, tumultuous and frightening times are ahead of us.

The passage in question reads in full, beginning in verse 14:

“Pursue peace with all people, and holiness, without which no one will see the Lord: looking carefully lest anyone fall short of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up cause trouble, and by this many become defiled; lest there be any fornicator or profane person like Esau, who for one morsel of food sold his birthright. For you know that afterward, when he wanted to inherit the blessing, he was rejected… (verses 14-17).”

Paul gives us several examples to avoid, in order to make sure that we will inherit the blessing of the Kingdom of God. He tells us that if we don’t pursue peace with all people, but rather continue to live a contentious life style, we will not see or be accepted by Jesus Christ. The same is true when we don’t live holy or God-pleasing lives. He also explains that we won’t inherit the blessing either, when we allow a root of bitterness to spring up causing trouble; and finally, we won’t be accepted by God if we commit spiritual fornication by rejecting, through our words, thoughts and deeds, the gift of eternal life which God has in store for us.

Especially the term, “root of bitterness,” is very meaningful, as it can and will defile the bitter person, as well as others, if it is not immediately rooted out.

The Broadman Bible Commentary explains:

“It is interesting to observe that this… [phrase] (‘root of bitterness’) was used by Peter in his denunciation of Simon Magus, who tried to buy the gift of the Holy Spirit with money (Acts 8:23). The writer may be referring to the passage in Deuteronomy 29:18: ‘Beware… lest there be among you a root bearing poisonous and bitter fruit.’ Here the warning is against one who assures himself that he is in the covenant relationship, even though he continues to keep a stubborn heart.”

The Commentary continues to point out that Hebrews is referring to “those people who are like Esau, who value immediate gratification of sensual desire above the final approval of God.”

The Commentary on the Whole Bible, by Jamieson, Fausset and Brown, explains that the root of bitterness “comprehends every person and every principle of doctrine or practice so radically corrupt as to spread corruption all around. The only safety is in rooting out such a root of bitterness… So long as it is hidden under the earth it cannot be remedied, but when it ‘springs up,’ it must be dealt with boldly.”

The New Bible Commentary:Revised adds that a person with a root of bitterness “can bring defilement on the whole congregation.” It refers in this context to the story of Achan, in Joshua 6:18; and 7:25.

When checking the Greek word for “bitterness,” i.e., pikria, it is defined, by W.E. Vine, Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, as “denot[ing] bitterness.” The Dictionary continues to point out that it “is used in Acts 8:23, metaphorically, of a condition of extreme wickedness, ‘gall of bitterness’ or ‘bitter gall’; in Rom. 3:14 of evil speaking; in Eph. 4:31, of bitter hatred; in Heb. 12:15, in the same sense, metaphorically, of a root of bitterness, producing bitter fruit.”

We can see, then, from the forgoing that the springing up of a root of bitterness must be avoided at all costs. This root does not suddenly appear, without having first been nurtured in the heart of a person. We see from the Biblical examples that the root of bitterness can be the result of wrong motives, thoughts, desires and actions. It is therefore important that we examine our hearts, to see whether Jesus Christ lives in us (compare 2 Corinthians 13:5), or whether we have a bitter, hateful, stubborn or hardened heart and a contentious spirit. If we do have such an arrogant heart (compare Isaiah 9:9), we must repent of it immediately, purify our hearts (James 4:8), and ask God to give us a humble and submissive heart (Matthew 11:29).

A StandingWatch program, titled, “Submitting to Authority,” was posted on the Web.

Our new booklet on the future of the USA and Great Britain has completed the first review cycle.

From the Philippines: “We received your booklets and tapes yesterday. We are very thankful and appreciate every material for spiritual growth you’ve given us. Most of the original booklets you sent us were distributed to old time members who also like to read them… I’m reading your booklet, ‘Should You Fight in War?‘ I plan to photocopy this after Passover. This is a very timely booklet and it coincides with the election of the new pope… Would you think he may be the last pope or may he serve as a transitional pope to pave the way for the last pope?”

Our comment: Both possibilities exist. The near future will tell for sure.

On Saturday, April 16, 2005, Edwin Pope will give the sermon, titled, “Put On The Lord Jesus Christ.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

In spite of our best efforts, problems do arise. There are many issues that are within our control, and it is a point of personal character to be responsible in these areas. For instance, preparation for the future is our duty. If we acquire a good education and career skills, we are able to direct our lives from a position of strength.

Notice how God teaches us in this regard: “Go to the ant, you sluggard! Consider her ways and be wise, Which, having no captain, Provides her supplies in the summer, And gathers her food in the harvest…” (Proverbs 6:6-8). The lesson here is to be motivated to recognize the need and to be ready.

This same principle applies in our relationship with God. Right now, we who are Christians must be building for the future–both for the events of our own lifetimes and for the opportunities God has promised relative to eternal life. In order to do that, we will need help, and the way for us to prepare is found in James 4:8: “Draw near to God and He will draw near to you…”

For our part, this kind of relationship with God takes constant effort. It is far too easy for us to get caught up in the moment and to relegate our contact with God to second or third place–or to no place at all! Time passes us by, and we suddenly wake up to the fact that our lives are unraveling with problems on every side.

When things go wrong in our lives, what should we do?

Our answer is to seek God with all of our heart, and to put God first in our lives by turning to Him in humility and repentance! We have the record of nations and individuals who have taken this approach, and we see how merciful and loving God is toward those who obey Him in this way.

We find this assurance from God–a way out for us when things do go wrong: “Therefore humble yourselves under the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time, casting all your care upon Him, for He cares for you” (1 Peter 5:6-7).

Bush and Clinton on Pope’s Legacy

The Associated Press reported on April 8, 2005, that “President Bush on Friday said that attending the funeral of Pope John Paul II was ‘one of the highlights of my presidency’ and made clear that he disagrees with former President Clinton’s assessment that the pontiff leaves a mixed legacy. Bush, the first U.S. president to attend a papal funeral, led a U.S. delegation to the 2 1/2-hour funeral Mass… Bush talked about his time in Rome in extraordinarily personal terms, saying it strengthened his own belief in a ‘living God.’ … As he viewed the pope’s body, Bush said, he felt ‘very much at peace’ and ‘much more in touch with his spirit… I knew the ceremony today would be majestic but I didn’t realize how moved I would be by the service itself,’ the president said. ‘Today’s ceremony, I bet you, was a reaffirmation for millions… No doubt in my mind the Lord Christ was sent by the Almighty,’ Bush said.”

Russia, China and India?

The Russian newspaper, Pravda, reported on April 12, 2005, that “India, China and Russia [are desirous] to create [a]new alliance to challenge USA’s supremacy.” Even though the article pointed out that especially India is reluctant to create such an alliance, as it does not want to jeopardize its friendly relationship with the USA, an extremely important trading partner, the article continued: “It was reported on Monday, however, that India and China concluded a strategic partnership agreement. Details of the new document were not exposed, although it is known that the parties came to agreement on the issues of the long-standing border dispute, bilateral trade relations and… economic cooperation. Indian and Chinese prime ministers stated that the document would boost diplomatic and economic links between China and India and help the two states resist ‘global threats.’ For the time being it is not known if Russia is going to have at least something to do with the ‘strategic partnership’ of India and China.”

Outbreak of Deadly Marburg Disease in Angola

The New York Times reported on April 9, 2005, about a new deadly virus in Angola. The article stated: “The death toll in Angola from an epidemic caused by an Ebola-like virus rose to 174 Friday as aid workers in one northern provincial town reported that terrified people had attacked them and that a number of health workers had fled out of fear of catching the disease. International health officials said the epidemic, already the largest outbreak of Marburg virus ever recorded, showed no signs of abating. Seven of Angola’s 18 provinces have now reported suspected cases and several neighboring countries have announced health alerts. ‘It’s becoming a huge problem,’ said Dick Thompson, a spokesman for the World Health Organization… ‘We clearly don’t know the dimensions of the outbreak.’ …

“There is no cure or vaccine for the highly contagious virus. Victims suffer a high fever, diarrhea, vomiting and severe bleeding from bodily orifices and usually die within a week…. The disease is spread through bodily fluids, including blood, excrement, saliva and vomit… Allarangar Yokouidé, an epidemiologist with the World Health Organization, told reporters that more than 80 percent of those who contracted the virus in Angola had died, a mortality rate that surpassed previous Ebola epidemics in the region. ‘Marburg is a very bad virus, even worse than Ebola,’ he said. .. A cousin to the Ebola virus, Marburg is named for the town in Germany where it was first identified in 1967 after laboratory workers were infected by monkeys from Uganda. … Scientists do not know the source of the virus or how the current outbreak began, but they suspect that the virus was transmitted from an animal, possibly a bat. Health experts say that to control the epidemic, medical workers must check everyone who had contact with a victim after the first display of symptoms. That can mean 10 or 20 people to follow for each suspected case, each of whom should be checked once a day… In one Ebola outbreak, he said, epidemiologists had to track 3,000 people a day… The task may be especially daunting in Angola, with its rutted dirt roads, teeming townships, remote villages and countryside still littered with land mines from decades of conflict.”

U.S. Trade Deficit at All-Time High

The Associated Press reported on April 12, 2005, that “The U.S. trade deficit… soared to an all-time high of $61.04 billion in February… Trade deficits of this magnitude have raised worries among economists about America’s ability to continue to attract the foreign financing needed to cover the shortfall between exports and imports…. Demand for foreign petroleum products shot up 10.3 percent to $18.2 billion, the second highest level on record, surpassed only by $19.6 billion in imports of petroleum last November. The February increase reflected higher prices as crude oil climbed to $36.85 per barrel, compared to $35.25 in January, offsetting a drop in the volume of oil imports. Analysts said America’s foreign oil bill is likely to climb even further in months ahead, reflecting further increases in global oil prices.”

Volcano Eruption in Indonesia

As AFP reported on April 12, 2005, “A volcano spewed into life on Indonesia’s disaster-blighted Sumatra island, spreading new panic after the recent tsunami and earthquakes and driving thousands from their homes… More than 20,000 people have been evacuated from the volcano’s slope.” Reuters added that “Mount Talang’s eruption was likely triggered by a series of earthquakes that have rocked Sumatra in recent weeks, including one on March 28 that killed more than 600 people on outlying islands… The mountain is among at least 129 active volcanoes in Indonesia, the world’s largest archipelago nation. The country is part of the Pacific ‘Ring of Fire’ – a series of volcanoes and fault lines stretching from the Western Hemisphere through Japan and Southeast Asia.”

Lebanon in Crisis

Reuters reported on April 12, 2005, that “Lebanon slipped deeper into a political vacuum on Tuesday after bickering among officials held back the formation of a new government and made a delay in general elections set for May almost inevitable… The United Nations and Washington have led calls for the polls to be held on schedule after Syria finishes withdrawing its military and intelligence forces from Lebanon by the end of this month.

“A senior military source said 10,000 troops had left Lebanon since the withdrawal began on March 8. He expected the remaining 4,000 soldiers to return home before April 30. Top pro-Syrian officials failed again on Monday to form a government, six weeks after Prime Minister Omar Karami resigned under popular pressure over the killing of his predecessor. But he was reappointed days later and tried, but failed, to persuade Lebanon’s anti-Syrian opposition to join a unity cabinet alongside pro-Syrian loyalists.”

EU Constitution in Jeopardy?

The EUobserver reported on April 12, 2005, that “A top German economist has warned of serious economic consequences if there is a No to the EU Constitution in the 29 May referendum in France.The chief economist at Deutsche Bank, Norbert Walter, told FT [Financial Times] Deutschland that a French No might cause a currency crisis in the new member states… ‘One problem is that the EU has absolutely no strategy about how to react to a failure in the Constitution referendum,’ Mr Walter indicated. He added that a debate about closing the eurozone to any more new members is also conceivable. Several countries are planning to have a referendum on the Constitution. Successive polls have predicted that the Treaty will fail in France and beyond, but the importance of France as a pioneer of European integration means that a French No could have grave implications for the 25-strong bloc.”

Earthquakes in California

Edison International issued the following press release on April 11, 2005: “April is Earthquake Preparedness Month… Southern California Edison (SCE) is reminding its customers that April is Earthquake Preparedness month and a good time to plan for disaster preparedness. ‘California is not only known for its golden beaches and snow-capped mountains, but for its earthquakes, which can create widespread damage and extended power outages,’ said Rose Pearson, manager of consumer affairs. ‘We’re encouraging our customers to take steps now to ready their families should a strong earthquake strike.'”

On April 12, 2005, around 4:00 a.m., an earthquake with the magnitude of 4.0 on the Richter scale struck Southern California. It was centered near the city of Santee, close to San Diego.

Some, in an attempt to teach a Sunday morning resurrection, have used Matthew 28:1 in support of such a teaching. We do know, however, that Jesus Christ was resurrected on Saturday afternoon, around sunset, after having been in the grave for three days and three nights. He was killed on a Wednesday, and placed in the grave on Wednesday afternoon, just around sunset.

We have set forth in detail the Biblical and historical proofs for a Wednesday crucifixion and a Saturday resurrection in our free booklet, “Jesus Christ — A Great Mystery.” In that booklet, we have also explained the correct understanding of Matthew 28:1, as follows:

“We read in Matthew 28:1-6 (Authorized Version): ‘In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre. And behold, there was a great earthquake: for the angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door, and sat upon it… And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for HE IS RISEN, AS HE SAID.’

“We note from the passage that Christ was already resurrected by the time the women came to the grave. We are told that they appeared ‘in the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week.’ Many commentaries point out that this phrase discusses the END of the SABBATH, that is, Saturday evening or late afternoon, and NOT Sunday morning.

“The Interlinear Literal Translation of the Greek New Testament renders this verse in this way: ‘Now late on Sabbath, as it was getting dusk toward (the) first (day) of (the) week, came Mary the Magdalene…’

“A.T. Robertson’s Harmony of the Gospel comments: ‘This phrase once gave much trouble, but the usage of the vernacular Koine Greek amply justifies the translation. The visit of the women to inspect the tomb was thus made before the Sabbath was over (before 6 p.m. on Saturday).’

“Cockrell states: ‘When does the Bible say that Jesus rose from the dead? The two Marys came to the tomb ‘in the end of the sabbath’ (Matth. 28:1). The Sabbath always ended at sunset: ‘From even unto even, shall ye celebrate your Sabbath’ (Lev. 23:32). Then they went to the tomb before sunset on Saturday. Jesus had risen from the dead before their arrival (Matth. 28:1-8)…’

“The Moffat Bible translates: ‘At the close of the Sabbath, when the first day was dawning…’

“The Elberfelder Bibel reads: ‘But late at the Sabbath, in the dawn of the first day.’ It comments: ‘Days started at sunset.’

“The Lamsa Bible states: ‘In the evening of the Sabbath, when the first day of the week began to dawn…’

“The revised Luther Bibel of 1984 translates: ‘When the Sabbath was over and the first day of the week began…’

“The Menge Bible renders this verse as follows: ‘But after the Sabbath, when the first day after the Sabbath was about to begin.’

“Finally, the revised Zürcher Bible of 1942 states: ‘After the Sabbath, when it was shining (lightening up) towards the first day of the week…’ It adds the following comments: ‘For the Jews a day began with sunset. The expression [in] Luke 23:54, “The Sabbath lightened up…” [The King James Bible states: ‘The Sabbath drew on’ or ‘drew near’] does not mean that the morning began, but that lights were kindled for the evening… Whether Matthew 28:1 likewise refers to the evening with which the Sabbath ended and the first day of the week began, is not clear.’

“However, based on the evidence presented herein, it is very clear that Matthew 28:1 refers to the end of the Sabbath, and NOT to Sunday morning.

“For instance, please note the following comments from ‘The Easter Sermons of Gregory of Nyssa,’ edited by Andreas Spira and Christoph Klock, 1981, pages 265, 266, and 269: ‘The only testimony about the time of resurrection is produced by Matthew 28:1: “Late on the sabbath”… That means, explains Gregory, it was already late in the evening (this evening being the beginning of the night before the first day of the week) when the angel came… Matthew alone remains testifying the hour of resurrection on Saturday evening… The time of resurrection is Saturday evening according to Matthew 28:1… The time of resurrection [was] “late on the Sabbath.”‘

“This fact is also established, when considering the meaning of the Greek word, translated in Matthew 28:1, as ‘in the end of the Sabbath.’ The Greek for ‘in the end of ‘ is ‘opse.’ It is defined as ‘late in the evening.’ It is not a reference to ‘early in the morning.’ Compare Mark 13:35 and Mark 11:19, where the word ‘opse’ is correctly rendered as ‘even’ or ‘evening.’

“Other passages confirm that Christ was resurrected long before Sunday morning. We read that Mary Magdalene came to the tomb on the first day of the week, when it was still dark, and Jesus was already resurrected by that time (John 20:1). This means, Christ was not resurrected on Sunday morning, at sunrise, but He had already been resurrected, ‘while it was still dark.’ In addition, John 20:1 might not even be talking about events that occurred Sunday morning, ‘while it was still dark,’ but it might be talking about events on Saturday evening, when it was getting darker. In the Greek, the word translated as ‘still’ [or ‘yet’ in other translations] is ‘eti.’ It can also be translated as ‘more,’ ‘yet more,’ or, ‘still more,’ as was done in Revelation 9:12 (‘Behold, still two more woes are coming after these things.’ Compare New International Version: ‘two other woes are yet to come’; and New Jerusalem Bible: ‘there are still two more to come’). In addition, Hebrews 11:32 states: ‘”What more shall I say?”‘ This could mean that John’s account is telling us that the women came to the grave when it was getting ‘even more’ dark-or ‘darker,’ after they had begun their walk to the grave when it was getting dark, at sunset. This would then also refer to events on Saturday night, not on Sunday morning.

“A similar explanation can be given for a passage in Luke 24:1, stating: ‘Now on the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they and certain other women with them, came to the tomb, bringing the spices which they had prepared.’ This passage may not be talking about events on Sunday morning, but it could refer to events occurring Saturday night. Word Studies in the New Testament by Martin Vincent, Volume 1, page 433, explains the correct meaning of the phrase, ‘very early in the morning’: ‘Literally, “at deep dawn, or the dawn being deep.”… Plutarch says of Alexander that he supped “at deep evening,” i.e. late at night.’ In any event, Luke 24:1 does not address the time of the resurrection, but the arrival of certain women at the grave, when the stone was already rolled away from the grave (Luke 24:2)…

“However, there is one Scripture, Mark 16:2, which clearly talks about events that took place on Sunday morning, at sunrise. It does not address the time of the resurrection, but rather the time of the women’s arrival at the grave. We read: ‘Very early in the morning, on the first day of the week, they came to the tomb when the sun had risen.’

“Since we know from other passages that some of the women visited the grave Saturday evening, and we know that Mark 16:2 describes the arrival of some women at the grave early Sunday morning, we must conclude that these Biblical accounts describe several different trips to the grave by various women. In other words, they did not all happen at the same time. This is also supported by the fact that the purposes of the trips to the grave were different. Matthew 28:1 tells us that women came to see the grave. Mark 16:1 and Luke 24:1 tell us that certain women came to anoint Christ. We also note that it is not always the same women that are mentioned. While Matthew 28:1 mentions Mary Magdalene and the other Mary, Mark 16:1 mentions the two Marys and Salome. Luke 24:1 does not identify the women, but implies that quite a number of women went, at certain times, to the grave (compare Luke 23:55). John 20:1 and Mark 16:9 only mention Mary Magdalene.”

In addition to these quotes from our booklet, “Jesus Christ — A Great Mystery!”, we would like to point out that, as mentioned in those quotes above, A.T. Robertson, in “A Harmony of the Gospel,” likewise teaches that Matthew 28:1 refers to “late Saturday afternoon and early evening.” This Commentary was used as a classroom text at Ambassador College (AC), an institution of education of the Worldwide Church of God, under the late Herbert W. Armstrong. Although Robertson has a few errors in his harmony, which were pointed out at AC, the fact that Matthew 28:1 describes events occurring on Saturday evening, was not one of these mistakes, but it was correctly taught at AC, under Mr. Armstrong.

In addition, although Mr. Armstrong was somewhat inconsistent over the years, in two different booklets, as to when the event in Matthew 28:1 occurred, he did write the following in his booklet, “Which Day is the Sabbath of the New Testament?” in 1952: “In the end of the Sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre [Matthew 28:1]… This is the first place in the Bible where the first day of the week is mentioned. Matthew wrote these words, under inspiration of the Holy Spirit, six years after the New Testament church came into being. The text says that late on the Sabbath day it was drawing TOWARD the first day of the week.” Mr. Armstrong had these statements republished in his booklet, “Which Day is the Christian Sabbath?, in 1962, 1964, 1968, 1970, 1971, 1972, and 1976. [In his booklet, “The Resurrection was not on Sunday,” copyrighted 1952, 1971, and 1972, Mr. Armstrong seems to be saying that the events in Matthew 28:1 occurred on Sunday morning. At best, we have an inconsistency here. Those who claim that we must follow every word uttered or written by Mr. Armstrong must decide which of his words they want to follow, and which of his words they must reject. The answer is, of course, we must follow every word written in God’s Holy Scriptures. A different approach borders on blasphemy].

Some have said that the word “dawn” in Matthew 28:1 can only mean, “morning.” First of all, this is false. Any good dictionary will tell you that the word “dawn” can also mean, “beginning,” as for example in “dawn of civilization.” In addition, it is somewhat immaterial what the word “dawn” means in English, if it does not convey correctly the original Greek. [The idea that ANY translation is inspired is, of course, false. We have always understood that NO translation is inspired, although some translations are more reliable than others. ONLY the original Hebrew and Greek texts are inspired, NOT ANY translations, which have been produced by unconverted men]. As we pointed out, the Greek expression means, translated word for word, “…as it was getting DUSK toward (the) first (day) of (the) week.” Compare, too, the Interlinear Translation of the Greek New Testament, by Berry. Note that it was getting dusk TOWARD the first [day] of the week. The Greek word for “toward” is “eis,” and means here “toward,” “to” or “into”, according to Young’s Analytical Concordance to the Bible.

Again, if one wants to be honest with the Scriptures, there is no way to say that this refers to Sunday MORNING. According to the Hebrew calendar, days start and end with sunset. The Sabbath ends with sunset, and the first day of the week begins at sunset. Matthew 28:1 CLEARLY states that the Sabbath was ending and it was getting dark, as the first day of the week began (AT SUNSET).

The New Bible Commentary concedes that it is possible that the women appeared first on Saturday evening, stating: “It may mean late on Saturday evening as the Sabbath was giving place at sunset to the first day of the week, which began at that hour by Jewish reckoning… see Luke 23 v 54.”

Some have wondered why the women — especially Mary Magdalene — would return on Sunday morning to the grave, as Mark 16:2, states, if they already had seen previously, on Saturday evening, that the tomb was empty, as Matthew 28:1 and other passages explain. They have concluded that therefore, all passages in the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John must refer to the same identical occurrence on Sunday morning — that they all address the same identical moment in time, when the women arrived at the grave.

However, that explanation is erroneous.

First, please notice the obvious distinctions in the four accounts.

Matthew 28:1 tells us that late on the Sabbath, when it began to dawn [or, getting dusk] toward the first day of the week, Mary Magdalene and the other Mary come to SEE the sepulcher. We read about ONE angel who rolls the stone away, sits on it, and talks to the women, while the watchers become as dead men (verses 2-4). When the women return from the grave, Jesus appears to them, and they worship Him (verse 8-9).

John 20:1 mentions that Mary Magdalene appears ALONE, when it was yet dark (or, as mentioned above, when it was getting darker), and she sees that the stone is already taken away. She runs back to tell the disciples, and Simon Peter and John run to the sepulcher and find it empty (verses 2-10). NO angel is mentioned in this episode, until verse 11. In verse 11, Mary stands outside the sepulcher, weeping, and she sees TWO angels WITHIN the sepulcher (not ONE, sitting outside on the stone). Then, in verse 14, she sees Jesus, thinking that He is the gardener. When she recognizes Him, He tells her not to touch Him (verses 15-17). Verse 18 reports that Mary Magdalene went back to the disciples to tell them that she had spoken with Christ.

Luke 24:1 tells us that women, who are first NOT specified, come very early in the morning to the sepulcher to ANOINT Christ’s body. They did not come just to SEE the body (as we are told in Matthew 28:1), but to anoint Him. Mark 16:1 explains to us that Marry Magdalene, Mary the mother of Jesus, and Salome BOUGHT (not: HAD bought) spices PRIOR to the annual Sabbath — which was a Thursday. They rested during the annual Sabbath, prepared the spices on Friday, rested on the weekly Sabbath, and came to the sepulcher “early… the first day of the week… at the rising of the sun” (Mark 16:2). Luke 24:1 does not mention that this happened “at the rising of the sun,” and the women mentioned in Luke 24:1 probably included additional women, as Luke 24:55-56; 24:1 says: “And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre… and they returned… now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came… and certain others with them.” Some of the women are later identified as “Mary Magdalene and Joanna, and Mary the mother of James and other women that were with them” (Luke 24:10). They ALL told the apostles (not just Mary Magdalene, as we read in the book of John), but nobody believed (verse 11). Then Peter arose and ran to the sepulcher (John is not mentioned!) (verse 12).

Even these two accounts in the books of Mark and Luke — when women appear to ANOINT the body of Christ — may not be describing the same event. In both accounts the stone was already rolled away. But in Luke, we read about two angels (Luke 24:4), while Mark only mentions one angel (Mark 16:5). The most important distinction is, too, that while Luke reports that the women ran to the disciples to tell them, prompting Peter to run to the sepulcher, Mark 16:8 records that they did not tell anyone about this incident at that time. Only later, in Mark 16:9-10, we read that Mary Magdalene told the eleven, after Christ had appeared to her.

Why, then, do we find these discrepancies? Are we really to believe that all these records report about the same identical occurrence, all happening at the very same time, involving identical persons, although they record many inconsistencies that cannot be harmonized — if one really wants to be honest with the Scriptures? The answer is, every record is inspired, but they do not all talk about the same event. For instance, there were not only three women who prepared spices, but more. They did not all come to the grave at the same time. Some came just to see the grave, not for the purpose of anointing the body of Christ. On one occasion, the women told the others, but on another occasion they did not tell anybody. In one case, only one angel was there; in another case, two were there. In one case, the angel (s) was (were) inside the grave; in another case, he was sitting outside the grave on the rock. In one case, the women saw the angel rolling away the stone; in other cases, the stone was already rolled away when the women appeared [If one wants to insist that all the events took place on Sunday morning, one would also have this inconsistency to explain: That is, when the women in John’s account appeared at the grave, while it was yet dark (as the reasoning goes), the stone was already rolled way, while in Matthew’s account (following the reasoning of a Sunday morning description), the women arrived at dawn — that would not be “yet dark” anymore — and SAW the stone being rolled away by the angel.]

But let us now ask and answer this question:

Why did Mary Magdalene and the other women wonder, on Sunday morning, who would roll the stone away from the grave (Mark 16:3), if Mary Magdalene and the other Mary saw already on Saturday evening, how the stone was rolled away (Matthew 28:1-5)?

The answer is actually quite simple, when we realize the state of mind the women (and the apostles) were in, when these events took place. Matthew 28:8, 10 states that they were afraid. Mark 16:8 tells us that they trembled and were amazed. Mark 16:11 tells us that the apostles did not believe. Luke 24:4 said that the women were perplexed, and John 20:11 tells us that Mary stood outside the open tomb, weeping. They were going through traumatic times, thinking their whole life with Jesus had been in vain — that everything was over. They did not know whether they were sleeping and dreaming, or whether they were actually experiencing reality. Later, Peter would have a similar experience in Acts 12, when he was imprisoned. When the angel appeared to him and freed him, he “did not know that what was done by the angel was real, but thought he was seeing a vision” (verse 9). Only after Peter “had come to himself,” he realized that what he had experienced was real (verse 11). The other disciples did not first believe it, either — they thought an angel had appeared to them, instead of Peter (verse 15).

Even though the women saw (in Matthew 28) how the stone was rolled away Saturday evening — after a traumatic week during which they had witnessed how Jesus Christ had died a horrible death — it appears that they did not believe that this had actually happened (as Peter later likewise doubted that his rescue from prison was real), rather thinking that they had somehow dreamed this — and so they were wondering on their next visit who would roll the stone away for them. In any event, when we want to be honest with the Scriptures and when we believe in the infallible inspiration of the Scriptures in their original writings, we must conclude that the women came to the grave more than once, on different occasions, and that the first visit took place at the end of the Sabbath, as it was dawning toward the first day of the week (Matthew 28:1), that is, right after sunset, when the first day of the week BEGAN.

Our new booklet, “Should You Fight In War?” and our new member letter were sent out this week.

A StandingWatch program, titled, “The Pope is Dead–What Is Next?” was posted on the Web. A new StandingWatch program will be recorded on Friday.

On Saturday, April 9, 2005, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “Looking To God.”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at 12:30 pm Pacific Time (which is 2:30 pm Central Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

Have you ever had someone respond to you, by saying: “but I think…”, followed by a lengthy explanation of his or her personal opinion?

It happens all the time, doesn’t it? And far too often, it occurs in areas in which the person you are talking with has absolutely no expertise and experience — whether it is in the field of business, law, education — or, of course, religion.

Especially when focusing on the true worship of God, everybody seems to have an opinion — and many times, it is “THE one and only correct position.” Far too often, it is something comparatively negligible which has become THE issue of salvation in the person’s mind. But God is not interested at all in your or my OPINION — He does not care what WE may think — and neither should we.

When God calls us to His way of life, He expects us to give up OUR opinions and replace them with the way GOD thinks.

Notice what God tells those who believe that they are wise and full of understanding: “The Lord knows the thoughts of the wise, that they are futile” (1 Corinthians 3:20). Paul even remarks: “And if anyone thinks that he knows anything [especially something “new” which only he or she is able to “see”], he knows nothing yet as he ought to know” (1 Corinthians 8:2).

But this is not what the human mind wants to hear. Rather, we are, so often, far too anxious to justify our thoughts to God — or His true ministers — rather than taking a deep breath, stepping back, and considering whether our thoughts are futile or vain in the eyes of God.

Notice Paul’s question in Romans 9:20: “But indeed, O man, who are you to reply against God?” The scribes and Pharisees at the time of Christ have become known to us as those who seemed to be always ready to argue with God. We find this telling report in Luke 5:22: “But when Jesus perceived their thoughts, He answered and said to them, ‘Why are you reasoning in your hearts?'” Christ had just forgiven the sins of a sick person (verse 20), but “the scribes and Pharisees began to reason, saying, ‘…Who can forgive sins but God alone?'” (verse 21). They were suffering from the typical “but I think”- syndrome. They did not agree with what Christ was doing or saying. But rather than submitting to God, replacing their thoughts and opinions with the mind of God, they began to reason and justify their own positions. They should have done, however, what Paul tells us to do in 2 Corinthians 10:4-5: “For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty IN GOD for… casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every THOUGHT into captivity to the obedience of Christ…”

Even members in God’s Church have to be careful not to embrace the “but I think”-approach, which clouds Godly understanding. Maybe, we don’t openly argue with God, but what about arguing with God’s true ministry, when they teach and expound to us the Word of God or Godly principles? Let’s notice Hosea’s warning to all of us today: “Now let no man contend, or rebuke another; For your people are like those who contend with the priest. Therefore you shall stumble in the day…” (Hosea 4:4-5).

Next time, when we are tempted to say, “but I think…”, let’s reconsider and ask the right question instead: “What does GOD think?”

Haider in the News

As The Associated Press reported on April 4, 2005, “[Austria’s] Joerg Haider and his supporters broke Monday with the once-powerful populist Freedom Party to form a new movement meant to reflect the former rightist firebrand’s turn toward relative moderation… The party’s fall in popularity has been accompanied by growing infighting among party pragmatists and the rightist fringe that extends to those with links to neo-Nazi publications.”

Prince Rainier of Monaco Dies

As the Associated Press reported on April 6, 2005, “Prince Rainier III [Europe’s longest-reigning monarch of Europe’s longest-ruling royal family, the Grimaldis], whose fairy-tale marriage to Hollywood star Grace Kelly brought elegance and glamour to one of Europe’s oldest dynasties, died Wednesday, nearly a month after he was hospitalized with a lung infection. He was 81… Rainier, who assumed the throne on May 9, 1949, had to endure the tragedy of his wife’s death and relentless scandals — including international criticism of the principality’s tax laws — that plagued the final two decades of his rule… Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II sent a message of condolence to the family. Rainier’s death means the queen [Britain’s Queen Elizabeth II], who acceded to the throne in 1952, becomes the longest-serving monarch in Europe.”

European Visas Required?

As AFP reported on April 6, 2005, “New US passport rules ‘threaten business relations'” between the USA and European countries. The article stated: “Sir Digby Jones, director-general of the Confederation of British Industry, said US demands for visitors to hold passports containing biometric information would cause ‘enormous problems’ for UK business… The UK is one of several countries expected to miss an October 26 deadline to start issuing the high-tech passports, which include a digital photo embedded with a chip. Only six European countries — Belgium, Germany, Austria, Finland, Sweden and Luxembourg — are expected to meet the deadline. People with passports issued after the deadline without biometric features will need a visa to enter the US.”

However, the Austrian-based “Networld” reported on April 5, 2005, that Austria might not be ready to issue the required new passports by the deadline, and that the USA would be unwilling to extend the deadline.

It should be noted, though, that in the rising heat of the discussion, an important aspect is overlooked. As AFP pointed out: “The new rules apply only to new passports issued after October 26, meaning that people with documents issued before the deadline will still be able to enter the US without a visa or biometric information.”

EU “Retaliates” Against USA

The EUobserver reported on March 31, 2005, that “The European Commission… intend[s] to impose an extra 15 percent duty on some types of paper, textiles and machinery from 1 May after ‘the continuing failure of the US to bring its legislation into conformity with its international obligations’…’The level of retaliation… is slightly below US $28 million,’ says a statement by the Commission…. The EU’s move is likely to raise transatlantic trade tensions… The European Commission’s decision has to be approved by member states before it can come into effect on 1 May — but no opposition is expected.”

In the USA, the decision of the European Commission has been sharply criticized by the media — including CNN. In a special report, CNN questioned what the EU is expecting of the USA — given the high amount of trade with the USA, which is already enormously benefiting the EU.

The Death of Pope John Paul II

With the death of Pope John Paul II, speculation is running high as to who his successor is going to be. Will it be the last pope in the history of the Catholic Church — a black pope perhaps (such as Cardinal Francis Arinze of Nigeria), and will he adopt the name of Peter, as Nostradamus and other “seers” have prophesied? In the annals of the Catholic Church, there has only been one black pope before.

Will it be a European — a German, perhaps? Could it be Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger (77)? Time magazine felt, at the beginning of this year, that he was the top candidate — something like a transitional pope. He has been presiding over the Office responsible for religious questions — formerly known as the Inquisition. He is described as “highly intelligent” (Bild Online, April 3, 2005). Whether or not it will be Ratzinger, he has already become known as the “creator of popes,” as Bild Online stated on April 6, 2005.

One thing is certain — this new election will be of tremendous prophetic importance. It is interesting that the new election process of 117 cardinals (under 80 years) — or 116 cardinals, as the Cardinal from the Philippines, Jaime Sin, fell sick and might be unable to attend — will begin on April 18, 2005 — exactly 16 days after the pope’s death, and less than a week before Passover. And, that during the burial of the pope, there will be a partial solar eclipse (as The Associated Press reported on April 6, 2005). The late pope’s testament “did not name the mystery cardinal he created in 2003… ending speculation that a last-minute cardinal might join in the April 18 start of the conclave [the papal election process],” according to The Associated Press of April 6, 2005.

To be able to elect a new pope, the cardinals, in sequestered meetings at the Sistine Chapel, have to agree on one candidate with a two-thirds majority (plus one). If there have been 33 unsuccessful attempts (ballots are cast each day, two in the morning and two in the afternoon, as AFP reported on April 4, 2005), the cardinals are allowed to elect a pope with a simple majority, or to agree on the most likely candidate, choosing from the two who had received the most votes. The longest election process occurred in 1268, when it took three years to elect a new pope (Bild Online, April 1, 2005). The shortest election took place in 1978, when Pope John Paul I was elected. He only ruled for 33 days, before he died (Bild Online, April 3, 2005). Some believe that he did not die of natural causes.

When the cardinals decide on a candidate, the traditional white smoke that for centuries has announced the selection of a new pope to the world will be joined by the tolling of bells (The Associated Press, April 6, 2005).

On April 6, 2005, Bild Online published an article, stating, “Not Every Pope Died in His Bed.” The article pointed out that Pope John XII (937-964) was killed by a jealous husband, after he had transformed the Vatican into a house of prostitution. Pope Benedict IX (1020-1055) died in battle, when he fought against a German “counter-pope.” Pope Paul II (1417-1471) died while he had sexual relationships with another man. Pope Innocence VIII (1432-1492) died, after having violated his eight daughters, when a blood transfusion from a boy failed. Pope Leo X (1475-1521) died of syphilis, after he had had sexual relationships with boys, men and women.

Der Spiegel Online pointed out on April 4, 2005, that historically, “many conclaves were dictated by intrigue and corruption.”

The Scotsman added on April 4, 2005:

“The world is on the brink of witnessing an ancient rite, one redolent with history, power and intrigue… Yet the late John Paul II could be responsible for initiating a long conclave. He ordered the construction of Casa Santa Marta, a £12 million, 134-room hotel, which will permit the cardinals to deliberate in comfort, 108 of them in three-room suites.”

Bild Online even went so far as to state, on April 6, 2005: “There is already a power and election struggle going on in the Vatican… Intrigues, conspiracies, cheating… Is every method acceptable? Mysterious organizations, which could be decisive as to who might be the next pope, are: Opus Dei, the army of the pope, also known as the Italian Mafia; Communione e Liberazione, a powerful Italian lay member movement; Sant’Egidio, a community similar to an order; and the Fokolaries, a ultra-conservative youth group, which very strongly worships Mary. About one-third of the 117 cardinals sympathize with one or the other of those groups. Whether it’s Opus Dei or the Fokolaries, they all are extremely rich… and run universities and seminaries for priests — in which cardinals are forged.”

Unknown to most is the fact that every baptized Catholic male can be elected pope — he does not even have to be a priest. But since 1378, only cardinals were elected popes (Bild Online, April 3, 2005; AFP, April 4, 2005).

The worldwide reaction to Pope John Paul II’s death was stunning. President Bush said that he had been “a hero for all times — a fighter for peace and freedom” — even though he had been strongly opposed to the Iraq war. Former German Chancellor Helmut Kohl said that Pope John Paul II was instrumental in the fall of the Berlin Wall and the end of the division in Germany and Europe. More than 100 governmental officials, as well as many more prominent figures, are planning to attend the funeral, from virtually every country around the world. Pilgrims are flocking into Rome by the millions. Even the wedding of Prince Charles was postponend (reportedly much to the anger of Prince Charles), as it would have coincided with the pope’s funeral.

Bild Online reported on April 6 about miracles that the late Pope John Paul II had allegedly performed during his life — including the healing of blind people; of individuals sick with cancer; and of lame and paralyzed persons. The paper stated that the Vatican is already considering sanctifying or canonizing the pope — a process which normally could last decades, if not centuries, except for popular demand of the masses. For instance, Franz of Assisi was sanctified as early as two years after his death (in 1226).

Der Spiegel Online discussed in its article of April 2, 2005, titled, “The Testament of the Lion,” why the late pope enjoyed such popularity–given the fact that he was extremely conservative. The paper pointed out that he did not compromise, and that he demanded unquestioned obedience. “His stance regarding abortion was terribly against the Zeitgeist [the commonly accepted view of the time]… He looked for reconciliation between Catholics and Jews — while declaring that the Catholic way was the only true one… The media loved this pope so much that they did not understand his radical stance on social issues… He could not prevent the Iraq war, but his resistance against it brought him admiration and love.”

The Bible prophesies that the final pope of the end-time will be able to perform miracles and propagate the Catholic way as the only true way — and he will do so in such a convincing manner, that most people will follow his lead. At the same time, important commandments of God will be ignored and neglected. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.” Have we now reached this final phase of human history, which will end with the return of Jesus Christ to this earth?

One has to be struck by the unending news coverage and the — overall — unquestioning admiration by the nations and people of the world for the late Pope John Paul II, and his religion. Only the tiniest mention is ever made about the deeply held beliefs embodied in Catholicism, and beyond that, only scant coverage of the recent problems of child molestation uncovered among so many priests of the Catholic Church.

In reading Revelation 13 and what is stated about the final
global impact of Catholicism, one has to be impressed how the world, more than ever before in recent times, is galvanized around Rome and the religious figure-head of this time!

Right now, the true Church of God — the spiritual body of Christ — seems indeed very small, very scattered and, overall, little prepared for what is coming…

The Church of the Eternal God in the USA and its corporate affiliates in Canada and Great Britain have consistently taught that it is not wrong to eat out on the weekly Sabbath or annual Holy Days (which are also called “Sabbaths” in the Bible), depending on the circumstances. At the same time, we must always keep firmly in mind that whatever we do or say or think on the Sabbath should be in realization of the fact that we are spending time that God has set aside for a holy purpose (Isaiah 58:13-14).

Quoting from our booklet, titled, “God’s Commanded Holy Days,” pages 21 and 22, we have said:

“It was Jesus Christ-the LORD of the Sabbath-who created the Sabbath, following the directive and command of God the Father. It is God-both the Father and the Son-who expects man to keep the Sabbath holy. Only God has the right to tell us how to keep the Sabbath holy. In Matthew 12:1-8, Christ tells us that mercy allows for a hungry person to get and eat food on the Sabbath. We see here a very important distinction to the time when God did not provide ancient Israel with manna from heaven on the Sabbath. In Christ’s day, food was available. The disciples could pluck heads of grain from the field. Under the law, the landowners were not allowed to harvest completely all grain, but they had to leave some of it in the field, so that those who were hungry could pluck and eat it.

“While this is true, it must be emphasized that the disciples did not ‘harvest’ the field on the Sabbath. They just plucked a few heads of grain to satisfy their hunger. We should also take note of what the Scripture does not address here. Notice that it does not reveal whether the disciples were traveling or whether they were close to home. We are not told why the disciples were hungry to begin with, and why they had not prepared food on the previous day for the Sabbath. The reason we are not told is that it is irrelevant for the point that Christ is making here. The message rings loud and clear: Don’t condemn the innocent as to how they keep the Sabbath. They will have to give account to their own Lord and Master-Jesus Christ (Romans 14: 4, 9-13). Instead, WE are to show mercy and compassion. Mercy teaches us that it is wrong to prohibit a hungry person from getting food for himself and to eat it on the Sabbath.

“This is not to say, however, that a Christian should engage in shopping on the Sabbath, except in a real emergency (compare Nehemiah 13:15-22). Nor should this episode be used as justification or an excuse for a refusal to prepare for the Sabbath on the previous day.

“Note also that the disciples were in the presence of Christ while they were eating. They were with God-in the person of Jesus Christ-and were focusing on God. They did not profane the Sabbath by forgetting the sanctity of the day when they plucked grain to eat it. If Church members today eat occasionally in a nice, quiet restaurant on the Sabbath or a Holy Day after Church services, for instance, while, at the same time fellowshipping with other brethren and speaking about the things that pertain to God, then we must not condemn them for that. For instance, Church members might be traveling for quite a distance to attend Church services, looking forward to spending additional time with their brethren after services. If, on the other hand, your conscience does not allow you to go to a restaurant on a Sabbath or a Holy Day, then you must not do so, since ‘whatever is not from faith [or conviction] is sin’ (Romans 14:23). It would be advisable, though, to review the Scriptures to see whether your conscience is based on the Bible or merely on man-made traditions. God never accepts our conviction as justification for the violation of His law, and man-made regulations can, as we saw, cloud the intent of God’s commandments in the minds of men.”

We might want to add here that anyone who sincerely believes that he or she would compromise God’s Sabbath by eating away from home in a commercial establishment must also consider their own example within the body of believers and the effect on other believers — especially those who might be weak in the faith.

This teaching, that it is not wrong to eat out on the Sabbath, is in accordance with the long-held understanding of the Church of God. In a letter from the Letter Answering Department of the Worldwide Church of God, dated October 1988, this understanding was correctly explained, as follows:

“The Church has long taught that it is not wrong to eat out on the weekly Sabbath occasionally or on the annual Holy Days, depending upon one’s circumstances and preferences. Those waiters, waitresses, chefs, and the like, who may serve in a restaurant, are not our ‘servants’ in the way described in the Fourth Commandment. They are the employees of the owner of the restaurant. They would be working regardless of whether or not we ate there. God does not hold us responsible for their working on the Sabbath just because we use their services — unless we are the only ones who ever ate in that restaurant on the Sabbath. Obviously, we make up a very small portion of the customers served in restaurants on the Sabbath or Holy Days. Further, eating out occasionally on the Sabbath can enhance spiritual fellowship with brethren and allow family members more time to be with one another.”

Mr. Armstrong, the late human leader of the Church of God, who died in 1986, explained once during a Bible study that he did not feel that it was inappropriate to go to a restaurant on a Sabbath. His long-time assistant, Aaron Dean, subsequently confirmed Mr. Armstrong’s understanding on the issue, to the effect that eating or not eating did not stop the cooks and servers at a restaurant from working on the Sabbath. Mr. Armstrong did not make it a practice of going out on the Sabbath (except on trips), and he didn’t comment a whole lot about it. He would not have formal dinners on the Sabbath (Friday nights or on Saturdays, during the day) at his house or Ambassador College — a college which was run by the Church — because that would have required employees or College students to work on the Sabbath. He would go out on a Friday night if he had guests, and if he had served his guests in his house, it would have meant a lot of work for Mr. Armstrong’s housekeeper and cook.

The Church of God in Germany published a booklet in the early 70’s, titled “Gottes Sabbat–ein Tag der Freude” (“God’s Sabbath — A Day of Joy”). It reflected the Church’s understanding on the issue, and stated: “In Matthew 12:1-5, Christ shows clearly that it is not prohibited to acquire food on the Sabbath, when one is hungry and has nothing to eat. If one is not at home, it is not wrong to go to a restaurant on the Sabbath. There are people who do not have the means of cooking at home. In such cases it is permissible to buy food on the Sabbath.”

Some have felt that we must never eat out on the Sabbath, as this would be engaging in the business of buying and selling. Sometimes, Exodus 16:22 and Nehemiah 10:31; 13:16-22 are quoted for that proposition. However, none of these Scriptures apply to eating occasionally in a restaurant.

Exodus 16 refers to a limited situation at the time. If we wanted to apply the entire passage literally today, we would not be allowed to leave our houses on the Sabbath (compare Exodus 16:29). But, we generally must leave our houses today to attend Sabbath services (Leviticus 23:3; Hebrews 10:24-25). In regard to the extreme and unusual circumstances at the time of Exodus 16, please also note that today, our food lasts longer than just for one day (compare Exodus 16:18-20). In addition, Exodus 16 does not even address the question of buying and selling.

Nehemiah 10 and 13 seem to apply more to the situation of a farmer’s market. If we were to apply it to occasionally eating out on the Sabbath, we would have to answer the following questions:

If Nehemiah were to prohibit eating out on the Sabbath, as it would violate, in principle, the prohibition to engage in commerce, then we could not stay at a hotel during the Sabbath (which Mr. Armstrong did on numerous occasions), as we would pay for the hotel’s services during that time (including eating complimentary breakfasts, room cleaning, using electricity), and we could never ride a bus to get to services (which Mr. Armstrong did habitually for a while). However, Christ made it very clear in the parable of the Good Samaritan that it is not wrong to stay in a hotel or an inn on the Sabbath and to pay for the services of the inn keeper (compare Luke 10:30, 33-35). Please note that in the parable, the man was severely beaten, and left almost half dead (verse 30). The Samaritan bandaged his wounds, brought him to the inn, took care of him (verse 34), departed the next day, giving the inn keeper money, and told him to take care of him, until he returned, when he would repay him (verse 35). Since the man was severely wounded and half-dead, he could not have been restored in just a week — which means, there would at least have been one Sabbath in between.

If Nehemiah were to prohibit eating out on the Sabbath, as it would violate, in principle, the prohibition to have a person labor for us, then we could not use a bus on the Sabbath to drive to services (as the bus driver “labors” for us); and hotel personnel could not do anything for us on the Sabbath (including cleaning our rooms and beds, bring us fresh towels, etc.).

If Nehemiah were to prohibit eating out on the Sabbath as it would violate, in principle, the prohibition to “work,” then one would have to answer the question why a person can “work” by preparing food on the Sabbath. For instance, Christ made it clear that it was not wrong to circumcise a baby on the Sabbath. This year, the Passover evening falls on the Sabbath, and work will have to be done during the ceremony. In addition, the Night to Be Much Observed falls this year on an annual Holy Day, following a weekly Sabbath. Some members of the Church of the Eternal God keep the Night to Be Much Observed in a nice, quiet restaurant, so as to reduce the work load on the women that night. Otherwise, the ladies would have to work during the weekly Sabbath to prepare meals for the evening. To prepare meals on Friday might pose several problems, as Friday, as the preparation day for the Sabbath, should be spent more properly to spiritually prepare for the Passover evening (in addition to finishing removing all leavening from the house, which must be completed this year by Friday evening).

In the early 70’s, it was the practice of the Church of God in Germany to meet together in a restaurant during the Night to Be Much Observed. This was always a most inspiring experience, and rightly observed, did not at all take away from the spirit of that occasion.

Some have said that we can eat out on an annual Holy Day, or on a weekly Sabbath, when we are traveling, but that we cannot eat out on a weekly Sabbath, when we are “within our gates.” However, there is no Scriptural evidence supporting this claim. Apart from the fact that the issues of having someone work for us, or engaging in business, would still be the same, the only Scripture occasionally used to justify the distinction is Deuteronomy 16:13. However, if anything, this passage would say the exact opposite (compare verse 14). Some have said that we can eat out on an annual Holy Day, as we are to “rejoice” on such a Day (compare Deuteronomy 16:14 and 15). However, this permission would equally apply to the weekly Sabbath, as we are to “rejoice” on the weekly Sabbath as well, which is a delight and a feast (compare Leviticus 23:2-3; Isaiah 58:13).

The religious leaders of Christ’s day made religion a burden (compare Matthew 23:4). However, in speaking of God’s commandments, John stated: “For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome” (1 John 5:3).

In conclusion, to teach that it is a sin to eat out in a restaurant on the weekly and annual Sabbaths is not Biblical.

A new booklet on the future of the USA and Great Britain has been written, and has entered the first review cycle.

The printing of our booklet on Fighting in War has been completed. We trust that we will be able to send out the booklet next week to our readers.

A new member letter has been written by Edwin Pope, and will be sent out next week. The letter addresses the current condition in the world and in the Church and encourages Church members to diligently prepare for the Passover. It has been posted on the website.

A new StandingWatch program will be recorded on Friday.

Following Internet Sabbath services from Colorado on April 2, Alistair Wuckert was baptized. Alistair lives in the Denver, Colorado, area and is married. He and his wife, Andrea, are parents of an infant son named Malakai.

GIVE—GET IT?

by Kalon Mitchell (19)

We all know the story of the good Samaritan; how a man lay bleeding in a ditch but most people who saw him turned away. They had things to do, meetings to attend, school to catch. They didn’t want to get their clothes dirty–in essence, they couldn’t be bothered. What about you and me? What would we have done?

Sometimes it can seem like there’s never a break in our activities. We are just too busy with our thoughts and problems to stop and think about others. Have you, maybe, noticed that someone’s feelings were down; that the lawn needed to be mowed; that the trash needed to be taken out, but you felt like you didn’t have time to help? Are you and I just superficial Christians?

What is the opposite of being superficial? Mr. Armstrong used to say that there are two ways to live–the way of give and the way of get. When we give, we practice God’s law of LOVE. When we live this way of life–of taking time to help others–we will still have the time to get the IMPORTANT things done; and we will have a sense of peace in knowing that we have helped to make someone’s life a little better. That’s the way of give—get it?