ISRAEL AND THE
RENEWED STRUGGLE
FOR THE "HOLY LAND"

Once again, this is a long article; but it is an EXTREMELY important one - especially in light of what's been happening in the Middle East. It has required an extensive amount of time and effort to write. In reading it, you should not skip around: each section builds on the previous one, and if you jump around, you may very well get lost. In addition, links are provided to previous articles that reinforce the content of this article. The article is divided into five parts. Part I, "A Cup of Trembling," deals with the re-emergence of anti-Semitism as a powerful force in world politics; it also describes the new anti-Zionism that is spreading like a wildfire throughout Europe and in certain parts of this country as well (most particularly in the liberal left and on college campuses); finally it details the irreconcilable differences that exist between Israel and the Islamic world that are pushing both sides irresistibly toward war with one another. Part II. "God's Unconditional Promises to Israel," deals with the nature of God's relationship with Israel. You are urged to read this section carefully because it forms the theological foundation for much that will follow. Part III, "A Covenant with Death and Hell," describes the relationship between Israel and the United States. Unlike what you might imagine, it is not a relationship that the Scriptures have glossed over, but one that is treated in great detail by the Word of God; it also deals at length with what the Scriptures say concerning the upcoming war in the Middle East. Part IV, "The Making of a Messiah," deals with the anti-Christ and his relationship to Israel, the United States, and - sadly - the American Evangelical community. Finally, Part V, "The Tribulation," deals with the Tribulation Period, and what it will mean in YOUR life. I urge you with all of my heart to read this article carefully. It may very will change your life forever.

"The burden of the word of the LORD for Israel, saith the LORD, which stretcheth forth the heavens, and layeth the foundation of the earth, and formeth the spirit of man within him.

"Behold, I WILL MAKE JERUSALEM A CUP OF TREMBLING unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah and against Jerusalem.

"And IN THAT DAY WILL I MAKE JERUSALEM A BURDENSOME STONE for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it." (Zech. 12:1-3)

At first glance, it would seem that Hitler’s Holocaust is a nightmlare that could never be repeated. The Gotterdammerung in which Hitler’s Valhalla went up in flames in a Wagnerian Twilight of the Gods should have consumed this horrible disease - AND PUT TO AN OPEN SHAME ALL THOSE WHO HATE THE JEWS. But like a nightmlare which won’t go away, like a cancer which goes into remission - feigning a cure - only to reappear again in some other part of the body and in a more virulent form, anti-Semitism is once more rearing its ugly head - and Jews have very REAL reasons to fear for their lives again.

To a very large extent, today's anti-Semitism revolves around the existence of a new and UNEXPECTED phenomenon: the reappearance in world history of the state of Israel, a phenomenon which the Jews felt they had no other choice but to FORCE on the world in order to forestall their own eventual extermination. The Jews have learned through grievous experience that unless they act to save themselves, unless they hold their own fate in their own hands, they are powerless to fend off the world's hatred against them - and no assurances to the contrary (even when proffered by the liberal democracies of the West) can ever suffice to make the Jews believe otherwise. The Jews have learned how truly WORTHLESS such assurances are.

For example, in May 1938, as Germany's "orgy of hatred" against the Jews was reaching new heights of sadism, the governments of Great Britain, France and the United States protested. While the world might not remember what happened next, the Jews certainly do: although Hitler was annoyed at this protest, he convened the Evian Conference and offered "his Jews" to the "international community," and to Great Britain, France and the United States in particular. He knew the offer would be refused. And that's precisely what happened: the nations of the earth - and in particular the "Western Democracies" - refused to take them.

German opinion smirked at the hypocritical posturing of the "Anglo-Americans." Goebbels laughed! - had he not known all along that no "civilized" nation would ever accept that "accursed" race? A German newspaper of that era commented,

"One likes to pity the Jews as long as one can use this pity for a wicked agitation against Germany, but no state is prepared to accept even a few thousand Jews. The conference (i.e., Evian) serves to justify Germany's policy against Jewry."

It is precisely the remnants of these people - the people the world turned their back on at Evian and later during the Holocaust - who, as frightened hordes of desperate refugees fleeing from Hitler's death camps, arrived in Israel to build a sanctuary against the unrelenting HATRED of the world. They knew at the time they were dispossessing people who had been there for centuries, BUT THEY HAD NO WHERE ELSE TO GO. No other nation - not even the United States - wanted them. If they were going to live, they would have to force the issue.

They came as the outcasts of Europe; the downtrodden of the shoddy Jewish ghettos of the Near East and North Africa; people with childhood memories of the sound of hammers boarding up doors and windows against the unrelenting pogroms directed against them in Russia, Hungary, Poland, etc.; they came as the remnants of Hitler's death camps and as people fleeing the indifference of the French, the Belgians, the Dutch, the Swedes, and all the other "do-gooder" nations of the earth to their plight - people who had at last been driven to frantic desperation to hold their OWN fate in their OWN hands for a change, which meant having their OWN nation and their OWN army with which to defend themselves - again, even if that meant forcing themselves onto the people of the Middle East and dispossessing Arabs from land they had inhabited for generations.

The Jews were seeking a place of refuge where, when all else fails, Jews could flee to without having to depend on the capricious consent of other nations and peoples who experience had shown were at best indifferent to their fate!

A place of refuge; of shelter; of asylum, of sanctuary! - that's what Israel means to the worldwide Jewish community. AND IT'S A PLACE WHOSE IMPORTANCE IS ONLY GROWING IN THE FACE OF A RESURGENT WORLDWIDE ANTI-SEMITISM. Indeed, Donald G. McNeil, Jr. of the New York Times reports that in France there is a rising tide of anti-Semitic incidents. In Marseilles the Orthodox Jewish Or Aviv synagogue was burned to the ground. An additional three other French synagogues were set on fire over the Passover-Easter weekend, and a synagogue in Strasbourg had its doors set ablaze the day after an anti-Israel demonstration there. In addition, in Lyon, 15 masked men crashed two cars through the gates of a synagogue and set them afire. Finally, shots were fired at a kosher butcher shop in Toulouse, and a young Jewish couple were badly beaten in Villeurbanne in the Rhone region.

The Central Jewish Consistory in Paris, in a statement sent to Agence Frence-Presse, called the weekend's attacks "the beginning of a new Kristallnacht, with the government totally passive about what was happening." Kristallnacht, or "Night of Broken Glass," on November 9, 1938, was named for the sweeping attacks that the Nazis incited on Jews and Jewish shops and places of worship.

In the face of all this, French Prime Minister Lionel Jospin announced that 1,110 additional police officers would be deployed to guard France's synagogues and Jewish schools - and, as a result, police officers, some carrying submachine guns, now are posted outside dozens of synagogues and Jewish schools throughout the country.

This is a shocking development for Jews in France. Until recently, leaders of France's 600,000 Jews have believed that they were living in a country where they were safe from the scourge of anti-Semitism. But with the growing number of anti-Semitic incidents, they no longer believe that's the case - especially in light of the fact that when they have publicly complained about the attacks, there has not been any genuine public outcry to stop them.

They just keep on occurring, ranging from anti-Semitic graffiti that is appearing on walls all over the country, to threatening phone calls received by rabbis, to shootings, to burnings, etc. Similar incidents have occurred in Belgium where five firebombs were thrown at a synagogue last weekend. And it's not just in France and in Belgium that this new anti-Semitism has taken hold. The fact is, it's happening all over Europe: in Germany, in Austria, in Denmark, in Italy - everywhere!

In addition to all this, Newsweek Magazine reports that there has been a marked revival of all the old "BLOOD LIBELS" against the Jews - including stories that the pastries used in the Jewish Purim festivities contain human blood; and that at Passover the blood of Christian children under the age of ten is used in the rituals. And while these stories are still confined to the fascist fringe in Europe, they are REGULAR FARE in the Middle East and throughout the Islamic world.

Indeed, devotees of these stories and myths can be found not just among the uneducated there, but among the university-trained elite as well. Take Dr. Umayma Ahmad al-Jalahma of King Faisal University Hospital in Saudi Arabia: Newsweek reports that she believes that at Passover,

"A needle-studded barrel (in which the Christian or Muslim child-victim is locked into) is used (to obtain the blood). The victims suffer dreadful torment - torment that affords the Jewish vampires great delight ..." [We URGE you to read our detailed account of these "blood-libels" in our article, "Pat Robertson, ILLUMINISM, and the New World Order."]

Finally, as if to add insult to injury, a venomous anti-Jewish press has re-surfaced "big time," and is peppering the world with anti-Semitic CONSPIRACY THEORIES. In Egypt, according to Newsweek, the press regularly features stories denying the Holocaust and accepting as fact the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. [Please see our article, "The Origins of the Illuminist Myth: The Fabrication of the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion" for a detailed account of the Protocols and the many other conspiracy theories that surround the Jewish people; please also see our article, "Henry Ford and Gerald L.K. Smith: Big Business and the Religious Right" for an interesting historical discussion on the intersection of interests in anti-Semitism between the American business community and the Religious Right; finally, please see our short article on "Holocaust deniers" entitled, "The Institute for Historical Review."]

Even the oft repeated story attributed falsely to Benjamin Franklin that the Jews would take over America if allowed to immigrate to the United States - a theory concerning the so-called "squalid" and "immoral" effect of Jewish power that most in the Religious Right in this country already subscribe to (see below) - is standard reading throughout the Middle East. This particular theory is a popular one because it seems to give an answer to many Muslims (and not a few Christians as well) concerning what many perceive to be America's slavish and unreasonable devotion to the Jewish state; a theory predicated upon a belief by many in the existence of a NEW YORK-JERUSALEM AXIS controlled by a mysterious cabal of Satan-worshipping Jewish financiers associated with the Trilateral Commission and the Council on Foreign Relations.

And these stories just keep on coming. For instance, the events of September 11th have given rise to the theory that Israel was the "hidden hand" behind the attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) and the Pentagon - a theory that was given a certain amount of "legitimacy" in Pakistan a few days after the attacks when General Rashid Qureshi, the public-relations chief for President Pervez Musharraf, told Newsweek that the attacks were carried out by the Israeli Mossad, and that all the Jewish employees of the WTC had mysteriously failed to show up for work on the day of the attack. [In fact, Jews suffered far more deaths from the attack on the WTC than any other group in relation to their percent of the population - editor]

These stories - and many others beside - give evidence to the fact that anti-Semitism is making a big "comeback" not only in the world at large, but in this country as well. The truth is, a great many Americans today would not find it particularly difficult to agree with Daniel Bernard, France's ambassador to Great Britain, when - according to Newsweek - he was overheard to say at a private dinner party in London:

"... that shitty little country (i.e., Israel)! Why should the world be in danger of World War III because of these people (i.e., the Jewish people)?"

Indeed, one of the great "open secrets" of today's America is that there remains a HUGE reservoir of anti-Jewish hostility in this country, especially in the Religious Right - THE CORE ELEMENT OF GEORGE BUSH'S POLITICAL CONSTITUENCY; and this hostility is clearly reflected in their hate-filled rhetoric against the ACLU. [Please see "The Republican Party And The Jews."] Why? - because, in the artful phraseology which has over the years come to surround anti-Semitism in the United States, THE ACLU HAS BECOME NOTHING MORE THAN A CODEWORD FOR THE JEWS. The truth is, there are a lot of Christians who would have little trouble echoing Billy Graham when he told Richard Nixon that the Jews had established a stranglehold on the country, and that -

"This stranglehold has got to be broken or the country's GOING DOWN THE DRAIN."

Pretty harsh stuff! Going down the drain! - i.e., that the Jews are responsible for ruining the United States! Wow! Nonetheless, if words are to be taken at their face value - that's what Graham was saying here! - i.e., that Jewish influence in the United States was ruining the country. That sounds like something Hitler, or Goering, or Goebbles, or Himmler would have said about Germany sixty years ago. And, indeed, it is! [Please see "The Jews, The Minorities And The Multicultural Imperative."] Graham continues,

"... there is a powerful bloc of Jews in this country that are putting out the pornographic stuff."

Plainly, Graham believes that Jews are responsible for America's lapsed morality. This, of course, is what Hitler et. al. believed too. Graham persists with even more caustic remarks about the Jews,

"A lot of Jews are great friends of mine. They swarm around me and are friendly to me ... THEY DON'T KNOW HOW I REALLY FEEL."

Since these remarks surfaced a few months ago as a result of recently de-classified and released Nixon tape recordings from the National Archives, a great number of "Graham-experts" and apologists have been hauled out to cite Graham's "unstinting support" for Israel over the years and to "write off" Graham's anti-Semitic remarks as something that "should not be taken out of context" - in other words, what people should do is ignore the implications of Graham's "unguarded" White House "table talk."

But come on now! What is more likely to be representative of the REAL Graham? - his "unguarded" remarks about the Jews to close confidants and friends? Or his carefully contrived public statements? Come on! - be honest here! Alexander Cockburn of Counterpunch Magazine believes that such thinking is very representative of the white, country club kind of Christian that - SADLY - Graham has come to mirror over the years. Cockburn writes knowingly and very sarcastically,

"Don't people know that this sort of stuff is consonant with the standard conversational fare at 75 percent of the country clubs in America, not to mention many a Baptist soiree. Nixon thought American Jews were lefty peaceniks who dominated the Democratic Party and were behind the attacks on him. Graham reckoned it was Hollywood Jews who had sunk the nation in porn."

Moreover, one should not be thrown off track with regard to Graham and the many others like him in the evangelical Christian community because of their "unstinting support" for the state of Israel.

While it's true that there is a lot of support from evangelicals like Graham, Robertson, Falwell, etc. for Israel, that does not seem to detract a great many of them from their disgust of the Jewish people in general. Evangelicals are SCHIZOPHRENIC on this point - and that SCHIZOPHRENIA has a lot to do with their view of the Jewish people as "Supermen" or Obermenschen (or sometimes as Untermenschen) [Please see "Pat Robertson, Illuminism, And The New World Order."].

Like the nursery rhyme about the "little girl with the cute little curl in her forehead," evangelicals somehow or other believe that when the Jews are "... good, they are very, very good, but when they're bad, they're horrid" - i.e., that when Jews accept Christ, they become almost superhuman in their Christianity, but when they reject Him, they become anti-Christs in their hatred of God. But the Bible doesn't admit to this kind of distinction between the Jews and the Gentiles; on the contrary, the Bible says:

"For ALL have sinned, and come short of the glory of God ..." (Rom. 3:23)

And it goes on to say:

"... there is NO difference between the Jew and the Greek (i.e., the gentiles) ..." (Rom. 10:12)

To think otherwise - to believe that Jews can be either "supermen" or "anti-Christs" - is to leave open the possibility that eventually ALL those Jews who refuse to accept Christ as savior should be treated as "anti-Christs." And what do you do with "anti-Christs?" - you persecute and kill them! This is what Luther did: Luther had expected the Jews to flock to him after the Reformation; surely they would "see the light" after Christianity was separated from Roman Catholicism! But they didn't convert, and when they didn't, he treated them all as "anti-Christs." [Please see "The Jews, The Minorities And The Multicultural Imperative."]

Luther loved the Jews and hated them all at the same time. Unfortunately, the hatred got the better of him - and it will do so for all those who think along similar lines: for instance, people like Reuven Doren and many other so-called "Messianic Jews" who think that the Jews (and Israel) will flock to them on the basis of their new Talmudic-kind of Christianity.

In the long run, people like Graham, Falwell, Robertson, et al who harbor this kind of SCHIZOPHRENIC picture of the Jews as either supermen or anti-Christs can be no REAL friends of the Jewish people - at least not in the long run: the "dark side" of their schizophrenia will, like Luther's, always get the better of them in the end - marking out the Jews in their minds as the "pornographers of the world," the "ruination of Christian civilization," the ubiquitous "destroyers of all that is decent and moral," etc.

[Please see our side article on the subject of "Jewish National Salvation." In addition, we URGE you to read our article on why the Jews tend to hold liberal political and social positions, "The Jews, the Minorities, and the Multicultural Imperative." Finally, for information on how Israel and the church relate to each other, we URGE you to read Chapter III of the Antipas Papers, "The Distinction Between Israel and the Church;" Chapter V, "Understanding the Book of Revelation," Chapter XI, "Tribulation and Judgment;" and Chapter XII, "The Two Witnesses."]

And this brings us back to the ACLU: to Christians like Graham, the ACLU is nothing more than a tool of the Jewish community - a Jewish community that is out to "get them" by emasculating their Euro-centered, Christian-based civilization. For example, Billy McCormack, a past director of the Christian Coalition, told the editorial staff of the Los Angeles Times,

"I'd like for you to take - but your paper might not allow you to do it - and that is to take a look at the Jewish element in the ACLU which is trying to drive Christianity out of the public place, and I'd like to see if you could do something objective there. Because the ACLU is made up of a tremendous amount of Jewish attorneys."

[What McCormack evidently meant was for the paper to "expose" the connection between the supposed anti-Christian attitudes of the Jewish community and the ACLU.]

The very real truth of the matter is, when conservative politicos like William Bennett, Jack Kemp, Bob Dole, George Bush, etc. and conservative religious leaders like D. James Kennedy, Jack Hayford, Jerry Falwell, Billy Graham, etc. express their feelings against the ACLU, what they are really doing is betraying their own anti-Jewish sentiments. TO THINK OTHERWISE IS TO EXPOSE ONESELF AS AN IGNORAMUS OR A NAIF - after all, it’s pretty much of a stretch to believe that in using this rhetoric they are not well aware of its anti-Jewish overtones.

There is just no way of getting around it: the term "ACLU" is a codeword in the anti-Jewish lexicon of both the conservative political and religious communities. And it is habitually used as such by people who are not very well-disposed towards the Jewish community - people like former Secretary of State James Baker, a close confidant of both the president (Bush, Jr.) and the vice president (Cheney), who could say without batting an eye in an unguarded moment to his friends and business associates: "FUCK THE JEWS!" Obviously, people don't say "FUCK THE JEWS" in public - after all, the remarks by both Graham and Baker were not meant for public consumption. But they do make remarks like that in public about the ACLU; and in doing so, they are sending signals out to the electorate and to the public in general about how they really feel concerning the Jews. [Please see "The Republican Party And The Jews."]

Of course, what Christians like Graham and politicos like Baker say in private, anti-Semites say openly and very publicly. For example, the flagrantly fascist, anti-Semitic magazine, Vanguard, the publisher of the Turner Diaries, says:

"Jews ... have taken the lead in persuading a whole generation that homosexuality (and other deviant sexual behavior) is a normal and acceptable way of life ..."

Now stop and think about this for a minute! - what's the difference here between what Graham said to Nixon and what Vanguard is saying? There is none, of course! It's the same rhetoric containing the same hate-filled shibboleths - AND MOST EVANGELICALS - IF THEY ARE HONEST - KNOW FULL WELL WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE.

Most have heard such talk by now in their churches - and it does little good for them to pretend otherwise. To such people, the Jews are the intellectual force behind multiculturalism; the bankers and financiers driving the economic integration of the world; the media moguls responsible for the destruction of "traditional values;" the destroyers of the old Orthodox World through communism and socialism.

Finally, there is the crushing loss by the Jewish community of the Left's support in recent years. This loss is almost impossible for most in the Right (both political and religious) to comprehend. For more than a hundred years, the Jews have been able to count on the Left's unstinting support when all else failed. Together with the Left, Jews had battled Hitler in Germany, and anti-Semitism in Poland, in Hungary, in France and elsewhere throughout Europe before the Second World War; and they had contributed immeasurably to the Jews' struggle for a truly pluralistic society in the United States, a society in which the Jews could feel as much at home as could Christians.

But that's all gone now; the Palestinians have displaced the Jews as the "darling" minority of the Left, and Jews today are seen as members of the "oppressor class" rather than as part of the "oppressed." Indeed, one would be very hard-pressed to find a Thurgood Marshall and a Constance Baker Motley willing to march with a Jack Greenberg, a Joe Rauh and a Michael Schwerner for the sake of a Jewish homeland in the Middle East - or, for that matter, any other reason today. And nothing symbolizes this more than the demonstrations against the Jews (for that's what those demonstrations really are all about) in front of Sproul Hall at the University of California recently, or similar demonstrations at the University of Michigan, the University of Wisconsin, at Harvard and elsewhere. [We urge you to see our very important article on this subject, "Schizophrenia in the Jewish Community;" it deals extensively with the Jews' loss of the Left's support both in the United States and throughout Europe.]

Given all this, is there any real doubt that very few people today would shed too many tears if Israel suddenly ceased to exist? AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT GROWING NUMBERS OF PEOPLE THROUGHOUT THE WORLD ARE BEGINNING TO THINK TOO. Again, as Daniel Bernard has said:

"... that shitty little country (i.e., Israel)! Why should the world be in danger of World War III because of it?"

With this kind of animosity against Israel, is there any wonder that growing numbers of people seem to believe that Israel's days as a Jewish state are numbered? For instance, according to Newsweek, only 34 percent of adults surveyed in the United States (Israel's closest ally) think Israel will continue to survive as a Jewish state for much longer. Some 23 percent think that Israel - largely as a result of the secularization effect that's all too obviously embedded in the so-called "Oslo Peace Process" - will be forced to give up its present status as a homeland for the Jewish people and instead be turned into a secular state with no particular connection to Judaism or the Jewish people: a country where Palestinians will shortly comprise the majority population; and 18 percent think Israel will simply be swallowed up by Islamic fundamentalism and cease to exist altogether. Indeed, on the front cover of the April 1, 2002 edition of Newsweek Magazine is a picture of an old and tattered Israeli flag with a faded Star of David emblazoned on it and the words:

"The Future of Israel; How Will It Survive?"

Richard Cohen, a journalist for the Washington Post (and one of those not unusual examples in the United States of "assimilist Jews" who seem to go out of their way to prove their anti-Zionist, secular-humanist credentials - for example, people like Adam Shapiro, a New York Jew recently found siding with Arafat against Israelis in Arafat's compound in Ramallah on the West Bank), believes that what the Jews are facing not only in the West Bank, but in Israel itself is analogous to what the French faced in Algeria in the late 1950s and early 1960s. Cohen believes that like the French in Algeria, the Israelis are "colonialists" in the Holy Land doing to the Palestinians what European colonialists did to native Americans in the United States. He believes that they really don't have any right to be there. He writes:

"I summon up the Algerian war (of the late 1950s) because I have long thought it was the direction the Palestinian insurrection would inevitably take. It's not just that both societies (i.e., the Algerians and the Palestinians) are overwhelmingly Muslims, but that they both consider themselves occupied by colonizers who, in turn, both (i.e., the French in Algeria and the Jews in Israel) consider themselves (wrongfully Cohen apparently thinks) to be virtually indigenous. Remember that Algeria was not a French colony. It was part of France itself. [What Cohen is saying here is that the French "settlers" in Algeria and the Israeli "settlers" in "Palestine" considered that they had as much right to be there as did the Algerians in Algeria and the Palestinians in "Palestine" (i.e., the Holy Land).]

"And remember, too, that the French did not fight halfheartedly. From the very beginning of the war, the French responded to guerrilla and terrorist tactics with extreme repression. Assassinations were commonplace, torture routine - human rights abuses, such as gang rapes, hardly uncommon. The French considered their enemy barbaric. They descended to that level themselves.

"The Battle of Algiers is now being fought in Jerusalem and Tel Aviv, in Haifa and Netanya - anywhere a Palestinian suicide bomber can infiltrate. It is being fought, too, with increasingly desperate Israeli tactics - first pre-emptive assassination, now the virtual reoccupation of the West Bank. The turn that the war - the Palestinian struggle - has taken may be lost on Sharon, and, it seems President Bush, but not on some of those involved. 'If they kill us, we will kill them', said Muhammad Odeh. 'It will never stop'. Odeh knows whereof he speaks. His son, Abdel Basset Odeh, blew himself up in Netanya last week, killing 22 others at a Passover Seder.

"Another observer, the astute Israeli columnist Nahum Barnea, said something similar. He noted that terrorism had become something like 'A POPULAR SPORT' for young Palestinian men and women. 'You can kill, deport and deter professionals', he wrote. 'There is no military way to fight suicide bombers'.

Cohen continues:

"I understand Sharon's rage and why he lashes out at Yasser Arafat, who is, for sure, complicitius in the suicide bombings. It is how I felt on September 11, down by the World Trade Center. First came a sense of utter impotence - all those deaths and nothing anyone could do about it. But then, instantly, came a wave of anger, a desire for revenge that, really, has never left me. I burnish my anger and treasure it. It is my own memorial to the thousands murdered.

"This is also how Bush feels, too. But this altogether understandable and even laudatory desire for revenge-cum-justice has led Bush to essentially endorse Sharon's actions. Bush does not seem to appreciate that even when it comes to terrorism, distinctions have to be made. Downtown Manhattan or the Pentagon is not Israel or the West Bank.

"The deeper Sharon plunges the Israeli military into the West Bank, the greater their peril. He and they must then swim in a sea of sharks, in a culture where suicide bombers are valued, praised - where they bring distinction and some money on a family that has little of each. He can, if he so chooses, even get rid of Arafat. But even that, in the long run, will not change matters. A new leader will arise. The struggle will continue.

"The Palestinians are practicing terrorism. No doubt about it. It is inexcusable, but not inexplicable. It is their chief weapon and, moreover, it works. Terrorism will persist until Palestinians feel that their political concerns are being addressed. It is folly to keep yelping 'Tenet and then Mitchell' as if it is some sort of magical incantation that will make terrorism go away ...

"The French, who now lecture the United States on human rights, proved in Algeria that nothing - not repression, not warfare, not torture, not assassination - could prevail over an enemy that fought dirtier, meaner and with more determination than they could."

Christopher Dickey and Daniel Klaidman of Newsweek echo Cohen. Both - like Cohen - are "assimilists" who abhor Zionism as anathema to the "enlightenment views" they cling to. They write:

"How will Israel survive? The questions come from the mouths of Israeli children. As Jews in Israel and around the world begin to commemorate Passover this week, they will read of the flight from Egypt. They will eat at a table laden with symbolism: the bitter herbs of slavery, the unleavened bread of a desperate escape. And the youngest child will ask, 'Why is this night different from all others'? They will listen to the story of the Exodus and of the four sons - the wise one, who asks the meaning of the laws; the wicked one, who denies his Jewishness; the simple one, who wonders, 'What is all this'?

"This year, at this moment, the ritual has special meaning, and these nights will be different from all others because so many Jews believe the future of Israel, or its children, or their place in the Middle East and in the world, is threatened now as it has not been for generations. Will the Jewish state survive? At what cost? With what identity? CAN IT EVER KNOW PEACE?"

Most Americans, of course, like to believe that there is no such a thing as irreconcilable differences. That differences can be bridged if everybody really works at it; that they can be compromised. But that simply isn't true. Take the matter of how Muslims REJECT out of hand any Jewish claim to ANY of the sacred sites in the Holy Land; for example, the Temple Mount. To Muslims, Jewish claims to the Temple Mount are based on FAKE HISTORY. Jewish claims are a fraud. That's what Hosni Mubarak, the leader of Egypt and a so-called "moderate" in the Arab world, believes: that the Israelis have "created history" in order to legitimize their claim to the Temple Mount. To the Muslims, the Temple is a figment of the Jews imagination. There is only the "Dome of the Rock," and "Al-Aqsa." That's all. Nothing more! That's why at Camp David two years ago, Arafat balked at any solution for Jerusalem that denied him FULL SOVEREIGNTY over the Temple Mount and all of eastern Jerusalem, saying that otherwise he feared a Muslim assassin's bullet. The PLO chief warned,

"... there will be no peace and no stability in the Middle East region if [Jerusalem] does not return to its legitimate owners."

Where is there here any room for "common ground?" There is none!

Then, as if to make sure his hearers understood what he meant, Arafat continued,

"I will NOT be flexible concerning the holy places. They are Palestinian, Arab ... and Muslim holy places, and everyone must respect it."

Palestinian Authority (PA) cabinet secretary Abed el-Rahman expanded on what Arafat had just said,

"If the THIEVING Israelis continue holding on to our lands, another Intifada awaits them - AND WORSE THINGS AS WELL." [And, of course, that's exactly what has happened.]

Arafat continued:

"You have to remember, you are speaking to Yasser Arafat. I will continue to liberate all the Islamic and Muslim holy places. I can't betray my people. I can't betray the Arabs ... I can't betray the Muslims."

Ultimately, what Arafat wants is to declare a Palestinian state by raising the Palestinian flag over a "liberated" Temple Mount. What he and Mubarak are willing to settle for in the interim - and what Arafat actually suggested to Clinton - is that the Temple Mount be transferred to "Islamic sovereignty," entrusted to Egypt, Saudi Arabia and Morocco, but with Palestinian administrative control.

It was an option Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak quickly ruled out. But Mubarak - like Arafat - is also afraid of what could happen to him if he were to yield to Israel on the question of the Temple Mount and Jerusalem, believing that if he becomes a party to a compromise, he will invite on himself the endless wrath of Muslim extremists and possibly murder at the hands of his own people.

Against this kind of intransigence, what does an agreement on a piece of paper mean? Nothing, of course. For example, the Oslo Accords are supposed to guarantee access to the Temple Mount to the Jews as well as to the Arabs, a right which the Jews have always claimed, but have never exercised [other than demanding access to the so-called "Western Wall" (which is, in reality, not part of the Temple Mount complex itself, but is merely an old "retaining wall" below the actual Temple Mount which was built after the construction of Herod's Temple to prevent erosion to the Temple's foundation)].

Because they have failed to exercise their "right of access" to the Temple Mount itself over the years in order to placate the Muslims, many Israelis now fear they will lose that right altogether - not only on a de facto level, but on a de jure basis as well.

It was precisely for this reason that then Likud chairman Ariel Sharon decided to put the Oslo guarantees of Jewish access to the Temple Mount to a test by visiting the Temple Mount on the eve of Rosh Hashana two years ago - a visit that Sharon advertised in advance as a "simple pilgrimage" to Judaism's holiest site; a "pilgrimage" which was supposedly guaranteed to the Jews by the Oslo Accords. Sharon reasoned that if such a "pilgrimage" could not be undertaken now at a time when ultimate authority over the Temple Mount still rests with Israel, what would happen if this authority were to pass to the Arabs - either directly or indirectly?

What occurred is probably exactly what Sharon had expected: THE PROMISES CONTAINED IN THE OSLO ACCORDS AMOUNTED TO NOTHING ON THE GROUND! The morning after Sharon's visit, over 20,000 enraged Muslim radicals converged at the Al Aqsa mosque to hear the Grand Mufti, Sheikh Ibrahim Ekrima, refer to Sharon as the "Jewish butcher of Muslims" who was "challenging more than one billion Muslims all over the world" by his DESECRATING presence the previous evening on the Temple Mount. The Mufti appealed for a pan-Islamic Jihad (holy war) "TO ERADICATE THE JEWS FROM PALESTINE." [Please see our article entitled, "The Coming War in the Middle East" for a detailed account of the false charges of Sharon's complicity in the Sabra and Shatilla massacres in Beirut which the Grand Mufti was alluding to here. The charge is made that Sharon controlled the Christian Maronite militias that entered the Palestinian refugee camps and carried out the slaughter; but the reality is, the American CIA was the organization that was really in charge, not Sharon.]

In case one still didn't get the message, Voice of Palestine radio began playing patriotic war songs and Arafat closed the schools; called a general strike; and urged everyone to "take their wrath to the streets." Since then, thousands of people have been killed and thousands more wounded, mostly Palestinians. PA minister Abed Rabbo warned,

"Trying to touch or to play with the issue of Al-Aqsa (i.e., the Temple Mount) will lead to a religious war which would last for generations. Any attempt to touch even a stone in the Aqsa mosque will provoke more than a billion Muslims all over the world." [And, again, this is precisely what has occurred - editor.]

All this ruckus because Sharon decided to exercise a right of pilgrimage that was presumably guaranteed to him by the Oslo Accords? This doesn't say much for these guarantees - especially in light of the fact that the world press has all but called for Sharon's lynching for exercising these supposed rights. Indeed, Dutch and Danish courts are currently in the process of indicting Sharon as a "War Criminal" for what happened at Sabra and Shatilla, and for his "inciting to riot" in Jerusalem when he visited the Temple Mount. Molly Ivins, a well-known columnist in the United States, believes that Sharon should stand trial for his visit to the Temple Mount as well. She suggested in a syndicated article that Sharon be "charged with treason" for putting the Oslo guarantees regarding Jewish access to the Temple Mount to such an open test. In light of all this, one should excuse average Jews for believing that the Oslo guarantees aren't worth the paper they're written on.

This brings us back to the peace proposals themselves. All current peace proposals demand that the Jews pull back to Israel's 1967 borders - which weren't really its borders at all, but a cease-fire line established at the end of the 1948 war. It was never recognized by any Arab state until after the 1967 war, and has been grudgingly accepted recently by states that still do not yet recognize the legitimacy of Israel - a border which most military analysts believe is indefensible, especially if Israel is forced to abandon its security positions on the Jordan River.

But even if Israel were to withdraw to its so-called 1967 borders, give up its defensive positions along the Jordan River, withdraw from all its settlements on the West Bank and Gaza, that would probably still not be the end of it. This is what Hussein Ibish and Ali Abunimah, both Palestinians, believe. They write:

"... the occupation is only one of two major issues standing in the way of an end to the century-old conflict. The denial of the right of millions of Palestinian refugees, those displaced in the 1948 and 1967 wars and their descendants, to return to their homes and land is also a fundamental obstacle. Unlike the occupation, it is an issue which has never been seriously addressed or properly understood in the U.S. All recent American and Israeli proposals for Israeli-Palestinian peace have been predicated on an unworkable and disastrous concept: that the world's largest group of refugees would renounce or be denied this basic human right."

But if the Israelis grant the Palestinians the "Right of Return," it will mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state. Contrawise, if the Jews refuse to grant the Palestinians this concession, the suicide bombings will no doubt continue endlessly into the future. As Newsweek suggested last week,

"Israelis know - as should the rest of the world - that the real division among Palestinians is not between those who want peace in the Western sense - i.e., as a point after which the world lives free of tensions with a consciousness of reconciliation. In reality, the number of Palestinian leaders holding this view is minuscule. THE FUNDAMENTAL SCHISM IS BETWEEN THOSE WHO WANT TO BRING ABOUT THE DESTRUCTION OF ISRAEL BY CONTINUING THE PRESENT STRUGGLE, AND THOSE WHO BELIEVE THAT AN AGREEMENT NOW WOULD BE A BETTER STRATEGY TO RALLY FORCES FOR THE ULTIMATE SHOWDOWN LATER ON."

Either way, Israel will eventually have to go if the Palestinians are to be satisfied! This is why the Jews will ultimately have to fight. There is no way around it.

All these things - the anti-Semitism, the anti-Zionism, the irreconcilable differences between the Arabs and the Israelis over Israel's presence in the Holy Land - have conspired together to produce a feeling of dreadful PARANOIA in the Jews regarding how the rest of the world feels about them, and a parallel sense THAT WAR WITH THE PALESTINIANS (AND INDEED THE ENTIRE ISLAMIC COMMUNITY) IS INEVITABLE. The very real fact of the matter is, Israel's back is up against the wall, and so much so that Jewish historian Amos Elon writes:

"I'M IN SUCH DESPAIR BECAUSE I FEAR IT IS TOO LATE. AND I HAVE ONLY TOLD YOU HALF OF WHAT I FEAR."

But the Bible says:

"And it shall come to pass, that as ye were a curse among the heathen, O house of Judah, and house of Israel; SO WILL I SAVE YOU, and ye shall be a blessing: fear not, but let your hands be strong.

"For thus saith the LORD of hosts; As I thought to punish you, when your fathers provoked me to wrath, saith the LORD of hosts, and I repented not:

"So again have I thought in these days to do well unto Jerusalem and to the house of Judah: FEAR YE NOT." (Zech. 8:13-15)

And so God warns Israel's enemies:

"Son of man, set thy face against mount Seir (i.e., those nations that immediately surround Israel), and prophesy against it,

"And say unto it, Thus saith the Lord GOD; Behold, O mount Seir, I AM AGAINST THEE, and I will stretch out mine hand against thee, and I will make thee most desolate.

"I will lay thy cities waste, and thou shalt be desolate, and thou shalt know that I am the LORD." (Ezek. 35:1-4)

I AM AGAINST THEE, O MOUNT SEIR

Listen brothers and sisters: it is a fearful thing for someone to hear those words from God, "I AM AGAINST THEE." There can be no more frightening thing in all the world, because we are dealing with God here. The Bible says:

"... fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him (i.e., God) which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." (Matt. 10:28)

And why is it EXACTLY that God is against Mt. Seir? The Lord explains:

"BECAUSE THOU HAS HAD A PERPETUAL HATRED (against Israel), and hast shed the blood of the children of Israel by the force of the sword ..." (Ezek. 35:5)

Now I ask you, Who is it today that has A PERPETUAL HATRED against Israel? Is it not CLEARLY those who are carrying out the suicide bombings in Jerusalem, in Tel Aviv, in Natanya, etc? SUICIDE BOMBING! - now that's hatred!

The Bible says that God is AGAINST THEM (i.e., all those who hate Israel in this way) and He will PURSUE THEM UNTO BLOOD!

Specifically, the Bible says:

"Therefore, as I live, saith the Lord GOD, I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee: sith (since) thou hast not hated blood, even blood shall pursue thee.

"Thus will I make mount Seir most desolate, and cut off from it him that passeth out and him that returneth.

"And I will fill his mountains with his slain men: in thy hills, and in thy valleys, and in all thy rivers, shall they fall that are slain with the sword.

"I will make thee perpetual desolations, and thy cities shall not return: and ye shall know that I am the LORD." (Ezek. 35:6-9)

Listen to me: you do not want to be found on the "RECEIVING" end of these verses for any reason! God is warning you! Get away, and get away fast! He is warning all those that are "round about" Israel - all those who will hear Him out on this matter - get away as quickly as possible. SOMETHING DREADFUL IS ABOUT TO HAPPEN, and you do not want to be around when it occurs.

All you believing Arabs who dwell in the vicinity of Mt. Seir, all you who believe and are "called according to His purpose," get away - and get your friends and families away too. A great calamity is coming. Something horrible is about to happen: all those who today say that Israel has no right to be where she is; all those who think that the Jewish people are trespassing on Palestinian land, you SHALL BE DESTROYED:

"I will prepare thee unto blood, and blood shall pursue thee." (Ezek. 35:6)

What's that say, then, about those who believe that Israel has no right to the so-called "West Bank?" Who say that they are going to drive Israel into the sea? Who say that Israel should negotiate with the Palestinians? Who say that Israel should give up East Jerusalem and the Temple Mount? Who hate Israel with a PERPETUAL HATRED? - it says that God -

"... will even do according to thine anger (i.e., HATRED), and according to thine envy which thou hast used out of thy HATRED against them; and I will make myself known among them, when I have judged thee." (Ezek. 35:11)

In other words, what the Bible is saying here is that God will hate these people to the degree that they have hated the Jewish people and the state of Israel.

God is going to HATE them to the degree that they hated Israel? Wow! - you say that that's not fair? - well, I tell you something, WHO ARE YOU TO SAY TO GOD WHAT'S NOT FAIR? The Bible says:

"Nay but, O man, WHO ART THOU THAT REPLIEST AGAINST GOD? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made me thus?

"Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?" (Rom. 9:20-21)

We must understand something here! HE IS THE POTTER AND WE ARE THE CLAY. There is nothing more to be said - and God help those who would dare to say otherwise and challenge God's UTTER and TOTAL supremacy and sovereignty in this matter! The Bible says:

"Who is this (i.e., man) that darkeneth counsel by words WITHOUT knowledge?

"Gird up now thy loins like a man; for I will demand of thee, and answer thou me (if you can).

"Where wast thou when I laid the foundations of the earth? declare, if thou hast understanding.

"Who hath laid the measures thereof, if thou knowest? or who hath stretched the line upon it?

"Whereupon are the foundations thereof fastened? or who laid the corner stone thereof;

"When the morning stars sang together ...?

"Or who shut up the sea with doors, when it brake forth, as if it had issued out of the womb?

"When I made the cloud the garment thereof, and thick darkness a swaddlingband for it,

"And brake up for it my decreed place, and set bars and doors,

"And said, Hitherto shalt thou come, but no further: and here shall thy proud waves be stayed?

"Hast thou commanded the morning since thy days; and caused the dayspring to know his place;

"That it might take hold of the ends of the earth, that the wicked might be shaken out of it?

"It is turned as clay to the seal; and they stand as a garment.

"And from the wicked their light is withholden, and the high arm shall be broken.

"Hast thou entered into the springs of the sea? or hast thou walked in the search of the depth?

"Have the gates of death been opened unto thee? or hast thou seen the doors of the shadow of death?

"Hast thou perceived the breadth of the earth? declare if thou knowest it all.

"Where is the way where light dwelleth? and as for darkness, where is the place thereof,

"That thou shouldest take it to the bound thereof, and that thou shouldest know the paths to the house thereof?

"Hast thou entered into the treasures of the snow? or hast thou seen the treasures of the hail,

"Canst thou bind the sweet influences of Pleiades, or loose the bands of Orion?

"Knowest thou the ordinances of heaven? canst thou set the dominion thereof in the earth?

"Shall he that contendeth with the Almighty instruct him? he that reproveth God, let him answer it.

"Then answered the LORD unto Job out of the whirlwind, and said,

"Gird up thy loins now like a man: I will demand of thee, and declare thou unto me.

"Wilt thou also disannul my judgment? wilt thou condemn me, that thou mayest be righteous?

"Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him?

"Deck thyself now with majesty and excellency; and array thyself with glory and beauty (if you can)." (Job 38-22, 31-33, 40:2, 6-9)

"DECK THYSELF NOW WITH MAJESTY AND EXCELLENCY; AND ARRAY THYSELF WITH GLORY AND BEAUTY ..." if you can?

Of course we can't!

Again, I say: He is the Potter, and we are the clay. But one should be perfectly clear here, God certainly did not choose the Jews because the they were somehow or other congenitally better than any other people on earth; or because they were a people morally superior to the people who surround them; or that they possess some kind of innate spiritual DNA that predisposes them toward God.

He chose them in order to make an open show of His MERCY - i.e., that His dealings with man are based on UNMERITED FAVOR (i.e., GRACE) and nothing else. That's what the Bible says:

"He hath not dealt with us after our sins; nor rewarded us according to our iniquities.

"For as the heaven is high above the earth, so great is his mercy toward them that fear him.

"As far as the east is from the west, so far hath he removed our transgressions from us.

"Like as a father pitieth his children, so the LORD pitieth them that fear him.

"For he knoweth our frame; he remembereth that we are dust." (Ps. 103:10-14)

And His mercy toward Israel is an OPEN and PUBLIC demonstration to that effect - a historical display of His KINDNESS and COMPASSION for ALL to see who seek after God - for the Bible says that with regard to this matter (i.e., His mercy), He is - as Peter says:

"... NO RESPECTER OF PERSONS:

"But in EVERY nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him." (Acts 10:34-35) [And the Bible goes on to explain what it means here by the word "work:" Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." (John 6:29).]

What's that mean? - it means that our relationship with God - whoever we are - is based on His mercy toward us and not on any innate righteousness on our part; that if we try to approach God on the basis of anything we can do, we will surely fail. The Bible says:

"... we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away." (Is. 64:6)

And again, the Bible says:

"As it is written, There is none righteous, no, not one:

"They are all gone out of the way, they are together become unprofitable; there is none that doeth good, no, not one." (Rom. 3:10, 12)

And so it is that we must trust in God's mercy to clothe us with His righteousness. But what assurance do we have that He will do so? For those of us who believe, we have, of course, the assurance of the Written Word:

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that WHOSOEVER (that surely includes everyone, no matter who they are or what they've done) believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

And the Bible goes on to say"

"For by GRACE (i.e., unmerited favor) ARE YE SAVED through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

"NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast." (Eph. 2:8-9)

And Israel is God's OPEN and very PUBLIC demonstration in the HISTORICAL RECORD and IN THE EVENTS OF TODAY, that God saves man on the basis of His mercy alone, and not on the basis of any righteousness we think we possess. After all, if God can remain faithful to Israel despite all that Israel has done, and all that she has failed to do, He can remain faithful to ALL those who call upon His name - and that He will fulfill ALL the promises He has made to us and bring us safely through to the end.

Contrawise, if God's promises to Israel fail on the basis of Israel's unfaithfulness, than we also stand in jeopardy of our future - for surely the church has been as unfaithful to God as Israel has been - OR HAVE YOU BEEN READING OUR MATERIAL FOR NAUGHT? The very real truth of the matter is, the church's historical record is every bit as tawdry and cheap as is Israel's, and to think otherwise is to reveal yourself as an IDIOT.

It's for this reason that those who condemn Israel because she supposedly is no different from any other nation are so wrong. While THEY ARE RIGHT that she possesses no higher innate morality than do the Palestinians, no greater virtue, no higher sense of decency and purity, they are still very wrong because THAT'S NOT THE POINT!

The point is UNMERITED FAVOR - i.e., GRACE. That's the point - and that if God can save Israel on that basis, He can also save you on that basis as well - whether you are Jew or Arab, Iranian or Turk, Russian or Chinese (China, of course, is today the home of more REAL Christians than anywhere else on earth, despite the fact of their unrelenting persecution by the Chinese government) - whoever you are! All this to say that God will surely save NATIONAL Israel, for the Scriptures say that on THAT day,

"... THEY (i.e., Israel) SHALL LOOK UPON ME WHOM THEY HAVE PIERCED (very obviously the Lord), and they shall mourn for him (i.e., Jesus), as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness (i.e., great sorrow) for him (i.e., Christ, whom they rejected), as one that is in bitterness (i.e., great sorrow) for his firstborn." (Zech. 12:8) [Please see our sidebar on the subject of "Jewish National Salvation."]

MODERN-DAY ISRAEL
AS A FLUKE OF HISTORY?

There are, of course, countless numbers of Christians today who believe that all this is hogwash! - that modern-day Israel is nothing more than a fluke of history (quite a fluke!) - and they are irritated (indeed, many appear to be quite irate) with those who believe otherwise. [Please see Chapter III of the Antipas Papers, "The Distinction Between Israel and the Church."] For example, take Texe Marrs: he finds the thought that Israel will ever again be a "fruitful nation" repugnant. He writes that people who believe the contrary "... would exalt the Jews as a superior race - as God's ETERNAL chosen people." [Please see our side article on Texe Marrs.] This is evidently what the Presbyterian and Reformed Churches of America believe too; a statement from these groups to that effect reads,

"... God’s promises to Israel were conditional. Dispensationalists* [i.e., those who believe that God is not finished with Israel (see below)] … greatly err in teaching that God … gave Israel a blank check … They teach that God’s promises to national Israel are binding upon God regardless of what Israel does or does not do. This doctrine is based upon a very shallow interpretation of isolated verses of Scripture.

"… THE CRUCIFIXION WAS ISRAEL'S MOST HEINOUS CRIME AGAINST GOD. It was at this point - their treatment of the Messiah - that Israel failed the most miserably to keep the conditions laid down in God’s promise to her.

"… WHAT WAS THE PENALTY FOR ISRAEL'S FAILURE TO MEET THE CONDITIONS LAID DOWN BY JEHOVAH, AND WHICH CLIMAXED IN HER HEINOUS TREATMENT OF THE MESSIAH? ... GOD WITHDREW HIS PRESENCE FROM ISRAEL AS A NATION. THE JEWISH STATE CAME TO A BITTER END IN A.D. 70. NOR WILL NATIONAL ISRAEL EVER AGAIN BE A FRUITFUL NATION.

"... There is no Scriptural basis for the REGRESSIVE idea that God’s dealing will again be centered ... in natural Israel at some future date."

* The term, "DISPENSATIONALISM" has taken on a decidedly negative hue among evangelicals in recent years - especially among those who feel that the church should exert itself more powerfully politically than it has in the past in order to brake the descent of American society into immorality and cultural chaos. The reason for this is quite easily explained: dispensationalism makes the church's entry into the political arena almost impossible to justify from a theological standpoint. Yet, if anything can characterize the church's self-appointed mission today, it is this: the necessity of Christians to "take back America for Christ and the church." Thus, THE DISREPUTE INTO WHICH THE CONCEPT OF DISPENSATIONALISM HAS FALLEN IN RECENT YEARS HAS MORE TO DO WITH "CHURCH POLITICS" THAN WITH THEOLOGY.

Regressive idea? Failure? Heinous Crime? - these are certainly harsh judgments!

But the very real fact of the matter is, there is a SCRIPTURAL basis for that belief - i.e., THAT GOD IS NOT FINISHED WITH ISRAEL; THAT THE PRESENT-DAY NATION OF ISRAEL IS NO FLUKE OF HISTORY, AND THAT GOD'S PROMISES TO ISRAEL REGARDING HER POSSESSION OF THE HOLY LAND ARE ETERNAL AND WILL NOT FAIL. A simple reading of the Scriptures will make plain the fact.

The reality is, Israel's claim to the Holy Land rests on a series of UNCONDITIONAL and ETERNAL covenants that God made with the Jewish people, and these covenants and promises are as REAL and UNCONDITIONAL and ETERNAL as the ones that He has given to us. If we once grasp the UNCONDITIONAL and ETERNAL nature of these promises - and appreciate how they are being worked out before our very eyes in the events of today, we will never again have reason to doubt God or to doubt His ability to save. As the Bible says:

"What shall we then say to these things? If God be for us, who can be against us?

"He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things?

"Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? IT IS GOD THAT JUSTIFIETH.

"Who is he that condemneth? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us.

"Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword?

"Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.

"For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,

"Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom. 8:31-35, 37-39)

[Again, please see Chapter III of the Antipas Papers, "The Distinction Between Israel and the Church for a fuller explanation of these promises.]

Charles F. Lincoln defines what the word "covenant" means insofar as it is used in the Bible:

"A divine covenant is (1) a sovereign disposition of God, whereby He establishes an UNCONDITIONAL or declarative compact with man, obligating Himself in grace, by the untrammeled formula, 'I WILL', to bring to pass of Himself definite blessings for the covenanted ones, or (2) a proposal of God, wherein He promises, in a CONDITIONAL or mutual compact with man, by the contingent formula 'IF YE WILL', to grant special blessings to man provided he (man) fulfills perfectly certain conditions, and to execute definite punishments in case of his (man’s) failure.

Four of the covenants that God made with Israel are UNCONDITIONAL - i.e., (1) the "Abrahamic Covenant," (2) the "Palestinian Covenant," (3) the "Davidic Covenant," and finally, (4) the "New Covenant." Only one of God's covenants with Israel is CONDITIONAL: the "Mosaic Covenant" - and the Mosaic Covenant was given to Israel for one reason, and one reason only: to prove that there is NOTHING any of us can do in and of ourselves to merit (or deserve) God's favor.

Unlike the conditional covenant (i.e., the Mosaic Covenant) the UNCONDITIONAL covenants depend ALONE on the Giver of those covenants for their fulfillment. Those things which were promised in these covenants depend EXCLUSIVELY on the sovereignty of the One who gave them, and they were conferred on Israel on the basis of the authority and integrity of God TOTALLY apart from the merit or response of Israel - and, again, it is precisely here that those who try to differentiate between Israel and the nations who are contending with Israel over ownership of the Holy Land are making such a HUGE mistake. God never granted Israel title to the Holy Land on the basis of Israel's merit, but SOLELY on the basis of His sovereign will.

Three additional points should be noted: FIRST, God's covenants with Israel are LITERAL. G.N.H. Peters writes:

"In all earthly transactions, when a promise, agreement, or a contract is entered into by which one party gives a promise of value to another, it is universally the custom to explain such a relationship and its promises by the well-known laws of language contained in our grammar or in common usage. It would be regarded absurd ... to view them in any other way ... The very nature of a covenant demands that it should be so worded, so plainly expressed, that it conveys a decisive meaning, and not a hidden or mystical one that requires many centuries to resolve in order to develop."

SECOND, THERE IS ONLY ONE NATION THAT GOD HAS EVER COVENANTED WITH - ISRAEL; NO GENTILE NATION (INCLUDING THE UNITED STATES) HAS EVER RECEIVED A DIVINE COVENANT FROM GOD. J. Dwight Pentecost writes:

"Finally, these covenants were made with a covenant people, Israel. In Romans 9:4 Paul states that the nation of Israel had received covenants from the Lord. In Ephesians 2:11-12 he states, conversely, that the Gentiles have not received any such covenants and consequently do not enjoy covenant relationships with God. These passages show us, negatively, that the Gentile (nations) were (and are) without covenant relationships (with God) and, positively, that God had entered into covenant relationships with Israel."

THIRD, it should be noted that THE UNCONDITIONAL COVENANTS MADE BY GOD WITH THE JEWISH PEOPLE ARE ETERNAL. In other words, they will NOT pass away. Lincoln writes:

"ALL of Israel’s covenants are called eternal except the Mosaic Covenant which is declared to be temporal, i.e., it was to continue only until the ... (advent of a better covenant - the New Covenant). For this detail see as follows: (1) the Abrahamic Covenant is called ‘eternal’ in Genesis 17:7, 13, 19; I Chronicles 16:17; Psalm 105:10; (2) the Palestinian Covenant is called ‘eternal’ in Ezekiel 16:20; the Davidic Covenant is called ‘eternal’ in II Samuel 23:5; Isaiah 55:3; and Ezekiel 37:25; and (4) the New Covenant is called ‘eternal’ in Isaiah 24:5; 61:8; Jeremiah 32:40; 50:5; and Hebrews 13:20."

As we just indicated, their are four different and separate UNCONDITIONAL and ETERNAL Covenants that God made with Israel - specifically: (1) the "Abrahamic Covenant," (2) the "Palestinian Covenant," (3) the "Davidic Covenant," and (4) the "New Covenant." All these covenant were declared to be ETERNAL and UNCONDITIONAL and all of them granted or re-affirmed Israel's title to the Holy Land.

The Abrahamic Covenant is the first of the four great ETERNAL and UNCONDITIONAL covenants made by God with the Jewish people (Genesis 12:1-3; 26:1-5; 28:10-15). It forms the basis for the remaining three. It contains seven promises:

(1) "I WILL MAKE OF THEE A GREAT NATION."

(2) "I WILL BLESS THEE."

(3) "AND MAKE THY NAME GREAT."

(4) "AND THOU SHALT BE A BLESSING."

(5) "I WILL BLESS THEM THAT BLESS THEE."

(6) "AND CURSE THEM THAT CURSE THEE."

(7) "AND IN THEE SHALL ALL THE FAMILIES OF THE EARTH BE BLESSED."

In the closing chapters of the Book of Deuteronomy, the children of Israel faced a crisis in their national existence (Deuteronomy 28-30). They were about to pass from the proven leadership of Moses to the unproven leadership of Joshua. They were standing at the entrance to the land that was promised to them by God. BUT THIS LAND WAS POSSESSED BY ISRAEL’S SWORN ENEMIES who had shown that they would resist any attempt by Israel to enter the land promised them. [WHICH IS PRECISELY WHAT ISRAEL IS FACED WITH TODAY.]

It was impossible for them to return to their former status as a slave nation, and the land to which they were journeying seemed shut before them. [And once again, this is exactly the situation that the Jewish people confront today in the Holy Land. They are caught between the "devil and the deep blue sea." Where will they go? They can't go back to the lands that drove them out in the first place - i.e., to Germany, to France, to Russia, to Iraq, to Libya, to Yemen, etc., and the Palestinians are bent on their destruction. What are they to do? - the parallel between "then" and "now" is total.] As a result, many of them doubted the efficacy of the original ABRAHAMIC COVENANT. Had the inauguration of the MOSAIC COVENANT, which all agreed was CONDITIONAL, set aside the UNCONDITIONAL ABRAHAMIC COVENANT, the promises of which were now in doubt? To answer these important questions, God stated again His covenant promise concerning Israel’s possession of and inheritance in the Land of Palestine.

The PALESTINIAN COVENANT promised the following:

(1) It reaffirmed title to Israel of the land of promise.

(2) It substantiated to Israel the fact that the introduction of the TEMPORAL and "CONDITIONAL" MOSAIC COVENANT had not set aside the UNCONDITIONAL and ETERNAL promises of the ABRAHAMIC COVENANT.

(3) It enlarged the boundaries of the promised land given in the ABRAHAMIC COVENANT.

In addition, THE PALESTINIAN COVENANT contained certain statements:

(1) That the nation would be punished because of its unfaithfulness vis-à-vis the MOSAIC COVENANT (Deut. 28:63-68).

(2) That Israel would be eventually restored to the land of promise after an as yet future dispersion among the Gentile nations (Deut. 30:5).

(3) That Messiah would come (Deut. 30:3-6).

(4) That there would be a future repentance of Israel (Deut. 30:1-3).

(5) That Israel would embrace Messiah as a nation (Deut. 30:4-8; cf. Rom. 11:26-27).

(6) That Israel’s enemies would be judged (Deut. 30:7).

(7) That the nation would receive her full and eternal blessing (Deut. 30:9).

Again, it is interesting to note that the exact conditions which prevailed at the time wherein the PALESTINIAN COVENANT was given, prevail again today. We do well to stand with Israel despite increasingly shrill calls by Israel's enemies to the contrary; it is a fearful thing to be found fighting against the God of Israel for ANY reason.

These promises made by God to Israel are contained in II Samuel 7:12-16. The historic background of the DAVIDIC COVENANT is well known. Inasmuch as David had come to power and authority in the kingdom and now dwelt in a house of cedar, it seemed incongruous that the One from whom he derived his authority and government should dwell in a house of skins - a tent. It was David’s intention to build a suitable dwelling place for God. But because he had been a man of war, David was not permitted to build this house. However, God made certain promises to David concerning the perpetuity of his house. These promises pertained to the eternal nature of:

(1) David’s House.

(2) David’s Kingdom.

(3) David’s Throne.

John Walvoord, past president of Dallas Theological Seminary, writes:

"What do the major terms of the (DAVIDIC) covenant mean? By ‘David’s House’ it can hardly be doubted that reference is made to David’s posterity, his physical descendants. It is assured that they will never be slain in toto, nor displaced by another family entirely.

"The line of David will always be the royal line. By the term ‘throne’ it is clear that no reference is made to a material throne, but rather to the dignity and power which was sovereign and supreme in David as king. The right to rule always belonged to David’s seed. By the term ‘kingdom’ there is reference to David’s political kingdom over Israel.

"By the expression ‘forever’ it is signified that the Davidic authority and the Davidic kingdom or rule over Israel shall never be transferred to another family, and its arrangement is designed for eternal perpetuity. Whatever its changing form, temporary interruptions, or chastisements, the line of David will always have the right to rule over Israel and will, in fact, exercise this privilege."

As with the PALESTINIAN COVENANT, certain prophetic implications resulted which naturally followed from the provisions of the DAVIDIC COVENANT:

(1) Israel must be preserved as a nation.

(2) Israel must be brought back into the land of her inheritance (including not just her 1948 boundaries, but also the so-called West Bank, the whole city of Jerusalem, and much of present day Jordan, southern Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, etc.

(3) David’s "Seed," the Lord Jesus Christ, must return to the earth bodily to reign over David’s promised kingdom.

(4) A literal earthly kingdom must be constituted over which Messiah will reign. Peters writes: "The fulfillment of the covenant promises implies, in view of this restored Davidic throne and kingdom, that the Messianic Kingdom is to be a visible, external kingdom, not merely a spiritual one ..."

(5) This kingdom must become an eternal kingdom.

The NEW COVENANT as stated in Jeremiah 31:31-34 guarantees to Israel what the temporal and conditional MOSAIC COVENANT could never accomplish - a converted heart as the foundation of all her blessings:

"Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a NEW COVENANT WITH THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL AND WITH THE HOUSE OF JUDAH: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them out of the land of Egypt (the MOSAIC COVENANT); which covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with THE HOUSE OF ISRAEL; after those days (i.e., the "last days") saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbor, and every man his brother, saying Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more." (Jeremiah 31:31-34)

Ryrie writes:

"The NEW COVENANT promises:

(1) "An UNCONDITIONAL, grace covenant resting on the ‘I WILL’ of God. The frequency of the phrase in Jeremiah 31:31-34 is striking (cf. Ezekiel 16:60-62).

(2) "An EVERLASTING covenant. This is closely related to the fact that it is UNCONDITIONAL and made in grace ... (Isa. 61:2; cf. Ezek. 37:26; Jer. 3135-37).

(3) "The impartation of a renewed mind and heart which we may call regeneration ... (Jer. 31:33; cf. Isa 59:21).

(4) "Restoration to the favor and blessing of God ... (Hos. 2:19-20; cf. Isa. 61:9).

(5) "Forgiveness of sin: ‘... for I WILL remove their iniquity, and I WILL remember their sins no more’ (Jer. 31:34).

(6) "The indwelling of the Holy Spirit. This is seen by comparing Jeremiah 31:33 with Ezekiel 36:27.

(7) "The teaching ministry of the Holy Spirit will be manifested and the will of God will be known by obedient hearts ... (Jer. 31:34).

(8) "As is always the case when Israel is in the land, she will be blessed materially in accordance with the provisions of the NEW COVENANT ... (Jer. 32:41; Isa. 61:8; Ezekiel 34:25-27).

(9) "The sanctuary will be rebuilt in Jerusalem, for it is written, ‘ ... I will set my sanctuary in the midst of them for evermore. My tabernacle also shall be with them'. (Ezek. 37:26-27a)

(10) "War shall cease and peace shall reign according to Hosea 2:18. The fact that this is also a definite characteristic of the Millennium (Isa. 2:4) further supports the fact that the NEW COVENANT is Millennial in its fulfillment.

(11) "The blood of the Lord Jesus Christ is the foundation of all the blessings of the NEW COVENANT, for ‘by the blood of THY COVENANT I have sent forth thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water’. (Zech. 9:11)

Ryrie continues:

"By way of summary, it may be said that as far as the "Old Testament" teaching on the NEW COVENANT is concerned, the covenant was made with the JEWISH PEOPLE. Its period of fulfillment is yet future, beginning when the Deliverer shall come and continuing throughout all eternity. Its provisions for the nation of Israel are glorious, and they all rest ... (solely) on the WORD OF GOD." [Please see our side article, "The Church Cannot Disinherit Israel of Her Promises from God."]

THE PROBLEM WITH THESE PROMISES AS THEY RELATE TO ISRAEL, HOWEVER, IS THAT THE ISRAELIS SIMPLY DON'T BELIEVE THEM. They have no trust in them. They have no faith in the One who gave them; so they are unable to appropriate them. The promises are there! They're real. But to make them operative on their behalf, the Israelis must reach out and take them.

Israel's situation today with regard to all it faces in the Middle East is analogous to a man who is getting ready to be evicted from his home for non-payment of the mortgage without realizing that he has inherited a fortune, and it is waiting down at the bank for him to come and claim it. He received a letter to that effect several weeks ago, but he thinks its all just a prank. Meanwhile, he is running around all over town to find someone he can borrow the money from. He thinks he has found someone. The money is being offered at a RUINOUS rate of interest, but what choice does he have? - so he accepts the money.

But it's "Mafia" money and there is going to be hell to pay for it! - AND THAT IS PRECISELY WHAT ISRAEL HAS DONE BY TURNING TO THE UNITED STATES FOR HELP! That's what's happening today in the Middle East! The United States has its own fish to fry in the region, and its going to make Israel fry those fish for it. That's what happens when you borrow money from the "mob" - when you can't pay the money back, you are reduced to bondage in the "mob's" service. The Bible says:

"The rich ruleth over the poor, and the BORROWER IS THE SERVANT OF THE LENDER." (Prov. 22:7)

Exactly how close this perverse relationship has drawn the United States and Israel together is attested to by the seeming Carte Blanche that President Bush has given Ariel Sharon to do whatever he wants in his war against the Palestinian terrorists - even in the face of overwhelming opposition against Sharon and the so-called "Israeli occupation of Palestine" that has seized hold of the rest of the world.

Yes, to be sure, Bush has told Sharon to pull back his forces on the West Bank - and he has even said, "I mean it." But there was no "or else" attached to his "I mean it," and the circuitous route that Colin Powell, Bush's secretary of state, took several weeks ago to get to the Middle East seems to indicate that Bush was trying to "buy" as much time as he can for Sharon to complete his job rooting out the terrorists on the West Bank and Gaza.

One thing's for sure: there is a lot of "winking" and "nodding" going on between Bush and Sharon - enough to give the impression that while it is obligatory on Bush to appear from time to time as if he were yanking on Sharon's leash a little, the overall notion one gets is that Bush has given Sharon leave to do pretty much what he wants. And insofar as all the yelping and howls of protest from his feeble counterparts in the fifteen nation European Community, the Middle East and elsewhere in the world to do more to rein Israel in - they seem to be rolling off Bush like water off a duck's back.

THIS ISN'T WHAT WAS SUPPOSED TO HAPPEN - WHICH SUGGESTS THAT SOMETHING MAY BE AFOOT BETWEEN ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD DOESN'T HAVE A CLUE ABOUT; that an intersection of interests and purposes between the two has taken place at the highest levels of government - one that is irresistibly pulling both countries together, and propelling them down the road to what they believe will be the "FINAL SOLUTION" to their problems in the Middle East: ALL OUT WAR, not only against the Palestinians, but against the entire Arab and Islamic world.

Most so-called "experts" had predicted that America's "War on Terrorism" would drive Israel and the United States apart, not together; that the United States, in its effort to build a large regional and global coalition - especially as its "War on Terrorism" might pertain to Iraq - would be forced to recognize that its relations with the Arab world would be shaped by its role in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict; that the United States would have to take a more "even-handed" approach to the struggle - which, when translated, means a more pro-Palestinian approach. After all, it seems - at least on the face of it - that asking Arab governments and societies to embrace U.S. foreign policy would require that the United States be seen as engaged in a serious effort to address the plight of the Palestinian people.

As both Ibish and Abunimah say,

"... U.S. policy toward the Arab world must contain affirmative elements. The U.S. cannot sustain common cause with Arab societies if it continues to oppose Palestinian independence and an end to the Israeli military occupation of East Jerusalem, the West Bank and the Gaza strip."

BUT WHAT IF THE UNITED STATES HAS COME TO SEE THAT IT HAS NO REAL FRIENDS LEFT IN THE MIDDLE EAST; THAT ITS EXTREMELY AVARICIOUS AND PREDATORY ECONOMIC POLICIES TOWARD THE PEOPLE OF THAT AREA OF THE WORLD HAVE AT LAST BORNE FRUIT IN A HARVEST OF RAGE AGAINST IT; THAT IT HAS BY NOW SO ALIENATED PEOPLE IN THAT REGION IN ITS GREED TO PUMP OIL OUT OF ARAB LANDS, THAT THE "ARAB STREET" IS NOW FORCING AMERICA'S "CLIENT-STATE" GOVERNMENTS IN THE AREA TO TURN AGAINST IT. WHAT ABOUT THAT? - that is, after all, what happened in Iran where a militant Islam there was directed almost solely against the United States, and where interest in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict played hardly any role at all. [Please see "The Coming War In The Middle East."]

What if the specter of militant Islamic fundamentalism has finally awakened the oil elites in the United States to the fact that they (and not just Israel) are also in REAL and very GRAVE danger of losing out in the Middle East? That they could very well see their billions and billions (even trillions) of dollars in "investments" there seized by "POPULISTS" under the banner of militant Islam? That most of the U.S. "client-state" governments there are about ready to "go the way" of the Shah? That the people in the region have at last caught on to what the U.S. has been doing to them for generations: ROBBING THEM BLIND OF THEIR OIL WEALTH? What about that?

The sight of the rulers of Kuwait and Saudi Arabia embracing Saddam Hussein's henchmen at the Arab summit in Beirut a few weeks ago (and all that such a thing might portend for the future of their investments there) could not have been lost on Washington. Neither did it escape their attention that King Abdullah of Jordan and President Mubarak of Egypt both declined to attend the Beirut summit out of fear that in their absence from Amman and Cairo respectively, Islamic militants could use the opportunity to instigate street riots and even a revolt against them. All this suggests that America's "client-state" elites in the Middle East hold a very tenuous grip on power; that they no longer are in control of events, and are - as a result - in grave danger of being overthrown. Then where would the United States be?

Such things cannot but weigh heavily on the minds of American government officials these days - especially in light of the fact that almost every member of the Bush Administration is a card-carrying member of America's oil elite with HUGE personal investments in the area at risk; cut them off from their source of funds - i.e., the oil revenues pouring into their coffers from the Middle East - and the power these people wield would dry up and quickly wither away. In this country, MONEY MEANS POWER. Lose your money and you will lose your power; it's as simple as that!

Some might object to this analysis. Most people think that war for the United States and Israel in the Middle East is simply unwinnable; that if, perchance, Israel and the United States are pushing for this kind of solution - i.e., all out war - Israel is in danger of bringing on its own destruction, and the United States runs the very real risk of getting involved in a guerrilla war that would make Vietnam look like a cakewalk.

After all, their Islamic opponents not only do not recoil from death, they embrace it as martyrs - and terrorism wielded by the hands of people like that is surely something to make people think twice about. What would happen to the Israeli and American armies in vast, built-up urban areas like Baghdad, Cairo, Beirut, Amman, Teheran, and so forth when confronted there by guerrillas in street to street, and building to building fighting? - their soldiers would certainly be slaughtered just as surely as they were in Mogadishu in Somalia.

ISRAEL AND THE UNITED STATES
ARE CONSIDERING TOTAL WAR

But people who think like that do not appreciate the kind of war that Israel and the United States may be contemplating: TOTAL WAR on a scale not seen since the end of World War II: the kind of war where whole cities are leveled to the ground, where not one building is left standing; and where whole populations are mercilessly slaughtered: the kind of war that was waged against Dresden, Berlin, Munich, Tokyo and - yes - even HIROSHIMA and NAGASAKI. [Please see "The Revolution In Military Affairs."]

Be clear - be ABSOLUTELY clear here: THE U.S. AND ISRAEL CAN WIN THAT KIND OF WAR. All it takes on their part is the stomach to wage it. And after 18 months of unrelenting terrorist attacks that only seem to get worse and worse, Israel is clearly acquiring a stomach for EXACTLY that kind of warfare, and the U.S., for altogether different reasons, is very close to letting Israel do so - or how else can one explain the seeming Carte Blanche that the United States has granted Israel in its war against the Palestinians?

And, again, make no mistake about it - that's EXACTLY what the U.S. has granted Israel, all of America's posturing to the contrary, and all of Bush's demands that Israel withdraw from the "occupied areas" notwithstanding. It's all show, and very little reality. That's certainly what most in Europe and the Middle East think. That's precisely what King Mohammed VI of Morocco told U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell when he visited him in Casablanca. The very real fact of the matter is, America and Israel are "in bed" with each other insofar as what is happening in the Middle East.

No doubt, the reason that each country would have for waging TOTAL WAR in the Middle East would be different: the Israelis, because they fear for their national existence, and even for their very lives; the Americans (or, more accurately, the American elites) because they fear for their investments - and it's precisely here that one can at last begin to discern the real relationship between Israel and the United States: the U.S. is in the "driver's seat" because when one fears for his or her very life, ONE IS MORE WILLING TO STRIKE A BARGAIN WITH THE DEVIL; specifically, Israel may be more willing than usual to be USED as America's "cat's paw" in its (America's) struggle to maintain access to the oil wealth of the Middle East. [Please see "The Real Enemy Of Israel: It's Not Who You Think!"]

BEATING THE WAR DRUMS

The very real fact of the matter is, the American oil elites are desperate to save their investments in the Middle East and Central Asia - and, as a result, the elite press has been beating the war drums against militant Islam for some time now, and serving up pictures on a never-ending basis on CNN, FOX, PBS, NBC, ABC, and CBS of the twin towers of the World Trade Center crashing down in New York City. The not too subtle message behind all this, of course, is that militant Islam needs to be DESTROYED before it can destroy us - never mind the fact that Islam is bereft of any nuclear bombs, while the U.S. possesses enough nuclear warheads to destroy the nations of the Middle East a thousand times over; and, of course, forget the fact that the U.S. has been robbing the people of the Middle East blind of their God-given oil wealth for generations now while most of the people in the region barely scrape by on pennies a day.

But the U.S. elites don't want you to know about that - i.e., about how HATED America is in the Middle East (and the reasons why it is so hated) - and they have done everything in their power to obscure these facts from the American people - though the elites themselves have very little doubt as to that matter any longer. They know very well what Islamic fundamentalism's main target is! - i.e., who the "GREAT SATAN" is: it's the United States, not Israel. [Please see "The Caucasus Mountains, And Chevron Oil."]

Indeed, it is impossible to over-emphasize the fact that when Islamic fundamentalism FIRST surfaced in Iran, it had very little to do with what was happening between Israel and the Palestinians, and everything to do with the thieving ways of the American oil elite. Israel hardly registered as a blip on the radar screens of the Iranian mullahs. The U.S. was the main target - and while Israel now registers pretty near the top of Islamic fundamentalism's target list, THERE CAN BE LITTLE DOUBT THAT SHOULD ISLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM SWEEP THE MIDDLE EAST, THE OIL ELITES IN THE UNITED STATES ARE GOING TO PAY A VERY STEEP PRICE INDEED.

And this is where Israel comes in. Israel is America's FORCE OF LAST RESORT if all else fails in the Middle East. It isn't as if the U.S. is through playing its duplicitous games in the Middle East with its "client-state" governments in the area - i.e., Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc., it's just if that game is lost, the U.S. can still play its "TRUMP CARD" in the area: Israel.

If, "God forbid," despite all of America's efforts to contain the genie of Islamic fundamentalism, which it - more than any other country - is responsible for uncorking on the world, it (i.e. Islamic fundamentalism) sweeps the Middle East and Central Asia anyway, America - contrary to what a lot of very naive pundits in Europe and this country think - is not going to fold up its tents and quietly steal away in the night. THEY WILL FIGHT! - AND THE ARMY THEY INTEND TO USE IS THE ISRAELI ARMY. The poor Israelis! - they think to use the United States for their purposes, but it's the U.S. that is going to use Israel for its purposes. That's what happens when one strikes a deal with the devil.

The Bible calls this agreement - i.e., Israel's "deal" to be America's "cat's paw" in the Middle East - HER (i.e., Israel's) "COVENANT WITH DEATH;" AND HER "AGREEMENT WITH HELL!" [Please see Chapter VI of the Antipas Papers, "The Gog/Magog War"] - AND IT IS PRECISELY THIS AGREEMENT THAT WILL PRECIPITATE ALL THE EVENTS OF THE TRIBULATION PERIOD - DANIEL'S SEVENTIETH WEEK! Specifically, the Bible says:

"And he [i.e., the "King of Babylon" - please see our article, "In Search of Babylon; What do the Scriptures Say?"] shall confirm the covenant with many (Israel) for one week (seven years): and in the midst of the week (after three and a half years) he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate." (Dan. 9:27a) [Please see Chapter V of the Antipas Papers, "Understanding the Book of Revelation" for a "time line" for the Tribulation Period."]

The living Bible translates this passage thus:

"This king [Antichrist - please see Chapter XIII of the Antipas Papers, "Anti-Christ, King of Babylon."] will make a seven year TREATY with the people [Israel], but after half that time, he will break his pledge and stop the Jews from all their sacrifices and their offerings; then as a climax to all his terrible deeds, the enemy [Antichrist] shall utterly defile the sanctuary of God [which is to say, he shall commit the Abomination of Desolation]." (Daniel 9:27a LB)

J. Dwight Pentecost writes:

"According to Daniel 9:26-27 the prince of the Roman empire (i.e., the West, called Babylon) will make a covenant with Israel for a seven year period. This covenant evidently ... guarantees Israel’s integrity [is a defense pact] ... [and] also is a Satanic imitation of the fulfillment of the Abrahamic covenant [see Chapter III of the Antipas Papers, "The Distinction Between Israel and the Church" - specifically that section that deals with the promises of God to Israel.] which ... [guaranteed] Israel title deed to the land. This action is pictured by John [in the Apocalypse] (Rev. 16:2) as a rider going forth to conquer [as the first horseman in the Apocalypse] ... This condition exists for three and one-half years, after which the covenant is broken by the ... [Antichrist]."

One of the most eminent scholars on "Last Things," Sir Robert Anderson, says that the signing of this treaty will signify the beginning of the Seventieth Week - i.e., the "Tribulation Period!" Anderson writes:

"... the Seventieth Week [the seven year period of the Tribulation] will be a definite period of time, of which the beginning, the middle, and the end are definitely marked [by certain well defined events (please see chart #2, in Chapter V of the Antipas Papers, "Understanding the Book of Revelation")]. [Just as the beginning of the first sixty-nine weeks were signified] ... not by the return of the Jews from Babylon, nor yet by the rebuilding of their Temple, but by the SIGNING OF THE PERSIAN DECREE [TREATY] which restored ... [them], so also the beginning of the Seventieth Week will date not from their restoration to Judea [May 14, 1948], nor yet from the future rebuilding of their shrine, but from the SIGNING OF THE [DEFENSE] TREATY BY THE COMING PRINCE [ANTICHRIST]."

BUT THE UNITED STATES IS NOT ISRAEL'S FRIEND! The fact is, the Bible calls the country with whom Israel has covenanted with here (i.e., the United States) an "OVERFLOWING SCOURGE." Pretty heavy! - and it warns Israel that this "overflowing scourge" will eventually BETRAY it:

"... your covenant with death shall be disannulled, and your agreement with hell shall not stand; when the OVERFLOWING SCOURGE shall pass through, THEN YE SHALL BE TRODDEN DOWN BY IT." (Is. 28:18) ["Overflowing scourge?" - this is certainly a pretty good description of the United States: just ask the peoples and nations of the world that the U.S. had reduced to "client-state" status - for example, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Venezuela, Brazil, Ecuador, Guatemala, Zaire - the list is endless.]

SO, ISRAEL IS WARNED: "You have covenanted with death, and you have made an agreement with hell, and you will be betrayed by those you have covenanted with."

Nonetheless, Israel persists in its desire for such a treaty - and, in the end, it will no doubt get what it wants, PROBABLY UNDER THE PRETENSE OF GUARANTEEING A PEACE WITH THE PALESTINIANS.

Concerning such a treaty as it would relate to peace in the Middle East, Newsweek writes:

"Even if those Palestinians who sign a 'final' agreement have no afterthoughts, no one can guarantee that they will not be replaced by radical successors. A peace agreement will not quell but may stimulate the intransigence of Hamas and other radical groups or states. If, as is asserted, Arafat cannot be asked to accept a permanent cease-fire as an entrance price into negotiations because his radical opponents would have a veto, why would not the same condition apply after a peace settlement? Thus the differences between a permanent and an interim settlement are more a matter of adjectives than substance. NATO ... or other third-party guarantees (i.e., guarantees from the EC or the UN) are of marginal utility in overcoming this problem.

"Nobody can seriously believe that the European countries would go to war for Israel, especially against challenges that are likely to be ambiguous. THE ONLY POSSIBLE SOLUTION WOULD BE AN AMERICAN GUARANTEE AGAINST INVASION FROM NEIGHBORING STATES ..."

But this is EXACTLY what the prophet is warning Israel against: such a guarantee is an affront to God; an abomination; IT IS ISRAEL PLAYING THE HARLOT WITH THE UNITED STATES.

Nonetheless, the Bible says that God will fight for Israel despite Israel's unfaithfulness; the Scriptures tell us:

"... LET GOD BE TRUE, though every man (be found out to be) a liar ..." (Rom. 3:4)

Specifically, insofar as this great war is concerned, the Bible says:

"... Thus saith the Lord GOD; I do NOT this (i.e., fight for you) for YOUR sakes, O house of Israel, but for MINE holy name's sake, WHICH YE HAVE PROFANED among the heathen, whither ye went." (Ezek. 36:22)

In other words, God has a purpose in this matter (i.e., insofar as this great war is concerned) that both encompasses and at the same time transcends Israel: and that purpose is to prove His faithfulness. If God can be faithful to faithless Israel, He can surely be faithful to all of us, regardless of who we are or what we have done. God is faithful; again, the Bible says:

"... LET GOD BE TRUE, though every man (be found out to be) a liar ... (Rom. 3:4)

And so God warns all those who oppose Israel - those who dwell in the lands "round about" her (i.e., in the regions of Mount Seir), who honor God, but who dwell in the midst of Israel's enemies; the warning to you is: GET OUT - AND DO SO QUICKLY; there is very little time left! The Lord is about ready to SANCTIFY His great name, and you are advised to get out of the way while there is still time. The Bible says:

"... I will sanctify my great name ... and the heathen shall know that I am the LORD ... when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes." (Ezek. 36:23)

And one is making a great mistake in making light of this warning! - Christian or non-Christian; believer or non-believer. The warning is: Get away, and get away as soon as you can!

The details of the Gog/Magog war are given in chapters 38 and 39 of the Book of Ezekiel; in Daniel 11:40-45; in Matthew 24:4-21; and finally in Revelation 12 [Please see Chapter VI of the Antipas Papers, "The Gog/Magog War," for a detailed description of this war.] A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING OF THIS GREAT STRUGGLE CAN ONLY EMERGE AFTER ALL THESE VERSES ARE PIECED TOGETHER.

The Bible says that in "the LATTER YEARS" (cf. Daniel 11:40 and Ezekiel 38:8) Israel will find herself surrounded by a group of nations who possess a PERPETUAL HATRED" against her (Ezek 35:5), and who have covenanted together to destroy her "... by the force of the sword ..." (Ezek. 35:5). [Please see our side article, "The Gog/Magog War as Differentiated from Armageddon."]

The Bible carefully lists these nations: essentially, nations, tribes and peoples who nowadays inhabit that portion of the Islamic world which stretches in the form of a great arc from the Caucuses Mountains in the north, southward through Iran, Iraq, Syria, etc., and then westward along the northern rim of Africa (Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco, etc.). [We URGE you to see our side article on this subject, "Old Thinking vs. New Thinking Regarding the Participants in the Gog/Magog War" - especially as this old thinking impacts Russia's supposed involvement in it.]

That it will be a MASSIVE invasion is clearly foretold by Ezekiel where the Lord speaks through the prophet to the remarkable angelic prince (kosmokrater) in charge of the army: GOG. The Bible says:

"... Behold, I AM AGAINST THEE, O GOG ...

"... I will bring thee (i.e., "Gog") forth, and all thine army, horses and horsemen, all of them clothed with all sorts of armour, even a great company with bucklers and shields, all of them handling swords:

"Persia, Ethiopia, and Libya with them; all of them with shield and helmet:

"Gomer, and all his bands; the house of Togarmah of the north quarters, and all his bands: and many people with thee.

"Be thou (i.e., Gog") prepared, and prepare for thyself, thou, and all thy company that are assembled unto thee, and be thou a guard unto them.

"After many days thou shalt be visited (i.e., visited by God): in the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people (i.e., Israel), against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste: but it is brought forth out of the nations ...

"Thou shalt ascend and come like a storm, thou shalt be like a cloud to cover the land, thou, and all thy bands, and many people with thee.

"To take a spoil, and to take a prey; to turn thine hand upon the desolate places that are now inhabited, and upon the people that are gathered out of the nations (again, Israel), which have gotten cattle and goods, that dwell in the midst of the land.

"And thou shalt come up against my people of Israel, as a cloud to cover the land; it shall be in the LATTER DAYS, and I will bring thee against my land, that the heathen may know me, when I shall be sanctified in thee, O Gog, before their eyes." (Ezek. 38:3-9, 12, 16)

"... Behold, I am AGAINST thee, O Gog ... (Ezek. 38:3) Listen to me, dear brothers and sisters in the Lord: again I warn you, it is a fearful thing to be found opposing God insofar as Israel is concerned. You will surely live to regret it. SOMETHING DREADFUL WILL HAPPEN TO YOU! - and not only to you, but to all those - Christian and non-Christian like - who today take sides against Israel insofar as the Holy Land is concerned. [Again, please see our side article on