Is There Really A Money Trust?

Is There Really A Money Trust?
Vol: 168 Issue: 30 Wednesday, September 30, 2015

One of our OL members posted a question regarding the existence of a money trust conspiracy. In essence, the question was if the money trust conspiracy theory was true. The short answer is yes.

The longer answer is still yes, but the actual money trust ‘conspiracy’ (that’s not exactly the right word for it, but it is close) is less malevolent in fact than it is in theory.

Less look first at what it is, and then we’ll examine what it isn’t.

The rallying cry of the American Revolution was “No Taxation Without Representation.” There was more to it than that. Great Britain didn’t go to war over a tea tax. Included in Great Britain’s financial demands on the colony was control of America’s currency of issue.

That was the real prize, and to the colonists, it was the straw that broke the camel’s back, one issue among many issues popularized as a ‘tea tax revolt’ by history.

The Revolutionary War concluded with a treaty between Great Britain and the new United States of America that included the establishment of the 1st Bank of the United States, but owned by the British Crown.

Working behind the scenes, as an advisor to the British Crown was German financier Mayer Amschel Rothschild. Rothschild reputedly once remarked,

“Give me control of a nation’s currency and I care not who makes its laws.”

Rothschild financed the British Crown’s rental of the Hessian army from Germany, which propelled him to favor in the British Court. Rothschild sought to be the King’s banker. Good fortune and planning soon made him the King’s bank.

Rothschild, with the help of his five sons who controlled the main banking establishments in Europe, developed most effective and well-known private intelligence networks the world had ever seen.

At that time British bonds were called ‘consuls’ and they were traded on the floor of the stock exchange. Eldest son Nathan Mayer Rothschild instructed all his workers on the floor to start selling consuls. The made all the other traders believe that the British had lost the war so they started selling frantically.

When the stock bottomed, Nathan Mayer Rothschild discreetly instructed his proxies to buy them all back. When news finally reached London that the British had actually won the war, Nathan Mayer Rothschild owned most of England.

It put the Rothschild family in complete control of the British economy, now the financial center of the world following Napolean’s defeat, and forced England to set up a new Bank of England, which Nathan Mayer Rothschild controlled.

Rothschild’s sons established banks throughout Europe. Jacob set up de Rothschild Freres (Rothschild Bros) in Paris, other brothers set up banks in Vienna, Hamburg and Nales.

The 19th century is sometimes called the “Rothschild century” and its litany of wars and insurrections were nicknamed the “Rothschild wars” by those who lived through them.

For example, during the war between Britain and France in 1812-16, Mayer financed the British Crown, while Jacob financed Napoleon. Rothschild banking interests, for a time, financed both the Union and the Confederacy during the Civil War.

The Rothschilds found war extremely profitable; before her death, Gutle Schnapper, Mayer Amschel Rothschild’s wife reputedly said, “If my sons did not want wars, there would be none.”

By the end of this century, a period of time that was known as the, “Age of the Rothschilds,” it was estimated that the Rothschild family controlled half the wealth of the world.

The War of 1812 between the US and Great Britain began when the US refused to renew the charter for the First Bank of the United States. It concluded with the establishment of the Second Bank of the United States. The US won the war, but Rothschild won control of the bank.

In 1832, Andrew Jackson campaigned under the slogan, “Jackson and No Bank.” In 1833, Jackson removed US deposits from the Second Bank of the United States and puts them in non-Rothschild controlled banks.

The Rothschild Group responded by contracting the money supply, creating a financial depression, prompting Jackson to swear, “You are a den of thieves, vipers, and I intend to rout you out, and by the Eternal God, I will rout you out.”

In 1836, Jackson finally succeeded in blocking renewal of the Second Bank of the United States’ Charter. Before his death in 1845, Jackson was asked what he believed was his greatest presidential accomplishment. “I killed the bank,” he replied.

In 1863, Lincoln broke with the Rothschild bankers and, with the support of the Czar of Russia, began issuing ‘greenbacks’ to finance the Civil War, infuriating Rothschild, whose banks held most of the pre-war US national debt.

In an 1865 address to the Congress, Lincoln said, “I have two great enemies, the Southern Army in front of me, and the financial institutions in the rear. Of the two, the one in my rear is my greatest foe.”

Two months later, he lay dead from an assassin’s bullet.

The rest of the American 19th century is a litany of banking panics, financial scandals, money supply shortages and recessions that prompted Jacob Schiff, head of Kuhn, Loeb, and Co, (of the Hamburg Rothschild Banking House) to proclaim;

“Unless we have a Central Bank with adequate control of credit resources, this country is going to undergo the most severe and far reaching money panic in its history.”

On December 23, 1913, (when the majority of both Houses were at home for Christmas break) the Federal Reserve Act was put before a vote at a skeleton Congress. Its passage provoked Congressman Charles Lindbergh to thunder;

“The Act establishes the most gigantic trust on earth. When the President signs this Bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized…….The greatest crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill.”

The first governor of the Federal Reserve was a recent German immigrant named Paul Warburg. Warburg was a member of the Hamburg branch of the Rothschild Banking House before joining the Hamburg-affiliated American investment group of Kuhn and Loeb.

Warburg took his seat as Governor of the Fed just as World War I broke out in Europe.

The German House of Rothschild loaned money to the Kaiser to finance it. In gratitude, KaiserWilhem named Paul’s brother, Max Warburg head of German intelligence. Since Warburg was part of the House of Rothschild, he had access to the Rothschild intelligence network.

The British House of Rothschild loaned money to finance the war to the British Crown. The Crown appointed Sir William Wiseman as head of British Intelligence in Washington in World War I. (Sir William Wiseman was a full partner in Warburg, Kuhn and Loeb until his death in 1963).

After the war, Paul Warburg was among the US delegates to the Treaty of Versailles. Present for the German side was brother Max Warburg.

The crippling war reparations levied against Germany were designated to be paid through the Swiss-based Bank of International Settlements, controlled at the time by a third Warburg brother, Felix.

Cozy. Paul Warburg at the helm of the Federal Reserve, his business partner in charge of British intelligence, his brother in charge of the enemy’s intelligence services, Rothschild money financing all sides, and another brother in charge of collecting reparations when it was all over.

Who said, in war, nobody wins?

Assessment:

These are some of the historical facts supporting the existence of a Money Trust ‘conspiracy’. Now, as to what the Money Trust isn’t.

It isn’t a Jewish conspiracy. There are a number of Jewish names among the Rothschild financial empire, but that doesn’t make it a Jewish conspiracy.

One doesn’t have to be a Jew to be part of the Rothschild group. Its aims aren’t Jewish aims. Its purpose isn’t to benefit world-wide Jewry — its purpose is to benefit the House of Rothschild.

The Rothschild family bonds are not Jewish family bonds, they are Rothschild family bonds. If the Rothschild family history was Irish, nobody would call their banking conspiracy an “Irish conspiracy”.

The Mafia is an organized crime organization made up primarily of Italians, but it isn’t an “Italian crime conspiracy”. It isn’t affiliated with Italy. Its aims have nothing to do with Italy, either malevolent or benign. The Italians don’t get a ‘cut’ from New York’s organized crime families.

The ‘ethnic’ part of the conspiracy is the easiest part to explain. One enlists conspirators from among one’s closest acquaintances. Historically, ethnic groups had been “ghettoized” according to ethnicity, so the guys from the neighborhood are most likely the same ethnicity.

If you were a European Jew, you mostly knew other European Jews. And if you were a European Jew of the 18th or 19th centuries, you had little chance to know, and even less chance, to meet a Gentile.

It was social, not ethnic or religious differences that dictated the ethnicity of the early House of Rothschild. And it was greed and lust for power that drove it, not some ethnic or religious ethic.

The Money Trust conspiracy is a banking conspiracy. It is no more a “Jewish conspiracy” than the Hollywood film industry is “Jewish”.

There are a lot of Jewish names among the top Hollywood film industry, but the goal of the Hollywood film industry is to benefit the Hollywood film industry, not world-wide Jewry. The aim of the Money Trust is to benefit the Money Trust.

The Money Trust benefits when the economy does well, since it owns the economy. Sometimes, it benefits from the economy stalling, so it can lend itself money and collect interest.

When an economy can no longer produce profit, it is allowed to collapse, which brings domestic and political upheaval, which ultimately results in war.

Wars have to be financed, and if both sides are being financed from the same source, that source can selectively control the resources of one side, and then the next, allowing one side to surge, then allow the other, back and forth, until the maximum amount of profit has been squeezed out to finance war materiel whose only purpose is to blow up, forcing the financing of more.

That is how the Money Trust works. Despite its ugliness, the Money Trust ultimately benefits you and therefore, it is allowed to exist.

The big question you are probably asking is, “who is behind the money trust today?” You won’t like the short answer.

You are. And I am. And so is everybody who benefits when the economy surges.

And so we all work together, doing our part to keep the economic surge going. As long as the economy is good, there are jobs, our families are fed, our homes are safe, our lives secure.

We invest in the stock market via our 401(k) plans, we try to protect the environment, preserve our resources, and keep the good times rolling.

So does the local bank manager, and his boss, and his boss, ad infinitum, but NOT to benefit the money trust. Nobody is working for the handful of business executives in the handful of boardrooms at the top of the pyramid. We are working for ourselves.

It just so happens to benefit that handful of unknowns insulated by dozens of figureheads who are known, world leaders, top banking officials, etc. That’s how the world system works.

It should come as no surprise to those who read and believe Bible prophecy for the last days.

“For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places.” (Ephesians 6:12)

We discussed the principle of hiding in plain sight. The best way to hide a conspiracy is among a number of competing conspiracies.

By floating the idea that it is a Jewish conspiracy, the banking conspiracy is effectively cloaked.

The “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” was the text used to justify the murder of uncounted tens of thousands of Jews in countless pogroms across Russia in the early 20th century.

It was widely circulated as documentary fact throughout Nazi Germany. It is still taken as Gospel by anti-Semites where ever they may gather.

The “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” borrowed its plot line from the existing Money Trust, and added the “Jewish conspiracy to dominate the world” twist to it.

Because there is an historical banking family that actually was behind all the events I outlined earlier, there is just enough truth to be plausible.

Making it a Jewish conspiracy makes it dangerous.

Whenever the subject of the money trust comes up, so do the “Protocols”. Only the extremists on both sides would care to discuss it further.

And being extremists, they are dismissed as extremists out of hand by the center who wouldn’t want to talk about it for fear of being labeled an extremist or an anti-Semite.

So nobody talks much about the Rothschilds, the money trust, the Federal Reserve, etc., for fear of being labeled an extremist or an anti-Semite. The money trust remains hidden in plain sight.

The Money Trust conspiracy exists, but it is hidden among so many different versions that the exact truth is known to only a few. We know what it was. Nobody is exactly sure what it is at the moment.

The Bible tells us what it will be.

According to Bible prophecy, the antichrist seizes control of an existing global economy. Itmust already exist — he has only seven years in which to govern.

It must be global — Revelation 13:17 says he exercises economy power over the whole earth — and it MUST be already centralized in order for him to seize it.

The Money Trust isn’t even a conspiracy, any more. It has gone way beyond that. It is a completed system — constructed over a period of hundreds of years — upon which we now depend for our continued existence as we know it.

We rely on it to feed our families. We depend on it to keep them healthy. We feed the world system by our labor, and then plow whatever we can save back into it to feed it some more.

We are enslaved by it on every level, and its power over each of us is both merciless and absolute. We can rail against it, shake our fist, but we can’t change it and hope to survive the process.

We can deny it exists. But we still go to work for it, pay taxes to it, and exist within its framework.

You can call it the money trust. Or you can call it, as the Bible does, the world system. Or you can pretend it doesn’t exist.

But it is what it is.

Originally Published: August 13, 2007

Ye Shall Be As Gods

Ye Shall Be As Gods
Vol: 168 Issue: 29 Tuesday, September 29, 2015

When a team hits on a winning tactic, then logic dictates that it should continue to use that tactic as long as it remains effective. Team Satan is no exception.

Way back in the Garden of Eden, Satan set the standard for false doctrine, outlining in a single sentence the roots from which all heresies spring.

It began with God issuing a prohibition to Adam and Eve regarding the fruit of one particular tree in the Garden of Eden.

“And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (Genesis 2:16-17)

It was a simple and straightforward prohibition — there wasn’t much room for misunderstanding. Indeed, that was the purpose of the prohibition. The choices were black and white — there was no room for shades of gray.

When the serpent came to tempt Eve, he did several things. First, he cast doubt on God’s Word; (“Yea, hath God said?”) and Eve responded by ADDING to God’s Word.

“. . . Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die.” (Genesis 3:1b-3)

What God really said was:

“But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” (Genesis 2:17)

Eve added the part about ‘touching’ it — and the rest, as they say, is history. Once God’s word has been ‘bent’ it is only a matter of time before it gets broken. Eve entered into a battle of wits without knowing she was unarmed.

Note Satan’s reply. First, he calls God a liar:

“And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die . . .”

Then, to support the charge, he makes God out to be the ‘bad guy’.

“For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil.” (Genesis 3:3-4)

Skeptics often point to the Garden of Eden as an example of the ‘contradictions’ in Scripture. After all, God said that Adam and Eve would die the very day they broke God’s prohibition, yet Adam lived another eight hundred years.

There is no contradiction. In the first place, on the day they sinned, they died spiritually. In the second place, twice in Scripture we are told that a ‘day’ to the Lord is as a ‘thousand years’ is to us.

By that standard, neither Adam nor Eve survived that ‘day’.

Let’s examine the rest of the Lie. First, there is the promise of hidden knowledge — “your eyes shall be opened.” That leads to the second lie; that knowledge will make us little gods. And finally, as gods whose eyes have been opened, we can tell the difference between good and evil.

Good and evil are outcomes — and outcomes are known only to God. There is an old saying to the effect that ‘no good deed goes unpunished’ because oftentimes, we set out to do something good for somebody, only to have it blow up in our faces.

For example, you buy your immature teenager a new sports car. You mean it for good. (It ispossible to do something stupid with good intentions — I do it all the time)

But when your teenager is killed drag racing, you realize that what you meant for good brought you nothing but evil.

Conversely, you refuse to let your teenager have a car until he is mature enough to handle the responsibility. Because he hasn’t got his own car, he gets picked up hitchhiking and is never seen again.

You meant it for good, but in both cases, the outcome was exceedingly evil.

The day that our eyes are opened to the degree that we know good from evil is the day we will stand in God’s presence. On that day, we will know just how presumptuous we were.

If it wasn’t such a tragedy, I’m sure the angels would be rolling on the floor with laughter. “Ye shall be as gods.”

You’ve gotta be kidding!

Assessment:

We touched on this topic a few days ago, but from some of my emails, there is still some misunderstanding about the point I was trying to make.

We were discussing the controversy about tongues in the modern Church era, and whether or not it is a manifestation of the Holy Spirit.

But the point wasn’t tongues, it was heresy and heresy-hunting. What is our obligation? Is it to expose the heretics by name? Is it to go among the deceived to publicly proclaim the heresy and correct their doctrinal errors?

One could make an argument from Scripture that is indeed the responsibility of every Christian. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that we are sincere in our bedrock doctrinal beliefs, even though we disagree on certain issues.

For example, you are a pretribulational Dispensationalist who believes that the Church Age concludes with the Rapture of the Church.

I, on the other hand, am just as sincerely convinced that the Rapture takes place at the conclusion of the Tribulation Period.

You’ve been in such discussions where somebody has tried to convince you that you were the heretic. How convincing was that?

You’ve got your Bible, you’ve got your verses, you’ve been down this road a million times — and you are immovable.

Are you right? Of course, you are. But are you right? (Well, you sincerely believe the answer is yes again, but you’d rather not say so out loud. After all, infallibility is what your opponent is claiming).

Here’s the rub. It is possible to be infallible for yourself in matters of doctrine — that is the definition of ‘faith’. I believe with all my heart that I am infallibly correct on matters of settled doctrine — but I also know in my heart that I am NOT infallible.

Logically, I must content myself with the understanding that the Holy Spirit IS infallible, and He has shaped my doctrinal worldview according to His purposes. I must trust Him that I can trust His leading.

The problem is, the other guy believes exactly the same thing, if he is a sincere Christian.

Now, we get to the meat of our debate. Which one of us, in this example, is the ‘little god’ whose eyes have been opened by the fruit of knowledge, so that he can tell good from evil?

If you answered, “both of us” then you’ve pretty much nailed it.

How, then, do we learn? More than that, how do we teach? After all, we learn by discussing various doctrinal differences, taking the insights of like-minded believers and comparing those insights to the Revealed Word.

Having determined our doctrinal worldview, we then teach it to others the same way we learned it ourselves. By discussing the various views and determining for ourselves which view best lines up with Scripture.

But wait! That’s what the other guy did, too. He learned his doctrine the way you did, comparing it to the Scriptures and determining which view lines up best with his understanding of the Word of God.

Having adopted his doctrine as being the correct one, like you, he feels it is necessary to correct the heresy of others for the ‘good of the Church’ — just like you.

Personally, I have absolutely no problem in pointing out doctrinal error. I do it all the time. Where I have to remember to draw the line is in claiming doctrinal infallibility.

I don’t believe that my doctrine is flawed — indeed, if I had any doubts, I wouldn’t teach it.Anymore than I would allow somebody else to teach me if I believed his doctrine was in error.

But there comes a point in a doctrinal debate where a line is crossed — where one goes from being a teacher to a dictator.

And we’ve all crossed that line at some point. No?

Have you ever reached the point where you’ve accused somebody of not being saved because they don’t agree with you? (Or, put another way, that you don’t agree with them.)

Now, WHO is it that has the authority to pronounce someone saved or lost? A little god? Or the One Who shed His Blood that men might be saved?

When Jesus sent the Apostles out to preach the Gospel, He didn’t send them out to browbeat the unwilling, but just the opposite;

“And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear your words, when ye depart out of that house or city, shake off the dust of your feet.” (Matthew 10:14)

“But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant.” (1st Corinthians 14:38)

Many of us take the Great Commission as evidence that our eyes have been opened, and, whether we care to admit it or not, that we are as gods, knowing good from evil.

In a sense, there is truth in that, but that is only true to a limited degree.

Our eyes HAVE been opened (to our sin) we ARE as gods (by virtue of our imputed righteousness) and we know ‘good from evil’ to a limited degree: (ie., God is good, we are evil.)

“The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?” (Jeremiah 17:9)

But when we begin to think that WE can infallibly determine good and evil by virtue of our eyes having been opened by our understanding of Scripture, then we’ve crossed the line from heresy hunter to ‘heretic’ ourselves.

It is a fine line, but not really as fine as all that.

“Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine; continue in them: for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee.” (1st Timothy 4:15)

Originally Published: March 10, 2008

Featured Commentary: One Big Happy Family ~ Wendy Wippel

‘And Ye Shall Be Hated For My Name’s Sake’

‘And Ye Shall Be Hated For My Name’s Sake’
Vol: 168 Issue: 28 Monday, September 28, 2015

In Belarus in 1999, the Full Gospel Pentecostal Church in Minsk had 1,000 members. After being driven from one building where it held services and being threatened to move from another, it has lost 400 worshipers. Most members stopped attending for fear of the government.

Private worship services are broken up by government thugs; Baptists are fined for singing hymns, Protestants are prohibited from purchasing property and Catholics are banned from using foreign priests.

Jews have suffered firebomb attacks on synagogues, and a government publishing house published a book considered to be anti-Semitic.

That is the state of affairs in the former Soviet Union State of Belarus under Alexander Lukashenko.

In August, Lukashenko’s government bulldozed a newly constructed church as parishioners were preparing for its consecration. The government claimed the church was a Christian denomination separate from the Moscow Patriarchate of the Russian Orthodox Church preferred by the Lukashenko regime.

But in point of face, while Belarus is Europe’s greatest religious oppressor, it is hardly Europe’s only regime to take aim at Christianity as a threat to the state. That was the same reason Rome persecuted the early Church.

In the last few years, hostility against evangelicals in Europe seems to be growing. In 1999, the French government passed an “anti-cult” law officially labeling evangelical groups as cults and sects.

There are several other European countries dabbling with anti-cult laws, including: Germany, Austria, Belgium, Netherlands, Romania, Portugal, Spain and a few others. In most of these countries, there are efforts to categorize evangelical churches as “cults”.

The issue of sekts (sects) is a growing concern among the Christian population in Germany. Sektenbeaufragers (sect commissioners) are priests and pastors of established churches who often speak out against new religious minorities.

Government officials are often accused of labeling groups with this term when “off-the-record.” In the German society, the word sekt often implies something akin to ” the most evil threat to society.”

Public opinion can turn against such a group and make them the target of violence and vandalism. Nothing is done by the government to stop slander of smaller, evangelical or fundamentalist Christian groups within Germany.

In France, a law entitled “To enforce the prevention and repression of groups of a sectarian nature” was passed by the National Assembly with only one dissenting vote. Evangelicals fear the passage of this anti-sect legislation because several of them had already been labeled as “sects,” in a list published in 1996.

Fearing that the term “evangelical” will be increasingly be equated with “sect,” several churches have already removed the word evangelical from their names.

The French National Assembly passed a bill that will give the state the power to dissolve religious groups and imprison and fine members found to be “creating a state of mental or physical dependence” among participants. The bill was designed to restrict the rights of evangelical groups, especially those active in proselytizing.

A list of 172 groups considered to be dangerous sects was leaked to the press. This list was compiled due to anti-cult hysteria in the French National Assembly after religious cults in other countries threatened national security.

One Baptist congregation on the list, the Institut Theologique de Nimes, lost the room they had rented for 12 years and two members of the congregation were fired from their jobs. Other groups named on the list suffered similar discrimination.

In Belgium in February of 2001, four American Pentecostal Evangel missionaries teaching at the International Christian Academy near Brussels were detained by Belgian authorities. They were ordered deported for not having “proper paperwork.”

Belgium has identified even more ‘dangerous Christian sects’ than the French have.

In 1997, the Belgian Parliamentary Commission on sects and the dangers they may pose to society and individuals released a large report. The report listed 189 organizations that fell under their definition of a sect, including many Christian groups.

In the report they defined three classes of sects, which included (actual) sects, harmful sectarian organizations, and criminal associations but made no distinctions on the list.

The report recommended the creation of two entities.

The first is a task force to help coordinate the intelligence efforts of law enforcement officials concerning sects.

The second is an independent center to monitor sects and propose legislation to combat the dangers they pose.

While these actions do not constitute an act of persecution, the classifying of individuals and considering legislation to punish them or restrict them due to their religious beliefs rather than their actions can be considered a precursor to more extreme actions.

As George Bernard Shaw once observed, ‘the one thing man learns from history is that man learns nothing from history.’

Assessment:

The Bible says that in the last days, the world will come under the power of a single, global religion, having ‘two horns like a Lamb’ but one that will speak ‘as a dragon’, we are told inRevelation 13:11.

A kind of ‘Christian’ ‘religiousity’ — but one that denies the fundamentals, like salvation and Biblical doctrines.

The Apostle Paul described it thusly:

“Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils; Speaking lies in hypocrisy; having their conscience seared with a hot iron; Forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God hath created to be received with thanksgiving of them which believe and know the truth.” [1 Timothy 4:1-3]

Further, the prophet Daniel identifies the leader of the Roman Empire as the one who will use that coming global religious system as a tool by which to maintain power during his seven yeardictatorship.

It is therefore hardly a coincidence that, as that time grows closer, we are seeing a legislative tightening on groups labeled as ‘fundamentalist’.

And thanks to the war against al-Qaeda, passing legislation against any fundamentalist group of any religious stripe sounds like a good idea to protect national security.

We are living in the last days. The days of an underground church are already upon us in many parts of Europe. Trending precisely as the Bible said it would in the last days. Because these ARE the last days.

Originally Published: December 7, 2002

Featured Commentary: The Church Christ Loved ~ Pete Garcia

Zechariah’s Puzzle

Zechariah’s Puzzle
Vol: 168 Issue: 26 Saturday, September 26, 2015

A nuclear Iran is the most dangerous enemy Israel has ever faced in her four thousand years of existence.

A nuclear strike ordered by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would almost certainly be met with a massive Israeli counterstrike, but Iran is a huge country. Vast expanses are sparsely populated and much of it shielded by mountains.

Ahmadinejad is betting his country could survive a single counterstrike. Tiny coastal Israel would not survive to strike a second time. Ahmadinejad believes it is his religious duty to destroy Israel, even at the risk of starting a nuclear war.

He believes Allah has tasked him with bringing about the return of the 12th Imam, Islam’s messianic figure. Ahmadinejad believes that once he starts a global war, the 12th Imam, or Mahdi, will return and lead Islam in a global conquest of the infidel world.

Ahmadinejad will not be deterred by American naval forces in the Persian Gulf. Nor will he be deterred by the risk of a nuclear response from Israel.

Ahmadinejad sees himself as Islam’s ultimate suicide bomber strapped with Islam’s ultimate suicide bomb. Ahmadinejad also shares the Muslim conviction that Jerusalem is the third holiest place in Islam.

So the most likely target of an Iranian attack would be Tel Aviv, on Israel’s coast, preserving Jerusalem as a prize for the Mahdi.

The Book of Zechariah dates from the early 5th century and is centered around Jerusalem. The majority of his prophecies are concerned with the future of Jerusalem, from the rebuilding of the Temple to the First Advent of the Messiah and through to His Second Coming at the end of the age.

Assessment:

Zechariah Chapter 13 addresses the First Advent of the Messiah, His rejection, and His betrayal.

“And one shall say unto Him, What are these wounds in thine Hands? Then He shall answer, Those with which I was wounded in the house of My friends. ” (Zechariah 13:6)

Modern Israel could make the same lament. As the war with radical Islam goes on, more and more nations are reconsidering the price demanded of them for their continued support of the Jewish state.

At the UN, diplomats eagerly await another opportunity to distance themselves from Israel to appease their own militant Islamic populations back home. Even a war-weary US is slowly backing away from its former policy of unhesitating support for Israel.

The Iran Study Group recommended meeting with Israel’s enemies to discuss trading parts of Israel for parts of Iraq. It recommended Israel be excluded so negotiations wouldn’t be hampered by Israeli objections. And it is being considered as a viable option.

The US-backed land-for-peace initiative resulted in Oslo War that has already deeply wounded Israel.

Zechariah’s Messianic prophecy continues,

“Awake, O sword, against My shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the LORD of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.” (Zechariah 13:7)

The Shepherd, of course, is Jesus. Jesus came first to ‘redeem the lost sheep of Israel.’ When Jesus sent the Twelve on their first missionary journey, He told them not to go to Samaria, or to the Gentiles, but instead, He commanded:

“But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 10:6)

“But He answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” (Matthew 15:24)

The lost sheep rejected the Shepherd, and a generation later, were themselves scattered by the Romans into a two thousand year exile. The Shepherd was smitten, and the lost sheep of Israel scattered, fulfilling Zechariah’s prophecy to the letter. After that, the prophet predicted, God will return His attention to His lost sheep.

The next two verses of Zechariah weave it all together into a cohesive pattern: The burden of Damascus. The absence of Israel’s neighbors from Ezekiel’s enemies list. The Ahmadinejad nuclear factor. The missing alliances.

And, like the burden of Damascus, it is a yet future event. It is a bone-chilling scenario to consider, given the present circumstances in the Middle East.

“And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the LORD, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein. And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on My Name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is My people: and they shall say, The LORD is my God.” (Zechariah 13:8-9)

Ahmadinejad is confident his nation could survive an Israeli nuclear strike and he is probably right. Indeed, Ezekiel’s List says that he is right, since Persia is on his list.

Syria, on the other hand, would not — and Ezekiel omits Syria from the Gog-Magog Alliance.

A nuclear strike against Damascus would certainly turn it into the ruinous heap envisioned by Isaiah, which would explain Syria’s absence from Ezekiel’s List.

Ahmadinejad’s religious ideology demands the destruction of the Jewish State. But Jerusalem’s status as Islam’s third holiest shrine ensures Jerusalem would not be targeted.

On the other hand, Tel Aviv is forty miles east of Jerusalem. Protected by distance and the mountains, Jerusalem would mostly probably survive a nuclear strike on Tel Aviv.

While Jerusalem is Israel’s most ancient and most religious city, Tel Aviv is its newest and most secular. Two thirds of Israel’s total population live within a few miles of Tel Aviv. The remaining third, including most of Israel’s religious Jews, live closer to Jerusalem and the West Bank.

An Iranian nuclear strike on Tel Aviv would therefore cut off two thirds of Israel’s population in a single strike. The surviving third therefore would consist mostly of religious Jews in and around Jerusalem.

Zechariah predicted the sudden ‘cutting off’ of two thirds of Israel, specifically noting the surviving third would be brought “through the fire”, emerging as “His people”.

Ezekiel predicted the restoration of Israel in stages; first as bone, sinew and skin, but “there was no breath in them.” (Ezekiel 37:8)

After Israel’s restoration, Ezekiel predicted that, from the four winds “breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.” (37:9-10)

The first stage of Israel’s restoration was the ingathering. It began with the First Zionist Congress in 1897 and the rush of early Jewish emigration to the Holy Land.

The second stage took place with Israel’s declaration of Independence and the five wars that left Israel in possession of one of the most powerful military machines in the world.

The third stage, Ezekiel says, is when God shall “put My Spirit in you. . .” after which:

“Neither shall they defile themselves any more with their idols, nor with their detestable things, nor with any of their transgressions: but I will save them out of all their dwellingplaces, wherein they have sinned, and will cleanse them: so shall they be my people, and I will be their God. (37:14a, 23)

Zechariah’s prophecy seems to indicate that final stage takes place following the destruction of secular Israel and the preservation of Israel’s religious community.

As I said, it is a chilling scenario. But no more chilling than the prospects now already facing Israel. But it is hard to imagine the current scenario unfolding any other way.

Admittedly, this a morbidly gloomy and admittedly speculative report. And there are no doubt some who think it pretty callous. But I am only quoting the prophet, not inventing the prophecy.

And I am anything but callous about the horror it portends. And I didn’t invent the horror, either. That is in the process of being invented by Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

One needn’t consult Zechariah to arrive at the identical conclusions in the event that Mahmoud Ahmadinejad is successful in his quest for the Bomb.

A nuclear strike on Tel Aviv would affect two thirds of Israel’s population. It is a fact that it would affect Israel’s mainly secular population. It is equally true that the surviving third would include the majority of Israel’s religious community.

Ahmadinejad’s war is unlikely to bring about his dreamed-of Islamic victory, however. A more likely consequence will be a global backlash against Islamic militancy and new resolve fordevelop a global government to prevent its re-emergence.

Iran would survive, without its nuclear program, more dependent than ever on its alliance with Russia.

What remains of Israel will be centered around Jerusalem, and it seems likely that the survivors of the world’s first nuclear sneak attack will enjoy some period of global patronage, similar to the outpouring of sympathy it received in the years immediately following the Holocaust.

The new Israel, centered around Jerusalem’s religious community, would have no need of a wall, and would enjoy some measure of peace and global sympathy for their situation.

Ezekiel’s Gog-Magog scenario calls for a land of unwalled villages, dwelling in apparent peace and safety, under the protection of the Western world. We aren’t there yet.

But Zechariah’s scenario would get us there in a blinding flash of light.

As I said, this is speculative. But Bible prophecy can be likened to assembling a jig-saw puzzle. As more pieces fall into place, the picture begins to get clearer and the puzzle pieces get easier to figure out.

Zechariah’s Scenario may well provide the next missing piece.

Originally Published: December 22, 2006

Marriage of Angels

Marriage of Angels
Vol: 168 Issue: 25 Friday, September 25, 2015

One of the things I enjoy most about a long drive is the opportunity to spend a little quality time with the Lord. I suppose what makes it so enjoyable is the lack of distraction. Even people who enjoy each other’s company as much as Gayle and I do eventually fall silent on a long drive and lose themselves in their own thoughts.

I was musing about what I have learned recently in studying the research on Hepatitis C, in particular, one of its methods of transmission. Among them is sexual activity, which puts HCV in the category of ‘Sexually Transmitted Diseases (STD’s).

A person who has sex with multiple partners is a walking Petri dish, and the virus is easily passed from one person to another, oftentimes with neither party being aware of the infection for years afterwards. During that time, the virus continues to spread and infect others.

However, the statistics say that among monogamous married couples, the instances of cross-infection are somewhere around five percent, and almost always through some other method of transmission; usually an exchange of blood through using each other’s razor, toothbrush or some other item that can transfer blood-to-blood directly, like sharing the lancet on a blood-sugar home testing device or something similar.

But there is no medical evidence that directly links HCV as an STD between two people living in a monogamous marriage. It was THAT interesting fact that I was musing about with the Lord as the white lines clicked by in front of me.

It brought home to me in a new way the truth of the Scriptures, particularly those involving marriage.

“Marriage is honourable in all, and the bed undefiled: but whoremongers and adulterers God will judge.” (Hebrews 13:4)

Assessment:

After the creation of Adam, Genesis 2:18 tells us, God decided,

“It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him an help meet for him.”

To accomplish this, God tells us that,

“And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; And the rib, which the LORD God had taken from man, made he a woman, and brought her unto the man.” (Genesis 2:21-22)

There is a legend that women have one more rib than men, but it is only a legend. We each have the same number of ribs, and nowhere does the Bible say that men have one fewer than women — only that God used one of them as the basis for creating woman:

“And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.” (Genesis 2:23)

What is important is the symbolism — man and woman were created out of one flesh.

“Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and shall cleave unto his wife: and they shall be one flesh.” (Genesis 2:24)

Jesus continued along this same line in His teaching about marriage, saying,

“Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.” (Matthew 19:6)

Marriage is the earthly model used by God to demonstrate our relationship with Him. In a marriage, each partner works together to accomplish the same objective — what happens to one happens to the other. Just as there are no two-headed creatures in nature, a married couple, as one flesh, can have only one head.

Christians are joined to Christ by betrothal; that is, we are engaged to the Bridegroom, who is the Head of the Church, ‘even as the husband is the head of the wife.’ (Ephesians 5:23)

The marriage act is far more than merely a biological function, the Bible says it has grave spiritual implications.

“What? know ye not that he which is joined to an harlot is one body? for two, saith He, shall be one flesh.” (1st Corinthians 6:16)

As I was contemplating all this, the Lord brought to mind what marriage means, from the perspective of heaven, and why the sundering of a marriage on earth creates such havoc.

The Book of Daniel identifies Michael the archangel as “the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people.” (Daniel 12:1) As an archangel, Michael is a commander of a legion of angels, a ‘great prince’ of angels who ‘stands for the children of Daniel’s people’ — the children of Israel.

Tradition and Scripture indicate another archangel, Gabriel, stands as the commander of the angels given charge of the Church. The word ‘angel’ means ‘messenger’ and we are admonished to,

“Be not forgetful to entertain strangers: for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.” (Hebrews 13:2)

The Lord Jesus confirmed that each of us is assigned an angel:

“Take heed that ye despise not one of these little ones; for I say unto you, That in heaven THEIR angels do always behold the face of my Father which is in heaven.” (Matthew 18:10)

God assigns angels to carry messages to believers, to encourage and exhort, and to keep us from spiritual harm.

It is equally clear that Satan also assigns his angels to each of us, to discourage and demoralize, and to lead us into spiritual error.

Now reconsider marriage, from the perspective of angels. I have an angel assigned to me personally. So does Gayle. One day, Gayle and I married, and we two became one flesh. That is to say, in the flesh, we are inextricably linked. On the day we were married, two individuals walked in, but three walked out.

Before the marriage, there was Gayle. And there was me. Afterwards, there was Gayle. There was me. And there a new, third creature, the one our friends now call ‘Jack and Gayle.’ (Indeed, when I go somewhere alone, I am usually greeted by my nickname. “Where’s Gayle?”)

What happens to Jack, happens to Jack. What happens to Gayle, happens to Gayle. But no matter what it is, it also happens to ‘Jack and Gayle’ — that new, third creature created by God as one flesh.

Now our angels are working in concert together with us both (and each other) in the context of that third creature. Our interests are inextricably linked, and therefore, so are the interests of our angelic guardians. In that sense, our angels are as ‘married’ as we are.

The Bible gives but two exceptions under which a married couple can be divorced. The first exception is that of adultery.

“Whosoever shall put away his wife, EXCEPT IT BE FOR FORNICATION, and shall marry another, committeth adultery: and whoso marrieth her which is put away doth commit adultery.” (Matthew 19:9)

The second exception is that of being unequally yoked spiritually.

“But if the unbelieving depart, let him depart. A brother or a sister is not under bondage in such cases: but God hath called us to peace.” (1st Corinthians 7:15)

When believers divorce, in a sense, so do their angels. Moreover, still from the angelic perspective, consider the havoc created when someone is ‘joined’ spiritually, to multiple partners.

And there are TWO angels, or messengers, involved with each believer, the one sent by God, and the OTHER one, sent by Satan.

“And lest I should be exalted above measure through the abundance of the revelations, there was given to me a thorn in the flesh, the MESSENGER OF SATAN to buffet me, lest I should be exalted above measure.” (2nd Corinthians 12:7)

NOW consider the havoc involved, again, from the perspective of angels.

As I drove and contemplated all this, I looked across at my help-meet, Gayle, and thought about our shared eternity.

In explaining marriage from the heavenly perspective, Jesus tells us that,

“in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven.” (Matthew 22:30)

I like to think that our angels are as happy as Gayle and I are. And that, in the resurrection, there is no need for us to ‘marry and give in marriage’.

Been there, done that.

All we are waiting for now is the keys to our new mansion. One I am confident we will share for eternity.

Thank You, Jesus!

Originally Published: November 3, 2005

Featured Commentary: The Russian Ascent ~ Alf Cengia

Crazy For Phobias

Crazy For Phobias
Vol: 168 Issue: 24 Thursday, September 24, 2015

According to ‘The American Heritage Dictionary’, if you have ”a persistent, abnormal, and irrational fear of a specific thing or situation that compels one to avoid it,” then you have a phobia.

There are some 593 identified phobias, according to one source that publishes what it claims to be ‘the definitive list’.  Here are a few examples of recognized phobias;

Agateophobia- Fear of insanity; Alliumphobia- Fear of garlic; Aphenphosmphobia- Fear of being touched ; Chronophobia- Fear of time; Decidophobia- Fear of making decisions; (and my personal favorite); Gerascophobia- Fear of growing old.

Phobias are a mental disorder, defined as being both abnormal and irrational.  To sufferers of a phobia, it can be debilitating.  But to those unaffected by that particular fear, they can be a lot of fun to watch. 

Consider sufferers of hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia, or, the fear of long words. (Tell me the guy who coined THAT one isn’t still laughing)

Among this comprehensive (and sometimes funny) list of phobias was one we hear often; ‘homophobia.’  There really IS a recognized ‘homophobia.’  It is the ‘fear of sameness, monotony’. 

The charge of ‘homophobia’ thrown about by gay rights activists to stifle critics (and in ‘advanced’ cultures like Canada’s, have them arrested) means the ‘fear of sameness or monotony’. 

I doubt that any of those labeled ‘homophobic’s by the gay rights crowd ‘fear’ that gay marriage will result in more monotonous sameness.  But phobia MEANS fear.  Calling someone a ‘homophobic’ elicits some ingrained playground response to being called ‘chicken’. 

(“Oh, yeah?  Well, er, ummm, some of my best friends are homosexual!”) 

Basically, that is what the entire ‘political correctness’ trend is based in.  Playground responses to subliminal playground tactics. 

I would venture to guess that the most ardent advocates of the PC movement were playground bullies now seeking absolution for their juvenile ‘crimes’. 

But human nature being what it is, they simply switched tactics, becoming verbal bullies whose ‘absolution’ requires to force everyone to repent with them. 

‘Islamophobia’ is another example of how the politically correct call each other ‘chicken’.  In the comprehensive list of phobias, Islamophobia is nowhere to be found. 

Even guys who can come up with hippopotomonstrosesquippedaliophobia to describe a fear of long words can’t find a way to view the fear of Islam as either ‘irrational’ or ‘abnormal’. 

Assessment:

‘Islamophobia’ is what is called a ‘neologism’ or a word invented or reinvented to reflect a shift in a cultural worldview.  The United Nations has held conferences dedicated to the discussion of ‘Islamophobia’, which Secretary General Kofi Annan called it a form of ‘bigotry’. 

But because ‘Islamophobia’ is neologism, or a word that means whatever its user wants it to mean, it has no defined boundaries. 

What, therefore, constitutes a case of ‘Islamophobia’?  Is it the fear of Islamic inspiredterrorists?  Or of the stated Koranic aim of spreading Islam to the Dar al Harb [Zone of War] until the return of the Mahdi? 

The definition of ‘phobia’ excludes these fears from consideration, since they are neither irrational or abnormal. 

Is Islamophobia a form of bigotry?  A ‘bigot’ is a prejudiced person who is intolerant of opinions, lifestyles or identities differing from his or her own. 

‘Bigot’ is a pejorative term against a person who is obstinately devoted to his or her prejudices even when these views are challenged or proven to be false.

If fear of being forced to convert or submit to Islam, against the backdrop of a global war on Islamic-inspired terror and the images of the Twin Towers extinguishing three thousand innocent Americans can be twisted to mean ‘intolerant’ it STILL doesn’t mean ‘irrational’ or ‘abnormal’. 

Insofar as those views being challenged or proved false, any rational, normal person can go into a bookstore, buy a copy of the Koran, and look it up for himself. 

(Of course, doing so, by definition, will make you both ‘irrational’ and ‘abnormal’ – so caution is advised.  There is a saying, “Ignorance is bliss.”) 

We’ve discussed the use of words as weapons in previous Omega Letters. 

In a war of words (propaganda war) politically correctness is the equivalent to taking off one’s Kevlar vest before wading into a gunfight.

“The tongue deviseth mischiefs; like a sharp razor, working deceitfully.” (Psalms 52:2)

“Death and life are in the power of the tongue: and they that love it shall eat the fruit thereof.” (Proverbs 18:21)

“Even so the tongue is a little member, and boasteth great things. Behold, how great a matter a little fire kindleth! And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell. . . But the tongue can no man tame; it is an unruly evil, full of deadly poison.” (James 3:5-6,8)

I am neither homophobic nor Islamophobic.  I am, however, developing a phobia of my own, phobophobia. 

It means, ‘fear of phobias’ — but alas, as applied in this case, it is a really just a neologism — since being afraid of some phobias is neither irrational nor abnormal.

Originally Published: June17, 2006

Featured Commentary: The Dancing Boys of Afghanistan~ J.L. Robb

Finding the Lost Tribes

Finding the Lost Tribes
Vol: 168 Issue: 23 Wednesday, September 23, 2015

Most people have heard of the Ten Lost Tribes of Israel.  For those that have not, the phrase refers to the ancient Northern Kingdom of Israel which was defeated and overrun by Sargon II of Assyria in the eight century BC.

After the death of Solomon in the 10th century BC, the ten northern tribes rejected Solomon’s successor, Rehoboam, preferring instead Jeroboan, who was not of the Davidic line.  

The Ten Lost Tribes are believed to be the tribes of Reuben, Simeon, Dan, Naphtali, Gad, Asher, Issachar, Zebulun, Ephraim, and Manasseh.  The Tribe of Ephraim and all Israel raised the old cry, “Every man to his tents, O Israel”.

Rehoboam fled to Jerusalem, and around 930 BC, Jeroboam was proclaimed king over all Israel at Shechem.  After the revolt at Shechem at first only the tribe of Judah remained loyal to the house of David.  But very soon after the tribe of Benjamin joined Judah.

Shechem was the first capital of the Kingdom of Israel.  Shechem is today located in the West Bank, in what was formerly Biblical Samaria.

The northern kingdom continued to be called the Kingdom of Israel or Israel, while the southern kingdom was called the Kingdom of Judah.  2 Chronicles 15:9 also says that some members of the tribes of Ephraim, Manasseh and Simeon fled to Judah during the reign of Asa of Judah.

During the three-year siege of Samaria by the Assyrians, Shalmaneser V died and was succeeded by Sargon II of Assyria, who personally recorded the capture of that city: “Samaria I looked at, I captured; 27,280 men who dwelt in it I carried away” into Assyria.

Thus, around 720 BC, after two centuries, the kingdom of the ten tribes came to an end.  The Bible relates that the population of Israel was exiled, becoming known as The Ten Lost Tribes.

That left only the Tribe of Judah, the Tribe of Simeon (that was “absorbed” into Judah), the Tribe of Benjamin and the people of the Tribe of Levi who lived among them of the original Israelites nation in the southern Kingdom of Judah.

The Kingdom of Judah continued to exist as an independent state until it was conquered in 586 BC by Nebuchanezzar of Babylon.  The Kingdom of Judah (also known as Judea) lost its independence under the Babylonians and subsequently became a province of a succession of empires.

It was transferred as a possession of empires; from Babylon to Persia to Greece to Rome.  In AD 70 the Romans destroyed what was left of Judea, Jerusalem and the Temple and exiled the Jews from their homeland, which the Romans renamed “Palestina” after the Phillistines.

They settled in Asia Minor until they were driven out by the Byzantine Christians, and later, by the Seljuk and Ottoman Turks, who ruled from 1077 to 1922.   

Palestine had no independent status during the Ottoman Empire.  As European powers expanded their foothold in the region and as Zionism brought Jewish immigrants to their ancestral homeland, no one could define Palestine’s contours.

A picture emerged only in the early 1920s under the British Mandate, which extended from the Jordan River to the sea, from the upper Galilee to the Gulf of Aqaba.

The 1948 war created a de facto partition, but no Palestinian state.  Jordan took the West Bank, and Egypt grabbed the Gaza Strip, filled with refugees from Israeli areas that now included 78 percent of the British Mandate territory. 

When Israel captured the Egyptian Gaza and Jordanian West Bank in 1967, the ‘Palestinian people’ were created out of the displaced Arabs.

When Sargon destroyed the northern kingdom of Israel, he did what conquerors did in those days; he transplanted the population of Israel to elsewhere in the Assyrian Empire, and then relocated elements of other subjugated people in their place.

From the time that Sargon II captured Samaria and the Northern Kingdom of Israel until May 14, 1948, there was nowhere on earth known as “Israel” and no such nationality as “Israelite.”  Citizens of the Southern Kingdom of Judah became known as “Jews”.

Still, the Prophet Ezekiel’s writings are filled with references to a future place called ‘Israel’, one that he describes as “the people that are gathered out of the nations” (38:12) and then further describes as “my people of Israel” (38:18)

Ezekiel wrote of Israel’s regathering in the last days. In Ezekiel 37, the prophet is shown a valley of dry bones. Those dry bones, the Lord explains, are the “whole house of Israel”(37:11) that the Lord says would be restored in the last days.

Six hundred years BEFORE the remaining Jews of Israel were scattered by the Romans, the Lord told Ezekiel of their regathering in the last days.

“Behold, I will take the children of Israel from among the heathen, whither they be gone, and will gather them on every side, and bring them into their own land; And I will make them one nation in the land upon the mountains of Israel; and one king shall be king to them all: and they shall be no more two nations, neither shall they be divided into two kingdoms any more at all.” (Ezekiel 37:21-22)

The fulfillment of this amazing prophecy could not be more obvious. The Jews of the Diaspora have indeed ‘come from among the heathen’ from ‘every side’ and returned to the Promised Land.  Including those that were once believed lost to history.

Precisely as predicted in Scripture for the last days.

Assessment:

When I was in Arizona a couple of years back, Jonathan Bernis had just returned from Zimbabwe.  Jonathan told me that he had been home for only four days this year.  JVM has dedicated itself to ministering to the Lost Tribes of Israel, both body and soul.

Here is how Jonathan Gannon, JVM’s Director of Outreach, described the trip.

On Tuesday the adventure went to the next level. We boarded a seven-passenger Cessna twin propeller airplane and flew deep into a remote bush area of Zimbabwe. Once we arrived, we checked into a small lodge and headed even deeper into the remote southern regions of Zimbabwe. We drove for nearly three hours over unpaved roads. My body is still bruised from the bumpiness of the drive.

We drove directly to the home of Chief Mbosi, the regional leader of the Lemba community. Honorable Member of Parliament Hamandesche, also a member of the Lemba tribe, accompanied us. We quickly affirmed that these remarkable people were Jewish. Their customs and practices bore all the markings of authentic and ancient Judaism. In fact, the “head men,” or elders of the community, are called Tzadikim, a Hebrew word for “righteous ones.”

Like something out of a movie, Jonathan Bernis formally greeted the chief and presented our team and objectives for coming. It was instantly evident that they were thrilled to see us. We got excited that we would be able to offer them a clear presentation of the Gospel. Some members of the Lemba are Believers, but most are not. The Lord has yet again led Jewish Voice directly into a harvest field of Jewish souls ripe for the Good News of Yeshua!

While I was visiting their Phoenix headquarters, I witnessed what the Apostle James (2:17) was talking about when he wrote, “faith without works is dead.”   

I watched as they packed up some five truckloads of medicines and other medical supplies and shipped them to Zimbabwe for the next step in JVM’s ministry to the Lembas. 

The mission of JVM is to save souls, and to lead God’s Chosen People into a saving knowledge of Christ, which is itself a formidable undertaking.  

But here is what the Apostle James meant by “dead” faith.

“If a brother or sister be naked, and destitute of daily food, And one of you say unto them, Depart in peace, be ye warmed and filled; notwithstanding ye give them not those things which are needful to the body; what doth it profit? Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.” (James 2:15-17)

Jonathan told me that the nearest dentist to the Lembas is more than 200 miles away.   There are no hospitals or clinics for the Lembas.  So Jewish Voice Ministries is shipping a hospital clinic, complete with doctors, dentists, medicine and medical equipment, from Phoenix, Arizona to the outback of Zimbabwe.

It is just one of JVM’s medical outreaches aimed at presenting the Love of Christ to lost Jewish communities of the African interior.  It is one thing to say “Jesus loves you. Be saved!”  But it is another thing altogether to say, “Jesus loves you. Be fed, clothed, healed and saved.”

How far would you go to spread the Gospel?  How much time would you spend away from your home and family?  How many people have you been involved in leading to Christ?  

Consider the following statistics.   In just the past year, JVM has led medical teams and outreach workers to minister to the lost Jews of Ethiopia and India.  JVM provided medical treatment to 7200 people in Woliso, Ethiopia in February, 2011.  They also led 832 people to Christ!

In May, in Addis Ababa, JVM treated 9,043 bodies, and while they were at it, they saved 1,463 souls.  In October in Gondar, they treated 7,224 bodies and added 1,696 souls to the Kingdom.  In Manipur, India, they treated 6430 bodies and 316 souls.

Thanks to the efforts of Jewish Voice Ministries, some three thousand, four hundred and seventy-five backwoods African tribesman will never stand in judgement before the Great White Throne, but instead will be rewarded at the Bema Seat of Christ.

“And the King shall answer and say unto them, Verily I say unto you, Inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me.” (Matthew 25:40)

Originally Published: February 13, 2012

Featured Commentary: Proof of Purchase ~ Wendy Wippel