God’s Grace

God’s Grace
Vol: 85 Issue: 22 Wednesday, October 22, 2008

There is a wonderful hymn published at the turn of the 20th century that proclaims, “Grace, grace, God s grace, Grace that is greater than all our sin.”

I’m sure most of you have sung these words at some point or another, but have you ever truly contemplated their meaning?

“Marvelous grace of our loving Lord, Grace that exceeds our sin and our guilt!” We sing it, but do we really believe it? More importantly, do we really UNDERSTAND it?

Wrote the Psalmist, “My mouth shall speak of wisdom; and the meditation of my heart shall be of understanding.” (Psalms 49:3)

What is wisdom? Psalms 111:10 says that “The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom.”

Solomon noted that “Wisdom is the principal thing; therefore get wisdom,” before admonishing us; “and with all thy getting get understanding.” (Proverbs 4:7)

But how does one make the leap from ‘wisdom’ to ‘understanding’?

“The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge: but fools despise wisdom and instruction.” (Proverbs 1:7)

“Wisdom and instruction”, applied together, produce knowledge.

“When wisdom entereth into thine heart, and knowledge is pleasant unto thy soul; Discretion shall preserve thee, understanding shall keep thee.” (Proverbs 2:11)

One can, therefore, express it as a Divine equation: Wisdom + Knowledge = Understanding.

“The fear of the LORD is the beginning of wisdom: and the knowledge of the holy is understanding.” (Proverbs 9:10)

‘Wisdom’ is the product of ‘fear’ (or reverence) of the Lord (as expressed in His Word). Out of His Revealed Word comes ‘knowledge’, which, when applied with ‘wisdom’ gives birth to ‘understanding’.

Note well that it is ‘understanding’ that the Lord says will KEEP thee.

It is the ‘wisdom’ to recognize oneself as a sinner in need of salvation taken together with instruction that Christ has extended a free pardon for one’s sin’s that result in the extension of God’s grace, which produces saving faith.

Proverbs 19:8a says, “He that getteth wisdom loveth his own soul, he that keepeth understanding shall find good.”

I don’t think the first part of that verse is an inaccurate statement, although it tends to take the wind out of our sails a bit when we think about it.

I prefer to think of my coming to Christ as an expression of my love for Him — but when I am as honest as Solomon was, and teachable enough to know wisdom when I hear it, I understand that my reason for turning to Christ was love of MY soul. (The wisdom to love Him came later.)

But note well that, to ‘find good’ out of wisdom, one must apply ‘understanding’.


Whenever I tackle the topic of ‘Amazing Grace’ some of the forum comments and emails suggest there are still many misunderstandings, particularly about the way I articulate the doctrine of grace.

I don’t mind revisiting it as often as necessary, as long as you don’t mind revisiting it with me.

The Bible instructs us to strive for perfection. To sin no more. To be perfect, even as the Father is perfect. That our every waking moment should be dedicated to God. (“Sell all you have, pick up your Cross and follow Me.”) To pray without ceasing.

That certain sins really drive God nuts;

“These six things doth the LORD hate: yea, seven are an abomination unto Him: A proud look, a lying tongue, and hands that shed innocent blood, An heart that deviseth wicked imaginations, feet that be swift in running to mischief, A false witness that speaketh lies, and he that soweth discord among brethren.” (Proverbs 6:16-19)

And I have knowledge that I am occasionally guilty of pride, sloth, gluttony, mischief, etc., — just as before I was saved. (Moreover, my personal observations tell me I am not alone among believers in this regard).

Now we turn to the concept of ‘grace’. “Being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” (Romans 3:24)

Further, Paul writes; “All things are lawful for me” but then says, “but all things are not expedient.” (1st Corinthians 10:23)

Few argue the Bible doesn’t teach salvation as an unearned gift extended to all who will receive it. But then they stumble over the idea of eternal security as a ‘license to sin’.

I don’t mean to sound pompous in saying this reflects wisdom, but without understanding. And it is ‘understanding’ that the Lord says is what will ‘keep’ you.

They argue that the doctrine of eternal security turns the Bible into a book of ‘suggestions’. I’ve been accused of endorsing sin. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Wisdom plus knowledge equals understanding.

I reverence God’s Word, which tells me that sin is man’s natural state of being. Paul’s explanation of the dual nature of man in Romans 7 confirms to me that the struggle with sin after salvation is as common to all men as it was to Paul.

It was the wisdom to love my own soul that brought me to the point of salvation, and the knowledge of grace and the dual nature of man that brought me to the understanding of grace.

Paul wrote, “For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, ACCORDING AS GOD HATH DEALT TO EVERY MAN THE MEASURE OF FAITH.” (Romans 1:23)

Wisdom (God’s Word) says that some struggle more with sin than do others, and that God deals out different measures of faith to each of us according to His will.

I think it fair to say we are pretty forgiving of ourselves. Sometimes, we can come up with pretty convincing reasons for falling at the moment we did.

That isn’t to suggest the reasons justify the fall, but we extend to ourselves the grace to pick ourselves up, and try again. Wisdom plus knowledge go out the window once we assume God is less forgiving of us than we are of ourselves.

God’s grace is perfect and all sufficient. If God’s grace didn’t extend to our post-salvation sins, then the only ones who would be in heaven would be those who died at the point of salvation.

Legalism dictates that God demands perfection, settles for minor imperfection, and revokes salvation from those whose imperfection crosses some invisible line.

Remember the story of the 300 lb preacher reminding his congregation that smoking is defiling the Temple of the Holy Spirit?

Smoking isn’t among God’s Seven Deadly Sins — but on that list, the glutton sits right there beside the drunkard. Are fat people habitual, unrepentant sinners who have condemned themselves? Or does God extend His grace to us according to our individual (and God-given) weaknesses or strengths?

I have the wisdom of Scripture that tells me that a holy God cannot countenance sin. That wisdom also tells me that, in God’s eyes, all sin is sin, and there are seven that God hates with a particular passion, habitual sins that, barring God’s grace, condemn as unrepentent; fat people, lazy people, gossips and drunks. I also have knowledge of human nature from personal observation. I have intimate knowledge of myself and my own shortcomings.

Applied with a knowledge — but without an understanding — of grace, it tells me that my own salvation must depend on my first accepting Christ and then, never sinning again.

I came to Christ thirty-five years ago. I am sure I have sinned in the last thirty-five years. Wisdom plus knowledge — but devoid of understanding — therefore dictates that I am already lost and without hope — so why bother even trying?

“Grace” is not a license to sin, it is Divine permission to get back up and try again. Sin is burdensome because it tends to pile up so fast. Soon, it becomes so heavy you CAN’T get back up on your own.

The burden is lifted by the grace of God so that we can get back up, heal our wounds and return to battle. Grace is not license to sin. It is medicine to heal and bandages to cover our sin so we can fight on.

Understanding grace is to understand what Paul meant when he told the Galatians, “I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.” (Galatians 2:21)

Change Like You Can’t Imagine

Change Like You Can’t Imagine
Vol: 85 Issue: 21 Tuesday, October 21, 2008

If the current polls indicate what will happen on Election day, Barack Obama will win the White House and the Democrats will build on their Congressional majorities.

If the Democrats can manage a supermajority in the Senate, (a distinct possibility) then America will find itself undergoing one of its most profound ideological shifts in history. To have a supermajority in the Senate, the Democrats need to hold sixty seats.

With supermajorities in both Houses of Congress, a President Barack Obama could rule unchecked. Obama promises America change you can believe in. Should the Democrats sweep the electoral map, we’ll get change we can’t even imagine.

The first thing an unchecked Democratic Congress will rush to President Obama’s desk will be Hillary Clinton’s universal healthcare plan modeled after Canada’s government-run, universal cradle-to-grave health care system.

The reason that it hasn’t been passed until now is because it doesn’t work. When money gets tight, health care is the first thing to be rationed out.

Here’s a typical example. The regional government that includes Niagara Falls, Ontario, is closing all the hospitals in that region except one.

The hospital that is to remain open will be expanded to become a super-hospital and emergency room serving the entire region as a government-initiated cost-cutting measure.

That means all medical emergencies for a regional population of 300,000 will be handled by one emergency room as much as forty miles away. That’s how governments administer health care.

According to the Lewin Group, the gold standard of health policy analysis, the Obama plan would shift between 32 million and 52 million from private coverage to the huge new entitlement.

Like Medicare or the Canadian system, this would never be repealed.

And as in the Canadian system, as U.S. health-care spending flowed into the default government options, taxes would have to rise or services would be rationed, or both.

An unfettered Democratic administration would be free to continue the effort to ‘fix’ the broken economy begun by the Democrats in 2006.

It is worth remembering that, while it is the White House that gets the credit or blame, it is the Congress that is responsible for the economy.

“We have some harsh decisions to make,” Speaker Nancy Pelosi warned recently, speaking about retribution for the financial panic. An unrestricted Democratic supermajority would be free to impose windfall profit taxes on oil companies, impose compensation restrictions on private companies, tax increases on ‘the rich’, etc.

Except that taxing profits takes away the incentive to increase profits, which tends to reduce productivity. Why work harder if the government takes it away? And when the government taxes ‘the rich’ — they are taxing America’s employers, who are then forced to lay off employees.

A Democratic supermajority would hand America back over to the labor unions.

The “Employee Free Choice Act” would convert workplaces into union shops merely by gathering signatures from a majority of employees, which means organizers could strongarm those who opposed such a petition.

You can be certain that a Democratic supermajority will hand Congress trillions of dollars in new spending from the auction of carbon credits.

Huge chunks of GDP and millions of jobs would be at the mercy of Congress and a vast new global-warming bureaucracy.

It is unthinkable.

One of the very first acts of a new Congressiona supermajority, before health care, before tax increases, before the environment, before anything will be the reimposition of the deceptively named “Fairness Doctrine.”

If Obama and the Democrats sweep the electorate, the voices of political opposition must be stopped. The Fairness Doctrine will stifle political speech by conservatives as effectively as the IRS has stifled political speech by religious leaders.

Under the terms of the “Fairness Doctrine” no media outlet will be permitted to present one point of political view without providing equal opportunity for the other point of view to be presented.

It sounds ‘fair’, but what it does in practice is make it so difficult for broadcasters to present political perspective that they just discontinue it altogether.

An unfettered Democratic Congress can be counted on to take steps to ensure they keep it that way. Before November 2010 rolls around, the Democrats will have empowered groups like ACORN to stack the voter rolls, eased identification requirements for voters, and restore the right to vote to convicted felons.

The next president will name, and the Congress will confirm, at least one, and possibly as many as three Supreme Court justices who will shape the law of the land for decades to come.

Supreme Court jurists serve for life, and with a friendly Congressional super-majority sure to confirm, a President Obama would be free to pick pretty much anybody that he liked.


“This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.” (2nd Timothy 3:1-5)

One of the most amazing aspects of the Bible is its amazing economy of words. Scripture is so constructed that one can return to the same verse over and over and each time, get something new from it.

The Lord has a lot to tell us in Scripture, so He doesn’t waste words doing it.

Entire volumes of commentary have been written on Creation — the Holy Spirit tells the story in the first thirty-one verses — He doesn’t waste words.

Yet in Proverbs, we find the same verse repeated, word for word; “There is a way which seemeth right unto a man, but the end thereof are the ways of death. ” (Proverbs 14:12, 16:25)

I’ve just presented a thumbnail sketch of the most evil political agenda imaginable to me — yet according to the polls, it is an agenda shared by a majority of the voters.

The agenda that looks so evil to me is what the Left sees as Utopia on earth. They believe that they are doing the right thing.

This is a good place to restate the basic philosophical difference between Democrat and Republican. It is the source of their authority to govern.

In a republic, the authority to govern is derived from the Divine. Blackstone’s Commentaries on English Common Law explain that in a republic, that which is prohibited by the Divine could never be overturned by a majority.

For example, in a republic, murder would always be a crime.

In a pure democracy, the moral authority is derived from the will of the majority.

(Think Roe v. Wade and you see where the worldviews inevitably collide.)

It isn’t that the Left is evil. It is that, devoid of Divine authority, man is left only with his conscience to be his guide.

“Every man does that which is right in his own eyes.” (Judges 17:6,21:25)

Notice that, in the context of discussing how tightly packed the Bible is, without a word wasted, that I quoted another repeated verse.

“In those days there was no king in Israel, but every man did that which was right in his own eyes. ” (Judges 17:6)

“In those days there was no king in Israel: every man did that which was right in his own eyes. ” (Judges 21:25)

When the Lord repeats Himself, it isn’t because He is absent-minded. It is because there is a principle there that He really, really wants us to take to heart. In this case, it’s this.

In these days, secular America has no king, either. The Left does that which is right in their own eyes. They aren’t evil. Just wrong.

“All the ways of a man are clean in his own eyes; but the LORD weigheth the spirits. ” (Proverbs 16:2)

“Every way of a man is right in his own eyes: but the LORD pondereth the hearts. ” (Proverbs 21:2)

It’s important to understand that what the Bible talks about for the last days is not something that happens in some kind of cartoon world populated by evil men who are all deliberately conspiring to bring about the destruction of good.

It happens in a real world. One like this one. With real people who really mean to do good. But they have a different moral compass because they have no King.

I’ve been studying, teaching and preaching about the signs of the times and the things that are to come upon the world in the days leading up to the Tribulation Period for almost thirty years. I never really knew what to expect.

Now that I see it unfolding before me, I am still shocked at how logically it is all coming together. It’s like, “well, yeah . . what we you expecting? A brass band or something?”

Well, yeah. Or something. But at this juncture, a trumpet will do.

The “Obama Effect”

The “Obama Effect”
Vol: 85 Issue: 20 Monday, October 20, 2008

In 1982, Tom Bradley, the black former mayor of Los Angeles ran for governor of the state. Bradley was favored to win by 22 percentage points over Republican challenger George Deukmejian.

The pollsters and mainstream media had already written Deukmejian off and proclaimed Bradley California’s new governor. Tom Bradley enjoyed the same type of love affair from the media that Barack Obama does today.

Like Obama, Bradley came across as larger-than-life; cool, unflappable, erudite and urbane. The election had energized the Democrats; more than eight million turned out to vote.

In the end, despite his perceived 22 point advantage, Bradley lost to his white opponent by just under 100,000 votes.

In 1983, Harold Washington ran for mayor of Chicago against white establishment politicians Richard Daley and Jane Byrne. Washington was the odds-on favorite in the polls, also enjoying double-digit leads up to Election Day. But he won by less than three points in what turned out be a late-night squeaker.

Six years later, Douglas Wilder ran for governor of Virginia. Wilder, the grandson of slaves, had made history in 1986 when he was elected Lieutenant Governor of Virginia by becoming the first black to win to be elected to state-wide office in the South during the 20th century.

So when we ran for governor in 1989, Wilder had a comfortable nine-point lead over his opponent, Marshall Coleman, (who was white.)

But when the votes were counted, Wilder’s margin of victory was so close (1/2 of 1%) that it forced a recount before Wilder could be certified the victor. That same year, black New York mayoral candidate David Dinkins went to the polls with an 18 point lead, and emerged out the other side having just squeaked past Rudy Guiliani.

When Hillary Clinton edged Obama in this year’s New Hampshire primary despite data that showed Obama leading some suspected the Bradley effect had crept back into play.

“Since then,” Democratic strategist Donna Brazile wrote recently, “pollsters and pundits alike have warned that Obama needs a six-to-nine point lead to overcome the so-called Bradley effect.”

This morning, Reuters/Zogby gives Obama +6, Rasmussen +6 and Gallup’s ‘traditional’ poll (of likely voters) gives Obama +3. Therefore, if the Bradley Effect holds, then it’s McCain by three to six points.

Interestingly, the left has discovered over the course of this campaign that the Bradley effect can work for them — just by talking it up. One Harvard study of 133 gubernatorial races from 1989 to 2006 found the Bradley Effect had actually reversed itself over time as white voters’ attitudes about race changed.

Only about five percent of voters say race is an issue today, compared with a third a generation ago, according to the study.

Which suggests to me that the other 95% of voters are lying.


It seems to me that race is playing a role in this year’s election on three different levels. And on each of these levels, racism benefits Obama. These are voters who support Barack Obama because he is black.

Colin Powell’s endorsement of Barack Obama is a prime example. I listened to Powell explain why he was endorsing Obama over McCain.

Powell agreed that he has almost nothing in common with Obama politically.

“It isn’t easy for me to disappoint Sen. McCain in the way that I have this morning, and I regret that,” he said on ‘Meet the Press’.

When asked directly if he was still a Republican, Powell answered in the affirmative. But when asked if race played a role, Powell said only that it was not the ‘dominant’ factor in his decision.

Maybe it wasn’t the dominant factor, but it was a factor.

In struggling for a logical reason other than race for why General Powell would vote for an untested uber-liberal over a seasoned professional, Powell seized on William Ayers.

“This Bill Ayers situation that’s been going on for weeks became something of a central point of the campaign,” Powell said. “But Mr. McCain says that he’s a washed-out terrorist. Well, then, why do we keep talking about him?”

Try this on for size. John McCain’s political career was kicked off in the living room of an abortion clinic bomber.

John McCain served on two different boards with an abortion clinic bomber.

John McCain denied knowing the abortion clinic bomber, even though John McCain wrote a foreword to one of his books about being an abortion clinic bomber.

Then he admitted it. Then he denied it. Then he refused to talk about it anymore.

When would Powell stop talking about that? So General Colin Powell would be among those five percent who admit that race plays a role.

What about the other ninety-five percent?

There are very few Obama supporters who would deny that they believe seeing a black man elected president would be a victory for race relations in the United States.

Virtually every white liberal Obama supporter within or outside the media has made that argument at some point in the past few weeks. They think electing black man president would be good for the United States. Barack Obama is a black man.

Therefore, electing Obama would be good for the United States. Not because of his legislative record. He has none.

Certainly not because of his background and reputation. Let’s summarize his background, for illustrative purposes.

Barack Hussein Obama was possibly born in Hawaii to a Kenyan Muslim — he is fighting a lawsuit aimed at forcing him to produce a legal birth certificate. He was subsequently raised in Indonesia.

His school records there listed him as a citizen of Indonesia and listed his religion as Islam. (The records exist and they say what they say.)

As to his reputation, he attended Occidental College in California in 1979. By his own admission, he experimented with all kinds of drugs.

His roommates were two Pakistani Muslim students, Mohammed Chandoo and Walid Hamid. In 1981, Obama traveled to Indonesia, Africa and Pakistan.

When he returned, he attended prestigious (and expensive) Columbia University. After Columbia he went to work with ACORN for $12,000 a year. While in Chicago, he met William Ayers and Tony Rezko, a Syrian national. Two years later, Obama went to the even more prestigious (and expensive) Harvard.

(I wonder if it is racist to ask who financed Obama’s million-dollar education?)

Obama was introduced to Chicago politics by William Ayers. His history with Tony Rezko is both wide and deep. This is not the resume of a potential President of the United States.

His political platform is classic Marxist class warfare, his economic policy is a recipe for depression, his energy policy impossible, yet today’s Drudge headline reads; Obama +5.5.

Call it “the Obama Effect.”

When a Plan Comes Together . . .

When a Plan Comes Together . . .
Vol: 85 Issue: 18 Saturday, October 18, 2008

Humpty-Dumpty sat on a wall / Humpty-Dumpty had a great fall / All the king’s horses and all the king’s men / Couldn’t put Humpty together again

The global credit crunch roiling world markets now has Europeans calling for the creation of a global central bank organized along the lines of the US Federal Reserve.

The European Union has a (somewhat) unified currency, the euro, but it has no central financial authority corresponding to the Federal Reserve system to regulate it.

So, when Europe’s stock market crashed in sympathy with the Dow, there was no system in place to put Humpty-Dumpty together again.

Now, European leaders are pressing for changes including global standards for regulation and banking, an early warning system within the International Monetary Fund for the world economy, and a supervisory body for at least the world’s 30 biggest banks.

President Bush is scheduled to have a dinner discussion at Camp David with French President Nicolas Sarkozy and European Commission President Jos Manuel Barroso to ‘discuss global financial reforms’ after having agreed earlier this week to hold G-7 meetings “at an appropriate time in the near future” to begin considering such an agenda.

British Prime Minister Gordon Brown is proposing holding a second Bretton Woods, a reference to the 1944 conference that set up the post-World War II global financial architecture and created the International Monetary Fund.

Brown’s proposals include establishing some sort of international oversight of the world’s biggest banks, limits on executive compensation, and more standardization and transparency for derivatives.

Marx would be proud. Noted the Wall Street Journal,

The U.S. is particularly queasy about international oversight of big banks. A senior Bush administration official said “ideas like that are probably political nonstarters in the United States, and in a number of other nations.”

(Like capitalist countries,for example) Administration officials say new international restrictions could limit capital flows around the world, hurting emerging economies as well as developed ones.

Japanese leaders echoed the U.S. hesitation, worried about what signals such a conference would send to markets. “Our honest feeling is that we want to prevent a situation where we need to hold such a summit meeting,” Japanese Prime Minister Taro Aso said in parliament.

. . .European leaders have political momentum, having played a lead role in finding a workable solution to the crisis, and some believe that the lame-duck Bush administration would have trouble resisting their proposals.


I’ve often wondered what role the Federal Reserve system might play in unfolding Bible prophecy, but I’ve never doubted that it had a role to play.

Bible prophecy makes no allowance for America to play the lead role during the Tribulation Period.

The prophet Daniel assigns that role to Imperial Rome’s successor. Still, I never considered the Fed as a trial balloon for a global economic dictatorship. Until now.

Daniel foretold the rise and fall of four successive world empires when interpreting a dream for King Nebuchadnezzar.

The king dreamed of a statue, but what caught his attention was its construction. Its head was of fine gold, chest and arms of silver, belly and thighs of brass, legs of iron, and its feet were partly iron and partly clay. Daniel interpreted each as representative of a world empire; Babylon, Persia, Greece and Imperial Rome.

The head of gold was Babylon, chest and arms, Persia, belly and thighs, Alexander’s Greek empire. Daniel predicted the third ‘king’ would not leave his kingdom to his sons, but it would be divided among his four generals. When Alexander died, his sons were murdered and his kingdom divided among his four generals.

Daniel’s prophecy was SO specific that there are entire schools of ‘scholarship’ devoted to proving the Book of Daniel a forgery. This school of thought says that Daniel must have been written by Judas Macabeeus sometime around 163 BC.

Accepting the Book of Daniel at face value — that is, authored during the Babylonian Captivity, leaves scholars of antiquity with no choice except to conclude Daniel was undeniably a prophet.

Rather than accept that conclusion, they conclude it must be a forgery.

However, Daniel was legitimized by Jesus Christ, Who referred to him as ‘the Prophet Daniel’ — so if Daniel is a late forgery, then Jesus Christ is not Divine and our faith collapses.

For that reason, I must give GREAT weight to Daniel’s identification of the four empires, particularly that of the fourth kingdom.

“And the fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron: forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all things: and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in pieces and bruise.” (Daniel 2:40)

But unlike the previous three, the fourth empire has no conqueror. The fourth kingdom is depicted twice — once as two legs of iron, and a second time as an inferior entity depicted as ten toes of iron and clay.

Eight hundred years after Daniel, the Roman Empire grew so large it was divided into two, the Western Empire at Rome, and the Eastern Empire at Constantinople.

Two hundred years later, the Empire collapsed under its own weight. Sixteen hundred years after that, the EU was founded by the “inner Six” under the Benelux Treaty of 1948.

This set the stage for the emergence of the EU ‘core states’ — the ten nations who are the only nations to hold FULL status in both the European Union and the Western European Union.

The WEU consists of ten full members, six associate members, five observers and seven associate partners. And, as WEU’s website notes at the bottom of the ‘delegations’ page;

“Following a decision taken on 14 June 2001, the Secretary-General stated during the 1352nd meeting of the Council of Western European Union on 28 June 2001 that, with regard to the period from 1 January 2002, the Member States deemed it unnecessary, in present and foreseeable circumstances, to make any formal change to the statuses of non-full members.”

In other words, no matter who else may join the WEU, full membership in the WEU, as in the EU, will always be limited to the original TEN core states.

“And whereas thou sawest the feet and toes, part of potters’ clay, and part of iron, the kingdom shall be divided; but there shall be in it of the strength of the iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron mixed with miry clay. And as the toes of the feet were part of iron, and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly broken. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men: but they shall not cleave one to another, even as iron is not mixed with clay.” (Daniel 2:41-43)

I don’t know if there were ever a more succinct description of the EU than ‘partly strong, partly broken.’ Its member states share everything but sovereignty, leaving it a unified nation of 320 million consumers with neither a constitution nor a central government.

There is one EU that speaks from Paris, another from Brussels, yet a third from London, and no three agree on any one point except that they can’t seem to agree on anything.

“And in the days of THESE kings shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed: and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for ever.”

I know it took some time, but I want to make sure that you can see that the ONLY existing geopolitical entity that qualifies to be the seat of the antichrist’s government is the EU.

The antichrist himself must be a ‘prince’ of that government (Daniel 9:27) an eleventh ‘little horn’ (Daniel 7:8) who arises to subdue three kings.

So how does this fit with the Federal Reserve’s role in Bible prophecy? John says that during the Tribulation, only those who have pledged worship to the Beast and signified it by accepting a mark in their right hand or forehead could buy or sell.

The Federal Reserve system is the ONLY system under which a cashless society could operate and a cashless society is the only system under which John’s prophecy of the Mark of the Beast could function.

But the Federal Reserve system does not qualify because it is NOT European. It has, however, proved itself over the past ninety-odd years, as a model worthy of adoption.

Both the Prophet Daniel and the Apostle John use the same imagery to depict the system of the Beast.

John says;”the beast which I saw was like unto a leopard, and his feet were as the feet of a bear, and his mouth as the mouth of a lion: and the dragon gave him his power, and his seat, and great authority.” (Revelation 13:2)

Daniel saw, “four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another. ” (Daniel 7:3) Daniel’s fourth beast had ten horns, three of which are plucked out by the roots, leaving seven. John’s beast has seven heads and ten crowns.

Now let me recap today’s headlines. The revived Roman Empire’s ten-nation core leadership wants the Group of 7 to create a global central banking system with oversight responsibilities for the world’s thirty largest banks in order to regulate the global economy the way that the US Federal Reserve regulates the US economy.

“And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up, and lift up your heads; for your redemption draweth nigh.” (Luke 21:28)

Israel: Lynchpin of Bible Prophecy

Israel: Lynchpin of Bible Prophecy
Vol: 85 Issue: 17 Friday, October 17, 2008

“For then will I turn to the people a pure language, that they may all call upon the Name of the LORD, to serve Him with one consent.” (Zephaniah 3:9)

Hebrew, as a spoken language, was already on the decline when Latin was still the lingua franca of the day. The modern word “Hebrew” is based in the root word ‘abar’ which means ‘to cross over.’

As a functional, working language, classical Hebrew flourished until around the time of the Babylonian Captivity in the 6th century BC. Under the subsequent Persian, Greek and Roman Empires, the popular use of classical Hebrew waned.

By the mid-part of the 2nd century, scholars studied Hebrew primarily for the purposes of quoting from the Mishnah and Talmud. By this time, Hebrew was primarily a written — rather than spoken — language, apart from its liturgical use in prayer.

But the revival of the Hebrew language as a working language wasn’t even seriously considered until late in the 19th century. There was no need — there had been no need, literally for centuries.

Alexander the Great’s Koine Greek was imposed over Hebrew, which was then superimposed by the Latin of the Roman Empire.

By this time, the working language of the Jewish people was primarily Aramaic. Following Rome’s Destruction of the Temple and the subsequent Diaspora, the Jews of Europe maintained their cultural identity speaking Yiddish, rather than Hebrew.

In 1881, a Lithuanian Jew named Ben Yehuda emigrated to Israel and set out to revive the long-dead Hebrew as a living, working and functional modern language based on classical Hebrew.

When Ben Yehuda’s first son was born in the Promised Land in 1882, he was raised as the first all-Hebrew speaking child in modern history. In December 1890, Ben Yehuda founded the Hebrew Language Council.

In 1922, the UN listed Hebrew as one of the three working languages of the British Mandate, fulfilling Zephaniah’s obscure prophecy that, when God DID call the Jews home to Israel, He would do so in the traditional pure language of Jewish worship, the long-dead language of David the King.

As the 19th century drew to a close, something began to happen within the world-wide Jewish community. It wasn’t really the centuries of persecution, the periodic pogroms, the second-class status of Jews in their host nations that precipitated the sudden attraction of the Jews for the Promised Land.

What was it that caused the Jews of the world-wide Diaspora, after nineteen hundred years, to suddenly decide, in the space of one generation, that NOW was the time to begin the Ingathering?

The Promised Land hadn’t moved. It had been right there for the whole two thousand years. And the late 19th century didn’t offer political hope to the Jews that the Promised Land would suddenly become Jew-friendly.

In 1900, Jerusalem had been under the rule of the Islamic caliphate of the Ottoman Empire for almost four hundred years.

And when I say that world-wide Jewry ‘suddenly’ decided it was time for the world’s Jews to return to their Promised Land, in historical terms, the ingathering was sudden, indeed.

First, the Jews began to long for a homeland. Theodor Hertzl, founder of modern Zionism, wanted a homeland for the Jewish people, first and foremost.

He wrote in 1896, “oppression and persecution cannot exterminate us. No nation on earth has survived such struggles and sufferings as we have gone through. Jew-baiting has merely stripped off our weaklings; the strong among us were invariably true to their race when persecution broke out against them…. “

He even petitioned the British government to allow the creation of a Jewish state in what is modern-day Uganda.

(In rejecting the petition, the British government reminded Hertzl and the Zionists that the Jewish homeland was in Palestine, then part of the Ottoman Empire).

In 1897, Hertzl convened the first Zionist Congress in Basle, Switzerland. Just fifty years later, the Jewish State was ‘born in a day’ fulfilling the words of the Prophet Isaiah.

Twenty-five hundred years ago, the Prophet Isaiah asked these questions:

“Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once?. . . ” and I want you to consider the answers with me carefully.

Q. “Who hath heard such a thing?” A. Of all the generations who ever lived from Isaiah until May 14, 1948, only THIS generation can answer that question, “We Have.”

Q. “Who hath seen such things?” A. When Isaiah asked that question, and for another 2,500 years after that, the answer was, “nobody.”

Of all those generations across the ages, only you and I can say that we hath seen such things a ‘nation born at once’ a nation which, as Isaiah continues, is identified as Zion; “for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children.” (Isaiah 66:8)

We witnessed within our lifetime, the “earth being made to bring forth in one day” that day being December 25, 2001 when the Soviet Union collapsed.

The north at last gave up the last of her captives as the former Soviet refuseniks finally escaped to the Promised Land, fulfilling the promise of the prophet Jeremiah;

“I will say to the north, Give up; and to the south, Keep not back: bring My sons from far, and My daughters from the ends of the earth.” (Isaiah 43:6)

Never in all of recorded history has there been an event more clearly prophesied nor literally fulfilled than the restoration of the Jews to the same piece of geographic real estate from which they had been evicted — not once, but twice.

The prophet Jeremiah predicted that the Jews of the Babylonian captivity would be restored after seventy years — and the Book of Daniel records that prophecy was literally fulfilled after the Babylonians fell to the Persian Empire.

But there was also a second ingathering prophesied for the Jews of Israel by the Prophet Ezekiel, one specifically identified by the prophet as concerning the “latter days” (Ezekiel 38:16)

At that time, said the prophet, the Jews will again inhabit the Land of Promise, which the prophet specifically identifies geographically as “the mountains of Israel” (and not the jungles of Uganda).

It is this second ingathering, the one for the latter days, that constitutes the most overtly miraculous work of God since the First Advent.

From the time of Christ to the modern era, the Jews have been targeted for extermination in almost every corner of the earth where they’ve sought refuge over the ages.

For centuries, without nation, land or flag, they’ve endured; their culture, religion and ethnicity intact, surviving even the Holocaust, Satan’s ultimate effort at wiping out God’s Chosen People .


The modern state of Israel stands as a living monument to the unbreakable Word of God; vibrant and living evidence of God’s existence and His continued involvement in the affairs of mankind.

The manner of its restoration is both overtly miraculous and historically fortuitous. It shouldn’t exist. But in order for any of the prophecies of the Bible for the last days to have any contemporary context, it MUST exist.

Without the existence of a literal, politically viable Jewish State known as “Israel,” none of the prophecies concerning the last days and the coming judgment of the nations find any historical context.

Whatever is happening on the global stage would then serve no particular prophetic agenda and we could draw no particular confidence from seeing it unfold.

But, SINCE there IS such an historical entity as Israel, a nation ‘born in a day’ as a Jewish State, against all the odds, we can know that the events that are unfolding in our lifetimes are following a particular script.

The current world-wide economic crisis has a prophetic context ONLY because there exists a Jewish State called “Israel”. Until the restoration of Israel in 1948, there was no prophetic context into which one could place the Crash of 1929.

We can see the prophetic context now, (thanks to historical hindsight) but the context is that the Great Depression was among the factors that caused the World War that resulted in the fulfillment of the prophecy of the restoration of Israel in the last days.

Looking forward or backward in terms of Bible prophecy, the temporal frame of reference we’re using is May 14, 1948.

For twenty-five millennial prior to that date, the prophecies of the last days were locked in a box, by Divine Decree.

“But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased. ” (Daniel 12:4)

The key that unlocks that box is the existence of the Jewish state of Israel. Since Israel’s re-emergence on the world’s stage, she has occupied a much greater portion of the world’s attention than her tiny size would warrant, because that is what the Bible said would be the case.

Israel is at the heart of every conflict, the question of the final status of Jerusalem is as important to America or Russia or Europe as it is to Tel Aviv.

Yet Israel is no larger than Rhode Island, no more populous than New York, and has fewer natural resources than Florida.

Why? Because the Bible is true. The world knows that it’s hours are numbered whether it wants to admit it to itself or not. The signs are all around, and the biggest and most annoying sign of all is that big Star of David over Jerusalem.

It is a constant reminder to the god of this world that his job is only temporary.

Please Come To Israel in the Springtime

In March, we’re planning to make a pilgrimage to this, the most important place on the face of Planet Earth, while there is still time and we are still free to do so.

We will walk the places where Jesus walked and visit the places where He taught.

I want you to see the place that the Lord of all Creation chose to step out of eternity and into space and time.

The Lord God Himself chose Israel as the place from which He would redeem all mankind.

We’ll walk the Way of the Cross, see the Place of the Skull, and view the empty Garden Tomb. We’ll visit the place where John baptized Jesus in the Jordan River.

But most important of all, we’ll see with our own eyes the evidences that the Bible is all true. There’s no experience like it.

We’re concerned that we may not get enough members to go along to make the tour viable. That is why we decided to work out an Israel-only option alternative, in the hope that the lower price might put the trip within reach of more of our members.

We’ve been able to pare the price down to roughly $3600 per person, $2200 for the land package; hotels, transportation, tour guides, etc., and $1400 for airfare. If the falling price of fuel reduces the final cost, we will pass the saving along to you.

We’re not doing this to make money — I want you to see Israel for the miracle that it is. I want you to experience that sense of closeness to God that comes from standing where He once stood, looking out over His Holy Land, mingling with His Chosen People.

If you can make it, please visit our website and fill out and send in the tour reservation form. And drop me an email and let me know you’re coming.

I want to share Israel with you, discuss it with you, be inspired with you, and then for us all to carry our shared experiences back home to encourage our membership as we face the perilous times ahead.


Clubbed Into Submission

Clubbed Into Submission
Vol: 85 Issue: 16 Thursday, October 16, 2008

While in Landesberg prison, Adolph Hitler wrote volume one of Mein Kampf (My Struggle), which was published in 1925. This work detailed Hitler’s radical ideas of German nationalism, antisemitism, and anti-Bolshevism.

The Nazi campaign for power in 1932 was violent and bloody and contained few characteristics of a democracy. Members of the German Worker’s Party stormed the campaign headquarters of their opponents, smashing windows, tearing up offices and intimidating opposition campaign workers.

Hitler blamed the terrorism of his supporters on his political enemies and pointed to the violence as evidence of how badly the country needed him in order to restore order.

The Nazis were confident of winning a majority in the Reichstag by using the large sums of money donated to them by leading industrialists and Goebbels’ expert manipulation of the media.

The Nazis’ position was strengthened by a strange incident, which occurred on the night of 27th February 1933 five days before the election.

The Reichstag building was set on fire by a Dutch Communist named der Lubbe. Many believed this to be a Nazi plot but it has never been proved either way. Hitler did however exploit the incident to his advantage.

The next day he persuaded Hindenburg the German President to sign the “Decree for the Protection of People and State.” This document suspended most civil and political liberties and strengthened the power of central government over that of local authorities.

This meant that the last week of the election campaign saw an increase in violence with hundreds of the Nazis’ political opponents arrested.

Hitler’s next step towards full control of Germany was to control the media. He decided that the best way to do this was to create a Ministry for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. This ministry was lead by Joseph Goebbels whose “cynical understanding of mass psychology” made him a formidable figure.

The aim of the ministry was to control and censor all the sources of mass media and use them to work for the Nazis.

Sort of the way the mainstream media works for the far left wing of the US Democrat Party.


In September, vandals attacked the Delaware County GOP Headquarters in Indiana, spray-painting an anti-McCain message on the building’s outer wall.

The Republican Party headquarters in Sarasota, Florida was attacked by vandals the following week. They sprayed the word “Obama” on the Republican Party of Sarasota’s office and tore up campaign signs.

The GOP booth in King County, Oregon was vandalized; the tent was torn open, tables holding campaign literature were flipped over, and parts of the display were set afire.

On October 1st, vandals destroyed about $1,000 worth of signs promoting Republican candidates displayed on private property in Clackamas County, Oregon.

According to Clackamas County Republican party chair Tom Devanney, this is the second time in a week that vandals have destroyed signs at this location.

It s sure not Republicans doing it, Devanney told the local newspaper as he surveyed the damage

On October 10, vandals spray-painted the words “Republican means slavery” on the door of the York County GOP campaign headquarters in South Carolina. The photo of John McCain was defaced.

I could go on and on and on, but what I want you get from this is that all this information was retrieved using the words “election vandalism.” I read through four pages of hits on the subject and in every single case, the targets were Republican campaigns and Republican candidates.

I narrowed the search, changing the keywords to “Democrat vandalism” What I got was page after page of reports of Democrats vandalizing GOP campaigns.

So I changed the keywords to “Republican vandalism”. The first two hits were bloggers complaining of Republican vandals — the rest of the page was filled with hits about Republican campaigns being the victims of vandals.

For every report of Republicans vandalizing Democrats, there were at least twenty of Democrats committing acts of vandalism, including arson, against Republicans.

What is happening to this country? I went back through our own archives to the 2004 election and found that the GOP’s chairman at the time actually wrote a letter to the head of the Democrat-supporting AFL/CIO begging them to stop “protest activities that have led to injuries, property damage, vandalism and voter intimidation.”

“A recent search of archived news reports nationwide indicated a higher number of reports [of vandalism against the GOP] during the past few months compared with the same periods during the 2000 and 1996 campaigns,” reported the Washington Times in 2004.

We could summarize today’s OL as follows: “A recent search of archived news reports nationwide indicated a higher number of reports [of vandalism against the GOP] during the past few months compared with the same periods during the 2004, 2000, and 1996 campaigns.”

If the story changed at all, it is only in that it is just getting worse. And the rest of us are merely growing more tolerant of it.

I’m not sure what it says, really. But I am sure it doesn’t say anything good.

The Hymietown Factor

The Hymietown Factor
Vol: 85 Issue: 15 Wednesday, October 15, 2008

According to the latest CBS/NYTimes poll, Barack Hussein Obama will be the next President of the United States.

That poll has Obama up by fourteen points. But before you reach for the smelling salts, this is a New York Times and CBS poll.

Just ask yourself what the New York Times or CBS would NOT do to hurt the GOP or advance the Democrats. (Manipulating a poll doesn’t even make the list.)

RealClearPolitics.com takes ALL the national polls, left, right, and (if they can find one) center, and averages them across-the-board.

According to their polling data, Obama is up by four points, not fourteen. So we MIGHT have a President Barack Hussein Obama. But it is by no means a done deal.

It seems that every other day, I learn something new about the Democrat candidate that makes me think, “this is his Willie Horton moment. If this doesn’t sink him, nothing can.”

And then it doesn’t sink him. So maybe nothing can.

Obama continues to fight tooth and nail in the courts to keep from having to provide a certified copy of his Hawaii birth certificate to Democrat activist and lawyer Philip Berg.

No matter how hard I try to come up with a reasonable explanation, I can’t come up with anything that sounds reasonable to me. There are reasonable questions surrounding the circumstances of Obama’s birth, not the least of which is whether or not it occurred in Hawaii or Kenya.

I cannot for the life of me understand how it could be in Obama’s interests to stonewall on the request.

If it were me, I’d send a copy to every major news organization in the country and have them all talking at the same time about how I showed up my detractors and proved that they were just trying to smear me all along.

I’d wager a paycheck that by flooding the mainstream media with certified copies of his birth certificate, Obama’s poll numbers would jump five points or more. All Obama’s other denials are subjective. This one is a concrete refutation.

Why NOT rub their noses in it? All it takes is a birth certificate. We’ve already seen Obama’s tax returns. What can a birth certificate reveal?

But that’s one question among many that don’t seem to trouble the mainstream media. Were it not for the alternative media, nobody would even be asking the question.

Worldnetdaily is reporting today that Barack Obama raised almost one million dollars for the presidential campaign of Kenyan dictator Raili Odinga.

Odinga promised to introduce Sharia law within six months of his election.

When he lost, Odinga’s machete-wielding followers killed 1,000 members of an opposing tribe and destroyed 800 Christian churches. No mosques were damaged, notes WND.

Why would a candidate for the White House raise a million dollars to advance the career of a Islamist foreign dictator?

As long as we’re asking questions, why did Obama mentor under the anti-white, anti-Jewish, anti-Israel, pro-Islamic and anti-American far left Reverend Jeremiah Wright for twenty years if he didn’t agree with the worldview Wright preached from the pulpit?

It strains credulity to the breaking point to accept Obama’s explanation that he had no idea Wright harbored such extreme views — so much so that I have to conclude that NOBODY believes him, but they’ve convinced themselves that it isn’t important.

Nobody attends a church for twenty years without sharing its philosophy. So we are left with the question, “Why?” but no answer.

Nobody seems even remotely interested in the fact that Obama’s strongest international support comes from America’s and Israel’s sworn enemies.

Obama’s campaign has been endorsed by Hamas, (at least $30,000 in illegal campaign contributions came from Gaza, one of the poorest cities in the world), received favorable mention by al Qaeda leaders, Syria’s Bashar Assad, Hugo Chavez, and even Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Why nobody thinks that might be relevant to who occupies the Oval Office for the next four years escapes me.

I would have bet the farm that Obama’s association with terrorist nutbar William Ayers would have been what sunk Obama’s candidacy.

Some lady at a McCain rally called Obama an “Arab” and, despite McCain’s instant repudiation of her remarks, the next day, McCain was being called a “purveyor of hate.”

McCain didn’t even know the lady and guilt by association was implied. But Obama’s relationship with Ayers gets a pass.

He’ll probably get a pass on Jesse Jackson’s comments about Israel, too.


One of the things that irks me about the “Reverend” Jesse Jackson is the ‘Reverend’ part. Jackson biographer and author of “Shakedown”, Kenneth Timmerman was asked in an interview if Jackson earned the title:

“I don’t think so . . . It was essentially a political ordination, a shotgun ordination. . . . I went to the church where he was ordained. He did not go through this two-year process. He never submitted himself to the authority of the church. He has never had a church himself, and he has been accountable to no one.”

Jackson became a hero to the Black Liberation Movement and the likes of Louis Farrakhan and Jeremiah Wright when he referred to Jews as “Hymies” and New York City as “Hymietown” during his run for the 1984 Democratic presidential nomination bid.

Jackson was recently interviewed by the New York Post’s Amir Taheri about the prospects for an Obama presidency.

First, says Jackson, Obama would put an end to “decades of putting Israel’s interests first”. Jackson believes that, although “Zionists who have controlled American policy for decades” remain strong, they’ll lose a great deal of their clout when Barack Obama enters the White House.

Jackson passionately denounced the toppling of Saddam Hussein as “an illegal and unjust act.” But he’s now sure that the United States “will have to remain in Iraq for a very long time.”

What of Obama’s promise to withdraw by 2010? Jackson believes that position will have to evolve, reflecting “realities on the ground.”

“We should work with our allies in Iraq to consolidate democratic institutions there,” he says. “We must help the people of Iraq decide and shape their future in accordance with their own culture and faith.”

On Iran, he strongly supports Obama’s idea of opening a direct dialogue with the leadership in Tehran. “We’ve got to talk to tell them what we want and hear what they want,” Jackson says. “Nothing is gained by not talking to others.”

Obama’s campaign sent out their national security spokesperson Wendy Morigi to respond. I was struck by her choice of words: “No false charges can change Barack Obama’s unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security.”

Jesse Jackson didn’t launch any ‘false charges’. Jackson was speaking in support of the Obama candidacy. And I couldn’t help but note that, “unshakeable” was Josef Goebbels favorite word — all of Hitler’s speeches were peppered with it.

Obama’s political manifesto is contained in his previous autobiographies. But Obama will get a pass on this because it was Jesse Jackson who spilled the beans.

Let’s step back and take a overview summary of what the Reverend Jesse Jackson expects of Barack Hussein Obama.

First, Obama will betray Israel. Second, Obama will break his promise to retreat from Iraq. Third, he will keep his promise for unconditional negotiations with Iran.

NOW you can reach for the smelling salts.