On February 11, 2017, Eric Rank will present the sermonette, titled, “The Long Game,” and Robb Harris will present the sermon, titled, “Empowering Our Relationship with God.”

The live services are available, over video and audio, at http://eternalgod.org/live-services/ (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time; 8:30 pm Greenwich Mean Time; 9:30 pm Central European Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

I was recently listening to the radio in the car and just caught the end of a conversation. I thought that I had heard everything but this was extreme. It was said that there were over 50 sexual orientation descriptions. I had read that a school in England a while ago had given a questionnaire to young people to see how they saw themselves from a list of over 20 definitions which, in itself was staggering, but over 50?

When I got home I googled this.   What I found was that the website www.thedailybeast.com stated the following: “It’s Complicated.  What Each of Facebook’s 51 New Gender Options Means.  For ten years, the social network limited billions of people identifying as either male or female. Now there are dozens of terms to pick from. Here’s how to understand them all.”   It then lists the definitions of all 51 genders.

Reading some of these definitions would be very amusing if it wasn’t so serious. I wonder how many reading this editorial, who have Facebook accounts, realised that Facebook was into this sort of thing?   It was quite shocking to think a seemingly harmless social networking site had been willing to go along with such perversion, and a site which now has two billion active users which is quite a sphere of influence!

As Christians, we should always ask ourselves: “Is this in accordance with Biblical instruction?” and “What must God think about this?”

First of all, we know that in the beginning God created man and woman (see Genesis 1:27 and Genesis 2:21-24). He didn’t create 51 different genders, He created just two, and in Genesis 1:31 we read: “Then God saw everything that He had made, and indeed it was very good…”  Therefore, God created just two genders, and to God it was very good!

Man comes along and two genders are not good enough for him. Of course, it has taken nearly 6,000 years to get to this stage, but it has been in the pipeline for quite some time with this being foisted on humanity through the “frog in boiling water” principle, and we know who is really the author of it all.  It is confusion.

God is not the author of confusion (1 Corinthians 14:33), but Satan is. He is the author of all that is wrong and evil; he is a liar and the father of it (John 8:44); he deceives the whole world (Revelation 12:9); and “he has great wrath, because he knows that he has a short time,” referring to the end of this age (Revelation 12:12). Just about everything that is wrong in society has Satan at the root of it all, and giving a list of 51 supposed different gender definitions causes confusion–and it IS confusion.

This sort of nonsense is another sign of how far society has degenerated, but unfortunately, it is now common currency with the younger generation who have had this foisted on them without realising it.  In fact, for many, it seems to be a badge of honour to be different from normality – and the Way of God! How tough it must be for parents with young children today who, if they realise it is perversion, have to combat this approach and mindset.

It is yet another manifestation of Isaiah 5:20-21: “Woe to those who call evil good, and good evil; Who put darkness for light, and light for darkness; Who put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter!  Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, And prudent in their own sight!” This gender confusion fits into this category perfectly.

Let us make sure that we recognise the ruses of Satan at this end time, of which this is one!

We begin with ongoing developments regarding President Trump’s travel ban for seven predominantly Muslim countries and the decision of the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals refusing to lift the stay on the Executive Order; speak on more controversies surrounding President Trump and his administration, including disconcerting reports on Stephen Bannon (please view our new StandingWatch program, “Meet the Real Stephen Bannon”); Mr. Trump’s defense of Vladimir Putin and his bogus claim regarding “underreported” terrorist attacks; and the move to bar President Trump from addressing the British Parliament.

We report on Germany’s and Europe’s distrust of Mr. Trump; as well as ideas to unite Europe as a nuclear super power and to establish a Europe with two speeds. We also speak on the mass massacres perpetrated by the Syrian government and the botched raid on Yemen.

We close with frustrating reports on Obamacare and scientific exaggerations regarding global warming, as well as some remarkable words by Pope Francis.

9^th Circuit Court of Appeals Refuses to Lift Stay

The New York Post wrote on February 9:

“Three federal appeals judges unanimously upheld a decision that slammed the brakes on President Trump’s refugee and immigration ban — and he furiously fired back on Twitter that he would continue the fight in court.

“The ruling by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco means the temporary travel ban — which caused chaos and massive protests at airports across the US — cannot go into effect without further litigation. 

“‘The Government has pointed to no evidence that an alien of the countries named in the Order has perpetrated a terrorist attack in the United States,’ the three-member panel wrote. ‘Rather than present evidence to explain the need for the Executive Order, the Government has taken the position that we must not review its decision at all. We disagree.’ [In footnote 7 on page 27, the Court also addressed and rejected the argument that the Executive Order was justified as these countries had been previously declared as countries of concern in 2015 and 2016.]

“Trump responded in an all-caps post on Twitter: ‘SEE YOU IN COURT, THE SECURITY OF OUR NATION IS AT STAKE!’ Trump said.

“He later told NBC the ruling was a ‘political decision’ and predicted ‘we’re gonna win the case.’

“The judges — who included one Republican — said that the states of Washington and Minnesota had shown that even temporary reinstatement of the ban would cause harm to their citizens. And the judges also took issue with the administration’s argument that the president had near absolute power over the nation’s borders and immigration policies…

“Trump has insisted his travel ban wasn’t aimed at Muslims. But the appeals judges said that issue remains to be decided. ‘The States have offered evidence of numerous statements by the President about his intent to implement a “Muslim ban” as well as evidence they claim suggests that the Executive Order was intended to be that ban,’ the judges wrote…”

The Los Angeles Times added on February 9:

“The court said the states were likely to succeed in their due process claim, noting that the due process protections provided under the Constitution apply not only to citizens, but to all ‘aliens’ in the country as well, as well as ‘certain aliens attempting to re-enter the United States after traveling abroad.’”

Deutsche Welle added on February 9:

“The San Francisco court decision was not about the ban itself, but about whether it should be allowed to go into effect immediately.”

The Court Order includes many citations of case law, including decisions pertaining to the unconstitutionality of detention camps for Americans of Japanese ancestry during World War II, and of denying passports to American members of the Communist Party despite national security concerns. 

For the entire 29-page order of the 9^th Circuit Court of Appeals, refusing to lift the stay on the Executive Order, see this link: http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2017/02/09/17-35105.pdf

We also include below several articles which were published prior to the decision of the 9^thCircuit Court of Appeals.

Assessing Limits of Trump’s Executive Order in Light of Emergency Court Rulings

The Daily Journal wrote on February 6:

“Seven emergency injunctions preventing parts of the President Donald J. Trump’s executive order on immigrant travel from being implemented have left attorneys scrambling to figure out who is affected, who is protected, and whether the government has complied with the rulings so far in sending some visa holders back to their home countries. Judges in Los Angeles, Seattle, Boston, Detroit, New York, and Alexandria, Virginia have weighed in on the Jan. 27 order, with some tailoring their rulings more narrowly than others… What remains unclear about the various injunctions’ reach is the definition of ‘valid visa’ at the time each judge’s order took effect.

“That’s because within hours of Trump signing his executive order on Jan. 27, the State Department ‘provisionally revoke[d] all valid nonimmigrant and immigrant visas of nationals of Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen,’ according to a letter published that day by Edward J. Ramotowski, deputy assistant secretary of the Department of State Bureau of Consulate Affairs. ‘Those visas are not valid for travel to or entry into the United States beginning Jan. 27,’ according to the department website. About 60,000 visas were preliminarily revoked, the State Department has said. As yet, no additional government statements have elucidated the meaning of ‘provisionally revoked.’”

Briefs Pour in Opposing Travel Ban

The Daily Journal wrote on February 7:

“… nearly 300 colleges, 100 technology companies, 16 state attorneys general and a host of civil rights organizations voiced their opposition to the ban in amicus briefs filed over the weekend. The legal argument behind each filing varies, with some focusing on the potential economic impacts, some focusing on the order’s alleged legal failings, while others raise concerns over human rights violations…

“Americans United claims the ban, which blocks entry for immigrants from seven Muslim-majority countries, violates the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment prohibiting Congress from establishing an official religion… The Korematsu Center, a social justice advocacy group, said the order relies on the plenary power doctrine, which holds that the legislative and executive branches are solely responsible for regulating immigration. Their brief criticized the doctrine as inapplicable and ‘a relic of an odious past that has no role in modern American jurisprudence.’… A coalition of 16 state attorneys general filed a brief Monday arguing the ban would undermine state law, as in many cases it would require a state to defy its own anti-discrimination law to stay in line with the federal order… Separate briefs filed by a coalition of law professors and clinicians and a group of nearly 100 tech companies emphasized the potential economic impacts of the ban…

“[Professor Andrew J. Pincus’] brief, signed by 292 universities nationwide, claims the ban would severely impact students from the seven affected countries, who would be prohibited from traveling outside the U.S. for academic or personal reasons out of ‘fear that they may fall out of legal status and suffer deportation.’ ‘Furthermore, if international students from the seven banned countries are no longer able to attend school in the U.S., either because they are denied entry to the country or their visas expire, our universities stand to lose hundreds of millions of dollars,’ the professors wrote in their brief.”

The New York Times added on February 5:

“In its argument for an appeal, the Justice Department had said the president had an ‘unreviewable authority’ to suspend the entry of any class of foreigners…”

Trump’s Attacks on Judges Will Backfire

The New York Times wrote on February 8:

“President Trump on Wednesday lashed out at federal judges considering a challenge to his executive order banning travel from seven predominantly Muslim countries, as his Supreme Court nominee called Mr. Trump’s attacks on the independent judiciary ‘demoralizing’ and ‘disheartening.’

“Mr. Trump escalated his public feud with the courts over his immigration order, saying that he had found a federal appeals court hearing on his executive order Tuesday night ‘disgraceful,’ and that the judges had failed to grasp concepts even ‘a bad high school student would understand.’

“The comments were a remarkable show of disdain by a sitting president for an independent judiciary, and they came at an awkward time for Mr. Trump, just as his newly selected nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Neil M. Gorsuch of the federal appeals court in Denver, was meeting with senators on Capitol Hill in the hopes of gaining support for his confirmation.

“Judge Gorsuch told Senator Richard Blumenthal, Democrat of Connecticut, that he objected to Mr. Trump’s harsh criticism of the courts, including his attack over the weekend on a Seattle district court judge who temporarily blocked his immigration order. In a Twitter posting on Saturday, the president called Judge James L. Robart, a ‘so-called judge’ whose ruling was ‘ridiculous’ and would be overturned.”

The Telegraph added on February 8:

“Mr Trump told the crowd he had listened to Tuesday’s hearing with dismay… Mr Trump attempted to litigate the case himself, reading at length from a document and commenting on how it proved the legal foundations of his travel ban – which was halted on Friday. Mr Trump went on: ‘I listened to lawyers on both sides last night, they were talking about things that had nothing to do with it… courts seem to be so political… it would be so great for our system if they could read something and do what’s right.’”

Refugees in the USA Flocking to Canada

Reuters reported on February 6:

“Refugees in the United States fearing a worsening climate of xenophobia in the wake of a divisive U.S. presidential campaign are flocking to Canada in growing numbers…

“More… would enter at border crossings, advocates say, if Canada didn’t have a policy of turning many of them away when they do.  Prime Minister Trudeau took office in 2015 on a commitment to admit tens of thousands of Syrian refugees… But this year, Canada plans to take only 7,500 government-assisted refugees – less than half last year’s number. People eager to sponsor refugees find themselves waiting years to do so…”

Trump: “We have a Lot of Killers”

Fox News wrote on February 4:

“On Sunday, Bill O’Reilly… asked [Donald] Trump whether he ‘respects’ the former KGB agent [Vladimir Putin]… ‘[Putin] is a killer,’ O’Reilly said. ‘There are a lot of killers,’ Trump responded, ‘We’ve got a lot of killers. What do you think? Our country’s so innocent?’”

Deutsche Welle added on February 6:

“Trump’s comments, which were broadcast ahead of the Super Bowl, irritated a number of congressional Republicans, who swiftly dismissed any equivalence between the US and Russia. Speaking to CNN, Mitch McConnel, the Senate leader, said of Putin: ‘He is a former KGB agent (and) a thug.’”

The Guardian added on February 6:

“Putin, in his 17th year of dominating the Russian political landscape, is accused by some Kremlin critics of ordering the killing of opponents. Putin and the Kremlin have repeatedly rejected those allegations as politically motivated and false… In January last year, after a British judge ruled that Putin had ‘probably’ authorised the murder of former KGB agent Alexander Litvinenko in London, Trump said he saw no evidence the Russian president was guilty.”

Trump’s Chief Political Strategist a Leninist?

The Guardian wrote on February 6:

“Stephen Bannon, President Trump’s chief political strategist and, after Trump, the most powerful man in Washington, once declared proudly: ‘I am a Leninist.’ He was talking to a New York university academic who had written extensively on communism and the former Soviet Union. ‘What on earth do you mean?’ the professor asked him. ‘Lenin wanted to destroy the state and that’s my goal too,’ replied Bannon. ‘I want to bring everything crashing down and destroy all of today’s establishment.’

“… Bannon has an assortment of Leninist political tactics that could have come from the Bolshevik leader’s playbook… much of Lenin’s political style and strategy can be adapted to present conditions. He depended on constant conflict and drama. He deliberately used shock tactics. He was nearly always domineering, abusive and combative, and often downright vicious. He battered opponents into submission with the deliberate use of violent language…

“Lenin abolished the existing legal system and started afresh… In his quest for power, Lenin promised people anything and everything. He offered simple solutions to complex issues. He lied unashamedly. He justified himself on the basis that winning meant everything; the ends justified the means…”

Mr. Bannon also made remarks about the great power of Darth Vader and Satan. Business Insider quoted Bannon in this way on November 18, 2016: “Darkness is good… Dick Cheney, Darth Vader, Satan. That’s power.”

This should wake everybody up. If not, maybe the next article will.

Do Donald Trump and Stephen Bannon Want a Holy War?

The Israeli paper, Haaretz, wrote on February 6:

“It’s an inconceivably scary thought that the Trump administration is simply winging it, breakneck, disrupting and detonating and taking America apart – and all of it without a plan. But here’s the even scarier possibility – that there is, in fact, a plan. A plan which would dramatically concentrate and expand Donald Trump’s power, inflame and mobilize his base, whip up and leverage racism, Islamophobia and, at a later stage, if needed, anti-Semitism, in order to slough all shortcomings onto scapegoats.

“… He needs a Holy War. And he needs a doomsday weapon he can rely on. As it happens, he already has one. It’s called Steve Bannon. And Steve Bannon… has been talking Holy War for years.

“In a speech to a Christian conference held in the Vatican in the summer of 2014, Bannon declared that ‘we’re at the very beginning stages of a very brutal and bloody conflict, of which if the people in this room, the people in the church, do not bind together and really form what I feel is an aspect of the church militant, to really be able to not just stand with our beliefs, but to fight for our beliefs against this new barbarity that’s starting, that will completely eradicate everything that we’ve been bequeathed over the last 2,000, 2,500 years… We’re now, I believe, at the beginning stages of a global war against Islamic fascism,’ he said. National security analyst Robert Baer said Tuesday that the Bannon speech sounded ‘like preaching for the First Crusade.’

“… Referring to the Friday presidential Executive Order which severely curbed immigration and entry from seven mostly Muslim countries, an order which Bannon is reported to have drafted without consultation with the office of the Attorney General nor with the Defense, Homeland Security, or State Departments, Baer said the ban could cripple U.S. intelligence gathering and America’s standing throughout the Mideast and the Islamic world… ‘None of this makes sense. We’re going to lose allies, and 99 percent of our intelligence in the Middle East comes from allies, from Iraqis, from Syrians.’ The ban could cause an Iraqi parliament to expel the 5,000 U.S. troops serving in the country in response, further hampering the battle against terrorists, he added…

“On Saturday night, amid the bedlam generated by the travel ban, as well as condemnations of Trump’s having marked International Holocaust Remembrance Day while refraining from any mention of Jews, the president named Bannon to the key Principals Committee of the National Security Council, at the same time dropping as regular members the chairman of the joint chiefs and the director of national intelligence…

“The war may not be underway just yet, but the Crusade certainly is. The Muslim Ban was just the staging area… And what about real war? Trump may well consider it a positive option precisely because he has no clue in [the] world what it’s like. What the horror of war means to the people whose lives are destroyed by it, whether they physically survive or not… His only experience with military service is evading it. His only experience with the innocent victims of war, is sending them back to Syria… God help us all.”

Underreported Terrorist Attacks?

Deutsche Welle wrote on February 7:

“The White House late on Monday issued a list of terror attacks over a 28-month period from September 2014 to December 2016, with US President Donald Trump saying that media had failed to cover them properly. The release of the list came after Trump continued to accuse the media of deliberately manipulating the news, saying that the press had been minimizing coverage of terror attacks and playing down the threat posed by the so-called ‘Islamic State’ (IS). He stated that the ‘very, very dishonest press’ had ‘their reasons’ for not reporting what he referred to as a ‘genocide’ at the hands of the terrorist group.

“The list, which… was made available to journalists, details cities, months, years, targets, and attackers… fails to explain why the White House had assessed these events to be underreported, and how they were all supposedly linked to IS. The Washington Post published the actual list online, which is more than 1,600 words long and features 27 instances of the term ‘attacker’ misspelled.”

Trump’s Bogus List

The Local wrote on February 7, 2017:

“… the list includes a number of terror attacks that were widely covered internationally, such as the November 2015 Paris attacks, in which 130 people were killed, as well as the 2015 shootings in San Bernardino, California, that killed 14 people.

“The attacks mentioned in Germany include the recent Berlin truck attack on December 19th in which 12 people were killed. The attack continues to be covered widely in the German media, which debates new, increased security methods and more is revealed about how the main suspect, Anis Amri, managed to slip through cracks in German intelligence.

“Overseas, it made front page coverage worldwide on December 20th, and the memorial service attended by Chancellor Angela Merkel was the main image on the front page of The New York Times on December 21st. As recently as the end of January the LA Times was still reporting on the attack’s impact on German politics.

“The list also mentions an attack in Hanover that has been in the news recently. In February last year, a teen girl motivated by Isis stabbed a police officer in the neck, though not fatally. She was sentenced at the end of last month to six years in jail. The case made the pages of the Telegraph, the Wall Street Journal and USA Today, among others.

“Two other attacks in Germany linked to Isis on Trump’s list also did not result in deaths other than of the perpetrators. In Würzburg, an asylum seeker attacked and injured five people on a train with an axe last July. He was shot dead by police. Within a week, an asylum seeker in Ansbach blew himself up outside a bar, injuring 15 others. Both of these attacks were widely covered and discussed in German politics, especially because they happened within a week of one another, and also of a mass shooting in Munich that was not found to be linked to terror.

“Internationally, both the Würzburg and Ansbach attacks attracted large media attention, from the BBC to the Los Angeles Times. The Ansbach explosion was a top story for CNN on their homepage, as was the Würzburg attack.

“Before the two attacks last summer, a Sikh house of prayer was hit by a homemade bomb attack in Essen last April, injuring three. The suspected perpetrators are three teen boys, accused of being inspired by jihadist extremism. Again, this attack was widely covered by international media.

“The one German attack mentioned in the list that seems to have received the least attention was an attack in Hamburg last October that still has not been solved. No suspect has yet been found, though Isis did claim responsibility. In this assault, a 16-year-old boy was fatally stabbed by a man described as being ‘of southern appearance’. In Germany, the murder was covered by every major newsroom: Bild, Die Welt, Spiegel, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, and more.

“Perhaps due to the lack of clarity about the crime’s motives, it was not as widely covered abroad, but a story about it by the Associated Press was published throughout local and national media in the US. In the UK, the Daily Mail and the Telegraph also covered the case.

“Of course, it is not known to what extent Trump hoped international news groups would cover these attacks. Some incidents mentioned on his list from Europe do not even appear to have solid links to terrorism, such as a drug bust gone wrong in Denmark and an arson attack in Sweden.”

No “Underreported” Terror Attacks in Israel Mentioned in Trump’s List

JTA wrote on February 7:

“No attacks in Israel were included on a list of 78 ‘underreported’ terrorist attacks released by the White House… Some of the dozens of attacks on the White House list were widely covered in the media, such as a series of attacks in Paris in November 2015, and mass shootings in Orlando, Florida, and San Bernardino, California, in June 2016 and December 2015, respectively.

“Attacks in Israel were omitted from the list, though over 350 terrorist attacks — including stabbings, shootings, vehicular ramming attacks and a bus bombing — have taken place since Sept. 13, 2015, according to a report released last month by Israel’s Foreign Affairs Ministry. Daniel Shapiro, the former U.S. ambassador to Israel, wrote on Twitter that the omission of attacks in Israel ‘is really hard to explain,’ adding that several attacks ‘were genuinely underreported.’

“Trump’s comments hinting at a journalists’ conspiracy to downplay terrorist attacks were widely derided by the media. ‘This appears to be a talking point that is in search of a set of facts that just doesn’t exist,’ said Jim Acosta, senior White House correspondent for CNN.”

A Long History of Presidential Untruths

The Los Angeles Times wrote on February 6:

“There’s a long history of presidential untruths…  As president, Ronald Reagan spoke movingly of the shock and horror he felt as part of a military film crew documenting firsthand the atrocities of the Nazi death camps. The story wasn’t true.

“Years later, an adamant, finger-wagging Bill Clinton looked straight into a live TV camera and told the American people he never had sex with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. He was lying.

“Presidents of all stripes and both major political parties have bent, massaged or shaded the truth, elided uncomfortable facts or otherwise misled the public — unwittingly or, sometimes, very purposefully… But White House scholars and other students of government agree there has never been a president like Donald Trump, whose volume of falsehoods, misstatements and serial exaggerations — on matters large and wincingly small — place him ‘in a class by himself’…

“When Trump incessantly talks of rampant voter fraud, boasts about the size of his inaugural audience or claims to have seen thousands of people on rooftops in New Jersey celebrating the Sept. 11 attacks, all are demonstrably false…

“President Obama took his turn apologizing for promising ‘if you like your healthcare plan, you can keep it’ under the Affordable Care Act; millions of Americans found that not to be true, and PolitiFact, the nonpartisan truth-squad organization, bestowed the dubious 2013 ‘Lie of the Year’ honor for Obama’s repeated falsehood…”

Speaker of the House of Commons Against Trump Addressing British Parliament

The Independent wrote on February 6:

“Donald Trump will not be welcome to address Parliament on his state visit to the UK because of its opposition to racism and to sexism, the Speaker of the House of Commons has said in a major snub to the American President. In a dramatic intervention, John Bercow, the Speaker, said he was ‘strongly opposed’ to Mr Trump speaking in the Commons as he stressed that being invited to address Parliament was ‘not an automatic right’ but ‘an earned honour’…

“The intervention will cause headaches in Downing Street, where Theresa May has bent over backwards to rekindle the so-called special relationship with the US… The Speaker’s intervention is a particularly stunning development because the post is politically neutral. Mr Bercow was previously a Conservative MP before he was elected to the role… Nearly two million people signed a petition calling for Mr Trump’s state visit to be cancelled in just days after it was announced. MPs are to debate the issue in Westminster Hall.”

JTA added on February 6:

“The Jewish speaker of Britain’s House of Commons said President Donald Trump should not be welcomed to address the British Parliament… [John] Bercow’s comments were greeted with enthusiastic applause… Bercow, whose paternal grandparents were Romanian Jewish immigrants to England, attended the Finchley Reform Synagogue and had a bar mitzvah, though he now considers himself secular.

“As one of the three so-called key holders at Westminster Hall, Bercow said he would use his position to prevent Trump from addressing Parliament. Saying the decision whether to invite him to England at all is ‘way beyond and above the pay grade of the speaker,’ Bercow said that opposition to racism and sexism and support for an independent judiciary are ‘hugely important considerations in the House of Commons.’”

German Public Trust in USA Plummets to Record Low

The Local wrote on February 3:

“A new poll shows that German trust in the transatlantic relationship has dropped to a level [equal] to public trust in Russia since Donald Trump was elected US President. In total, seven out of ten respondents told [a] research group…  that the US is not a trusted ally of Germany at the moment. That was a drop of 37 percent compared to a survey conducted in November, marking a record historic low for faith in the transatlantic partnership, Die Welt reports… Asked about their attitudes to US President Donald Trump, Germans expressed considerable disapproval.

“Eighty percent of respondents said that the EU must work more closely to oppose the US president. Similarly, 67 percent expressed fear that he would harm the German economy, while only 26 percent said they thought it was a good thing that Trump was implementing his election pledges. [Another] poll found similar concerns about the new head of the White House among the German public. Only three percent of respondents said they thought German-American relations would improve with Trump in power, while three quarters of respondents said they would get worse.

“Two thirds of Germans also said that Trump’s implementation of election pledges through executive orders is undemocratic. Eight out of ten respondents… said the travel ban for people from seven Muslim-majority countries was damaging for the US. And 85 percent said that Trump’s policies would do his country economic damage.”

“When Trump Makes America Small, Europe Must Stand Tall”

The EUObserver wrote on February 2:

“Donald Trump is certain he is going to make his country great again – by turning its back to the world, by building walls and by saying no to foreign people, goods and services. But it won’t work… It will lower the living standards of the average working American by making products more expensive, cutting off supply chains and reducing specialisation and competition. It is devastating not only to the United States but to all of us.

“When the US turns inwards, it leaves a void that needs to be filled… we need to remind ourselves that the second largest economy in the world is not China… The biggest one is the European Union. The most logical and well-suited actor to replace America’s leadership is Europe… The rest of the globe should turn to [Europe], not to China… Europe should be the shining city on the hill for the rest of the world…

“When the US goes home, Europe goes abroad. When Donald Trump turns friends into enemies, we remain friends. When he makes enemies into allies, we remain allies to our friends…”

This reaction is quite telling.

Europe Is “Forced” to Unite

The EUObserver wrote on February 3:

“EU leaders pledged the need for unity and for Europe to stand on its own two feet at their meeting in Valletta on Friday (3 February), during a discussion on how to handle US president Donald Trump…Leaders… said they would… move toward more independent European action on issues where the EU and the US administration disagree…  Merkel said that this is an opportunity for Europe to redefine itself and become more self-reliant.”

Europe Sees Trump as a Threat

The New York Times wrote on February 2:

“Like much of the world, the European Union is struggling to decipher a President Trump who seems every day to be picking a new fight with a new nation, whether friend or foe. Hopes among European leaders that Mr. Trump’s bombastic tone as a candidate would somehow smooth into a more temperate one as commander in chief are dissipating, replaced by a mounting sense of anxiety and puzzlement over how to proceed.

“If many foreign leaders expected a Trump administration to push to renegotiate trade deals, or take a tough line on immigration, few anticipated that he would become an equal opportunity offender. He has insulted or humiliated Mexico, Britain, Germany and Iraq; engaged in a war of words with China and Iran; and turned a routine phone call with the prime minister of Australia, a staunch ally, into a minor diplomatic crisis.

“With the possible exception of NATO, where he has softened his tone, Mr. Trump has expressed disdain for other multilateral institutions such as the European Union. His praise has been reserved for populists and strongmen, like Nigel Farage, the former leader of the U.K. Independence Party, President Rodrigo Duterte of the Philippines and, of course, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

“Mr. Trump is convinced that the United States has been played for a patsy by the rest of the world and is vowing to set things straight. ‘We’re taken advantage of by every nation in the world virtually,’ he said on Thursday at a prayer breakfast. ‘It’s not going to happen anymore.’

“Against this forbidding backdrop, some European leaders are urging their counterparts to recognize that Mr. Trump may represent a truly dire challenge, one that threatens to upend not only the 70-year European project of integration and security, but just about everything they stand for, including liberal democracy itself…

“Traditionally, Europeans view Germany as the bulwark of the European Union, its largest, richest and most influential country, but uncomfortable with open leadership. Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, up for re-election this autumn, is seen as practical, pragmatic and devoted to the European project, and Germans see the euro as a political sacrifice they made of the revered deutsche mark to please the French. So they deeply resent Mr. Trump’s attacks on Ms. Merkel for her refugee policy and his statements that the European Union itself is a ‘vehicle’ for German self-interest. Ms. Merkel was angry over comments by Peter Navarro, the director of Mr. Trump’s new National Trade Council, that Germany was manipulating a ‘grossly undervalued’ euro to gain trade advantages over other Europeans and the United States.”

All of this will lead to a stronger united Europe in our time.

Europe a Nuclear Super Power?

Die Zeit wrote on February 6, that the Chairman of Poland’s governing party and former leader of Poland, Jaroslaw Kaczynski, advocates the creation of a “European nuclear super power” which is to equal that of Russia.

The Express added on February 7:

“Warsaw sensationally called for a new ‘nuclear Europe’ complete with its own gargantuan defence force and missile armoury to help keep the Kremlin’s ambitions in check. Jaroslaw Kaczynski, widely seen as the most powerful man in eastern Europe’s biggest country, said a radical rethink of the EU’s defence policies was the only way to secure peace in the region…

“But the political heavyweight, seen as the power behind the throne of Poland’s government, admitted his plan may not be popular with other member states. And he conceded it would require ‘tremendous expenditure’ to get off the ground, which is an unlikely course of action given the economic malaise which has gripped the eurozone for the last decade.

“Both Berlin and Warsaw are keen on further EU integration of military spending and operations with the eventual aim of creating a Brussels army…”

Coming—a New Pro-European Alliance between Germany and France?

MarketWatch wrote on February 8:

“Come the autumn, the eurozone may have its most pro-Europe, reformist leadership for a couple of decades. The centrist Emmanuel Macron is getting closer to power in France, while the Social Democrat leader Martin Schulz looks to have a decent chance of replacing Angela Merkel in Germany.

“A Schulz-Macron alliance could finally re-boot the euro, creating the momentum for the genuine fiscal, monetary and economic union that the single currency needs…

“Start with France. With the Republican Francois Fillon sinking deeper into a scandal over vast sums paid to his wife from the state, the centrist Emmanuel Macron looks more and more likely to make it into the second round of voting in early May.

“The basic rule of French politics is very simple. Whoever makes it into the second round again Le Pen wins the presidency… Macron looks a surer bet with every week that passes.

“Over in Germany, something just as dramatic is happening. Switching Martin Schulz from Brussels to Berlin has given the center-left Social Democrats a huge boost in the polls. One this week showed his party overtaking Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats, while all of them have shown significant rises in support. Add in the Left Party and the Greens, and come September Schulz may have enough support to finally bring Merkel’s long reign to an end…

“If Schulz takes power, the Berlin-Paris axis, the most important relationship in European politics, would suddenly look very different. There would be the opportunity to accelerate economic integration — and give the euro a final chance to succeed. Far more than the leaders they would replace, both Macron and Schulz are passionate believers in the EU, and they are willing to sacrifice national sovereignty to make integration work.

“Merkel was always portrayed as a great champion of the EU, and on paper she was. But in practice, she didn’t do much about it…

“Between them, Macron and Schulz would agree on one thing. The eurozone, as Macron argued in a speech in Berlin last month, needs to radically change if it is to prosper. It needs to be turned into a fully functioning economic union.

What would that look like? For starters, there would be a banking union, with a single regulator… There would be a EU Treasury, with powers to raise taxes, harmonize rates, and spend money right across the continent… In short, Brussels would look a lot more like the federal government in Washington.

“True, that might create intense political opposition. Lots of people won’t like it. But… Macron and Schulz as president and chancellor would have the will and momentum to make it happen…”

Merkel Says Europe’s Future Could Be Two-Speed

The Local wrote on February 4:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel said European leaders may commit to a union of ‘different speeds’ when they make a major declaration on its future at a summit in Rome next month. The European Union has long been riven by debate about whether all countries must commit to full integration including the single currency, or whether some can go at different paces. The 27 leaders minus Britain are due to make a declaration at the summit in Rome in March marking the 60th anniversary of the EU, in which they will set out a post-Brexit roadmap.

“‘We certainly learned from the history of the last years, that there will be as well a European Union with different speeds, that not all will participate every time in all steps of integration,’ Merkel told reporters after a summit in Malta. ‘I think this may be in the Rome declaration as well.’ Merkel said the idea was to set out a plan for the next ten years of the EU, which has been buffeted by the eurozone crisis, Brexit, migration, the Ukraine conflict and now faces a new challenge in the form of US President Donald Trump. Belgium, the Netherlands and Luxembourg, a group of the EU’s founding members, also issued a statement on Friday backing a two-speed EU.”

Deutsche Welle added on February 8:

“… it was the first time that Merkel clearly claimed this old idea [of a two-speed Europe] as her own. Whoever believed it was an exclusive statement had to think again on the following Tuesday. In a meeting with Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydlo, Merkel once again spoke of a Europe of ‘two speeds.’… ‘That should be taken seriously,’ an EU diplomat in Brussels told DW.

“… Right now it looks like a two-speed Europe will be part of this vision… The truth is that Europe has worked at different speeds for decades. The eurozone, the freedom of movement embedded in the Schengen agreement and the Maastricht Social Protocol are already part of a ‘phased integration’ in which not all EU member states take part. In the future, different combinations are conceivable, like the eurozone, a core Europe driven by Germany and France or a circle of the EU’s founding members…

“The goal is to save the European project. This applies to the common currency and the economy in particular. The next Greek crisis is at Europe’s doorstep – maybe even a trade war with Donald Trump’s United States. Before everything goes down the drain, Merkel is trying to at least maintain the shell of the union… The idea of a multi-speed union is perhaps Angela Merkel’s last attempt at saving Europe.”

The Bible prophesies that a two-speed Europe is coming. Ten core nations or groups of nations will develop from the Eurozone, and they will transfer, at that time, their power and authority to a charismatic political and military leader who will promise safety and security for Europe and the entire world. Note the next article.

Adolf Hitler: “Wait Calmly”

Die Zeit wrote on February 1:

“Few sensed what Hitler’s appointment as chancellor actually meant, and many reacted to the event with shocking indifference.

“… This, despite the fact that Hitler had plainly explained in ‘Mein Kampf’ and countless speeches before 1933 what he wanted to do once in power: to abolish the democratic ‘system’ of Weimar Germany, to ‘eradicate’ Marxism (by which he meant both social democracy and communism) and to ‘remove’ the Jews from Germany. As for foreign policy, he made no secret of the fact that he wanted to revise the Versailles Treaty and that his long-term goal was the conquering of ‘Lebensraum in the East.’

“German President Paul von Hindenburg’s camarilla, which had hoisted him to power through a series of intrigues, agreed with Hitler’s goals of preventing a return to parliamentary democracy, of cutting the chains of the Versailles Treaty, massively arming the military and once again making Germany the dominant power in Europe. As for the rest of Hitler’s stated intentions, his conservative coalition partners were inclined to dismiss them as mere rhetoric. Once he was in power, they argued, he would become more reasonable…

“The fact that Hitler’s appointment meant that a fanatical anti-Semite had come to power should have made Germany’s Jews, above all, nervous. But that was not the case at all. In a statement given on Jan. 30, the chair of the Central Association of German Citizens of Jewish Faith said, ‘In general, today more than ever we must follow the directive: wait calmly.’ He said that although one watches the new government ‘of course with deep suspicion,’ President Hindenburg represents the ‘calming influence.’ He said there was no reason to doubt his ‘sense of justice’ and ‘loyalty to the constitution.’ As a result, he said, one should be convinced that ‘nobody would dare’ to ‘touch our constitutional rights.’ …

“French Ambassador Andre François-Poncet called the Hitler-Papen-Hugenberg cabinet a ‘bold experiment,’ but he also suggested his government remain calm and wait for further developments… Rarely has a political project so rapidly been revealed to be a chimera as the idea that the conservatives would ‘tame’ the Nazis. In terms of tactical cunning, Hitler towered high above his cabinet allies and opponents. In a short time, he had upstaged them and driven them against the wall…

“Hitler needed only five months to establish his power. By the summer of 1933, fundamental rights and the constitution had been suspended, the states had been forced into conformity, the unions crushed, the political parties banned or dissolved, press and radio brought into line and the Jews stripped of their equality under the law. Everything that existed in Germany outside of the National Socialist Party had been ‘destroyed, dispersed, dissolved, annexed or absorbed,’ François-Poncet concluded in early July. Hitler, he claimed, had ‘won the game with little effort.’ ‘He only had to puff — and the edifice of German politics collapsed like a house of cards.’”

We should take this warning from the past very seriously today.

The Brutal Murders of the Syrian Regime

The Guardian wrote on February 7:

“As many as 13,000 opponents of Bashar al-Assad were secretly hanged in one of Syria’s most infamous prisons in the first five years of the country’s civil war as part of an extermination policy ordered by the highest levels of the Syrian government, according to Amnesty International.

“Many thousands more people held in Saydnaya prison died through torture and starvation, Amnesty said, and the bodies were dumped in two mass graves on the outskirts of Damascus between midnight and dawn… for at least five years.

“The report, Human Slaughterhouse, details allegations of state-sanctioned abuse that are unprecedented in Syria’s civil war, a conflict that has consistently broken new ground in depravity, leaving at least 400,000 people dead and nearly half the country’s population displaced.

“The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights claimed last May that at least 60,000 people had died as a result of torture or dire conditions in Syrian prisons from the earliest months of the anti-Assad insurrection…”

Fox News added on February 7:

“The 48-page report claims Syria secretly carried out mass hangings at the Saydnaya Military Prison to eliminate those who spoke out against the government… There are two detention centers at Saydnaya Military Prison, which, according to the report, may hold up to 20,000 people.

“In the ‘red building’, the majority of detainees are civilians who have been arrested since the beginning of the crisis in 2011. In the ‘white building’, the majority of the detainees are officers and soldiers in the Syrian military who have been arrested since 2011. The report said the detainees were never given a fair trial. Instead, they were tortured until they gave false confessions. Government leaders, the report said, knew the prison was a human slaughterhouse yet turned a blind eye to it.”

Botched Raid on Yemen

The Guardian wrote on February 8:

“The Yemeni government said on Wednesday it wants a rethink of US counter-terrorist operations on its territory after a botched commando raid on 29 January that left more than 30 civilians dead. The Navy Seal operation, aimed at gathering intelligence on al-Qaida in the Arabian Peninsula (Aqap), has shone light on chaotic decision-making in the Trump White House, where presidential aides, many with little foreign policy or national security experience, are competing for influence…

“In the White House press briefing on Wednesday, the press secretary, Sean Spicer, insisted that the raid in Yemen was a success and said anyone questioning its success owed an apology to the family of Chief Petty Officer Ryans Owens, the Navy Seal killed in the operation.

“When asked if that criticism applied to Senator John McCain, who deemed the raid a failure after receiving a classified briefing on the operation, Spicer repeated: ‘Anyone who undermines the success of that raid owes an apology and a disservice to the life of Chief Ryan Owens.

“The night raid on a village in the central Yakla region appears to have gone wrong from the start, with the crash landing of an Osprey aircraft. According to the accounts of local villagers, about 50 US troops began by shooting villagers and tribal elders, and Aqap militants camped nearby only joined the fight after many civilians were already dead. Villagers told the Bureau of Investigative Journalists (BIJ) that 31 people had died, including nine children under the age of 13. Of the nine young children who died, the smallest was only three months old. Seven women were killed, including one who was heavily pregnant. Seven more women and children were injured. The dead also included the eight-year-old daughter of al-Qaida propagandist and American citizen Anwar al-Awlaki, who was killed in a September 2011 US drone strike in Yemen, her family said…

“The circumstances of Trump’s authorisation of the raid, at a dinner on 25 January, have drawn scrutiny of how the new White House makes such life and death decisions. The plan was presented to Trump at the dinner by the defence secretary, James Mattis, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff, Gen Joseph Dunford. The president was flanked by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and his chief strategist and former Breitbart news executive, Steve Bannon. Apart from Bannon’s seven years as a navy officer more than three decades ago, neither has foreign policy experience.

“The casual format differed markedly from previous practice, where such decisions would have been taken in the White House situation room and involved top officials from the state department and intelligence agencies, convened by the national security council (NSC)…”

This is stunning and sad, indeed.

Germany “Disappointed” with Israel

JTA wrote on January 8:

“Germany condemned a controversial new Israeli law that retroactively legalizes settler homes built on private Palestinian land. Berlin said Wednesday that the ‘regulations law’ undermines trust in Israel’s seriousness about reaching a compromise with the Palestinians. ‘Many in Germany who stand by Israel and feel great commitment toward it find themselves deeply disappointed by this move,’ a German Foreign Ministry spokesman said in a statement. ‘Our trust in the Israeli government’s commitment to the two-state solution has been fundamentally shaken.’

“The law, which the Knesset passed in a raucous late-night session Monday, allows the state to seize private Palestinian land on which settlements or outposts were built, as long as the settlers were not aware of the status of the land. In cases where the landowners are known, they are entitled to compensation.

“Censure of the law has come from governments around the world, including the United Nations, the European Union, France, Britain, Turkey, Jordan and the Palestinians. The United States has refused to comment…

“Most of Israel’s political opposition and even members of the governing coalition oppose the legislation. Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit has said he would not defend it before the Supreme Court. It was the first time that an Israeli attorney general has made such a refusal, legal experts told JTA.”

Of course, when the acting US attorney general made a similar comment regarding the executive order of a travel ban, President Trump fired her immediately. Does this mean that Israel is more of a democracy than the current USA?

Whatever Happened to Repeal and Replace Obamacare?

The New York Times wrote on February 6:

“In a brief aside in an interview with Bill O’Reilly of Fox News broadcast before the Super Bowl on Sunday, Mr. Trump went further than he ever has in acknowledging the reality that any hope of quickly replacing the Affordable Care Act has been dashed. ‘Yes, I would like to say by the end of the year, at least the rudiments, but we should have something within the year and the following year,’ the president said. That admission is sure to be a serious disappointment for the president’s most fervent supporters, who sent him to Washington believing that he would move quickly to dispatch the health law.

“The uncertainty is already reflected in the way Republicans talk about the health care law. Some now talk about ‘repairing’ the law, rather than repealing it entirely… ‘I don’t really know what he’s referring to in terms of a year,’ said Senator John Cornyn of Texas, the No. 2 Senate Republican. He added that Republicans hoped to get their replacement plan in place ‘well before that.’ Senator John Thune of South Dakota, the No. 3 Republican in the chamber… expressed hope that ‘at some point,’ if Mr. Trump has a health care proposal, ‘he’ll engage and that we’ll be able to work together with him on it.’…

“Insurance executives say immediate action is needed to stabilize insurance markets, or else more insurers will withdraw from the public marketplaces created under the Affordable Care Act. Insurers deciding whether to participate in the market in 2018 face a May deadline for submitting rate proposals to the federal government.”

Obamacare is indeed a disaster, with sky-rocketing premiums and continuously increasing co-payments. But so is the delay in keeping the clear promise to replace and repeal Obamacare.

Climate Change Exaggerated?

The Daily Mail wrote on February 4:

“The Mail on Sunday today reveals astonishing evidence that the organisation that is the world’s leading source of climate data rushed to publish a landmark paper that exaggerated global warming and was timed to influence the historic Paris Agreement on climate change…

“The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected. Launched by NOAA with a public relations fanfare, it was splashed across the world’s media, and cited repeatedly by politicians and policy makers. But the whistleblower, Dr John Bates, a top NOAA scientist with an impeccable reputation, has shown The Mail on Sunday irrefutable evidence that the paper was based on misleading, ‘unverified’ data. It was never subjected to NOAA’s rigorous internal evaluation process – which Dr Bates devised.

“His vehement objections to the publication of the faulty data were overridden by his NOAA superiors in what he describes as a ‘blatant attempt to intensify the impact’ of what became known as the Pausebuster paper…

“Official delegations from America, Britain and the EU were strongly influenced by the flawed NOAA study as they hammered out the Paris Agreement – and committed advanced nations to sweeping reductions in their use of fossil fuel and to spending £80 billion every year on new, climate-related aid projects. The scandal has disturbing echoes of the ‘Climategate’ affair which broke shortly before the UN climate summit in 2009, when the leak of thousands of emails between climate scientists suggested they had manipulated and hidden data…”

This is indeed shocking. Truth does not seem to be an issue in light of political agendas.

Remarkable Words from Pope Francis

On February 7, Zenit reported the following:

“According to Vatican Radio, Pope Francis stressed this to faithful during his daily morning Mass at Casa Santa Marta, as he reflected on how ‘God created us as children in His image.’ Drawing inspiration from the Book of Genesis’ account of the Creation of man and woman, Francis recalled how God has given us His DNA and spoke about the first of three great gifts, which God gave humanity in Creation.

“‘… First of all, He gave us His “DNA”, that is, He made us His children, created us in His image, in His image and likeness, like Him. And when one makes a child, he cannot take it back: the son is made, he exists. And whether or not he resembles the father, he is a son; he has received his identity…’ Jesus, he noted, taught us how a father waits for his children. (He gave us the identity of a child: ‘to “man and woman”, we must add the identity of “child”. We “are like gods”, because we are children of God.’…

“God’s second gift in Creation, Pope Francis said, is a ‘task,’ namely the work of advancing Creation. ‘Not to destroy it; but to make it grow, to care for it, to keep it and make it carry on…’

“God’s third gift in Creation, the Pope stressed, is love. Beginning with the love shared between a man and a woman. ‘Male and female He created them. It is not good for the man to be alone. And He made his partner,’ the Pope said…”

It is indeed the potential of man to become a born-again God being in the Family of God. God made man in His image… first as a physical being, but with the potential of becoming a Spirit being—a God being. Those who have received God’s Holy Spirit are already begotten children of God, but it has not been manifested what they will be. But they will be like Christ in His glory, when He returns.

One of the most distinguishing and defining differences between most Christian organizations and the Church of the Eternal God and its international affiliates is the observance of the biblical Sabbath and the biblical annual Holy Days.  In our Statement of Beliefs, we state the following, under “Observation of God’s Commanded Holy Days”:

“We believe that we are to observe certain weekly and annual Holy Days, during which time we are to attend Church services and to refrain from secular labor, including school, college or university attendance, and which time we are to dedicate and devote to worship, spiritual study, prayer, fellowship with Church members, and physical rest.”

This shows that the biblical Holy Days are sanctified by God. God set those days aside for a holy purpose; it is not for us to determine when certain times are holy, since only God can and does decide this. God wants us to remember those days to keep them holy. And so, we continue in our Statement of Beliefs to list those Holy Days, introducing them as follows: “These weekly and annual Holy Days are…”

We begin with the weekly Sabbath, showing that we observe the “seventh-day weekly Sabbath from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. The day symbolizes God’s resting on the seventh day, after having recreated the surface of the earth in six days, and the forthcoming Millennium which is also referred to as a Sabbath lasting for 1,000 years (Leviticus 23:3; Exodus 20:8-11, Hebrews 4:3-11).”

It is important to realize that the weekly Sabbath is a Holy Day, which lasts from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset. God reckons each day beginning at sunset and continuing through until the following sunset. We know from the Jewish people when to keep the Sabbath. It is the Jews to whom God committed His revelations or His “oracles,” as Paul clearly explains in Romans 3:1–2. These “oracles of God” included the Old Testament Scriptures, as well as the knowledge of the week and of the Sacred Calendar. (We accept the Sacred Calendar, as used by the Jewish community, and reject the idea of having to create our own calendar. Many have tried to do so without godly authority, and hopeless confusion has been the result.) The Jews preserved the knowledge of which day the seventh day of the week is. Without an understanding of when a week begins and ends, we would not have been able to tell, from the Bible alone, which day the seventh day of the week actually is. Today, the Jews keep the Sabbath on Saturday, beginning Friday evening, at sunset. Nobody questions today that the Sabbath, as preserved by the Jews, is the seventh or last day of the week. All understand [or should understand] that Sunday is the first day of the week.

Some few organizations may keep the weekly Sabbath, but they do not keep [any or most of] the annual Holy Days and Festivals (For the correct dates of the annual Feast days, please note our Holy Day calendar).

We continue in our Statement of Beliefs with a reference to the Passover, stating that we observe the “Passover once a year in the evening by engaging in a footwashing service as an example of humility in accordance with Christ’s example, and partaking of the unleavened bread and wine, symbolizing physical and spiritual healing and forgiveness of sin. The entire service symbolizes a remembrance of Christ’s death (Leviticus 23:5, Luke 22:14-20; John 13:1-5; 1 Corinthians 11:20-29).”

After the 24-hour Passover day had begun at sunset, Jesus changed the symbol of the Passover lamb to the symbol of footwashing, bread and wine. Subsequently, He was betrayed and arrested that same night, and He was beaten and killed during the daylight portion of the Passover day. He was laid in the grave just before sunset, at the end of the Passover day. The entire 24-hour day of the Passover is not a Holy Day per se, in that we are not required to keep the entire Passover day holy, but the service at the beginning of the Passover evening is holy time.

The Passover is only to be observed by properly baptized persons (those who are spiritually circumcised, Colossians 2:11-14), who have received the Holy Spirit; otherwise, they would partake of it in an unworthy manner (1 Corinthians 11:27-29). [This is the ONLY service of the Church which is for baptized Church members only. Otherwise, we state in our Policy Statement that “we welcome guests to our Church services, as long as they are not contentious and worship with us in peace and harmony and in accordance with our doctrines and practices.”] The Passover is observed once a year as a memorial; the concept of keeping it more often throughout the year, perhaps calling it “communion” or the “Lord’s Supper,” is not biblical and constitutes partaking of the “Passover” in an unworthy manner. Also, the Passover is to be observed with UNLEAVENED bread and wine—not grape juice. Finally, the Passover is to be kept at the beginning of the 14^th of Nisan, NOT at the end of the 14^th of Nisan or the beginning of the 15^th of Nisan, and it is NOT to be kept as a meal.

We continue to explain in our Statement of Beliefs that we observe the “Days of Unleavened Bread once a year by not partaking of any food prepared with leaven for a period of seven days following the Passover [It is not commanded to abstain from leavened products during the Passover day; however, as mentioned above, the piece of bread which will be partaken of during the Passover service must be unleavened, as it symbolizes the sinless body of Christ]. The partaking of the unleavened bread during the Days of Unleavened Bread symbolizes our commitment to live a sinless life (Leviticus 23:6-8; Acts 20:6; 1 Corinthians 5:7-8).”

While we observe the entire seven days by avoiding leavened products, only the first and the last day of this seven-day period are annual Holy Days. Numerous Scriptures tell us to remove leavened bread from our houses before the Days of Unleavened Bread begin, and not to eat leavened bread during these seven days. At the same time, we are told to eat unleavened bread during these days. Biblical passages containing this command can be found in Exodus 12:15-20; 13:7; 23:15; 34:18; Leviticus 23:6; Numbers 28:17; and Deuteronomy 16:3, 8. As a general rule, we are to eat unleavened bread every day during the Days of Unleavened Bread (barring emergencies or other extraordinary circumstances), as we are to replace sin (symbolized by leaven) with righteousness (symbolized by unleavened bread). Compare 1 Corinthians 5:6-8; Luke 12:1; Matthew 16:12. Even those who normally don’t eat bread should still eat a little bit of unleavened bread every day during the Days of Unleavened Bread (in addition to their normal food which must not contain leavened products of any kind), to remind them of the symbolism conveyed during those seven days.

The Church of God has never taught that beverages [such as beer or wine] or items not meant or fit for human consumption [such as dog food, tooth paste, fire extinguishers, cleaning material, medication] are to be removed. In addition, though, the Church of God has consistently preached and taught that certain “leavening agents,” which the Jews don’t remove, SHOULD BE removed. These leavening agents include baking soda and baking powder, but not “brewer’s yeast,” “yeast extracts,” or “cream of tartar.” Whether or not baking soda or baking powder are active agents, they would clearly be used as a substitute for leavening to puff up any flour or meal product, thereby violating the spirit of God’s commands.

We have prepared an extensive list of products which should be removed and avoided during the Days of Unleavened Bread.

The Church also keeps the Night to Be Much Observed at the beginning of the 15th day of the first month (after sundown on the First Day of Unleavened Bread) when members gather together for an evening meal. On that occasion, they reflect on how the events of the exodus of ancient Israel, when they came out of physical slavery in Egypt, foreshadowed their spiritual exodus from their slavery of sin (Exodus 12:42; Numbers 33:3).

Today’s Jewish community is totally confused about the distinction between the Passover night and the Night to Be Much Observed. In fact, they keep the PASSOVER at the END of the 14th and the beginning of the 15th day, TOGETHER WITH the Night to Be Much Observed, as if the two events were one and the same. But these are two separate events that are to be observed at two separate times. Scripture commands that the Passover is to be observed at the BEGINNING of the 14th day, while the Night to Be Much Observed is to be kept at the beginning of the 15th day—one entire day LATER! God said that at the END of the 14th day (or the beginning of the 15th day) unleavened bread is to be eaten until the END of the 21st day—that is, for seven days (Exodus 12:18).

We continue to explain in our Statement of Beliefs that as the next annual Holy Day, we observe the “Feast of Pentecost once a year. This day symbolizes the coming of God’s Holy Spirit for the purpose of converting those called by God at this time (Leviticus 23:15-16, 21; Acts 2:1-4; 20:16; 1 Corinthians 16:8).”

The Church of God understands and teaches that only very few are called today to salvation, which fact is pictured by the Feast of Pentecost or the Feast of the Firstfruits (Exodus 23:16; compare James 1:18; Romans 8:23; Revelation 14:4). While there is much confusion in the Christian and Jewish world regarding the correct date of Pentecost, the Church of God determines it by counting 50 days from the Sunday [after the weekly Sabbath], on which the wave sheaf was offered and which falls within the annual Holy Days of Unleavened Bread, as instructed in the Bible (Leviticus 23:11). The Feast of Pentecost also tells us that today, both “Jews and Gentiles” are called; that is, “in every nation whoever fears Him and works righteousness is accepted by Him’” (Acts 10:35; compare Acts 10:45; 11:18).

The Feast of Pentecost also teaches us that we are not yet born again, when we receive the Holy Spirit at the time of our proper baptism; but that we are Spirit-begotten children of God. Our Spirit birth will occur later.

We proceed to state in our Statement of Beliefs that we observe as the next Holy Day the “Feast of Trumpets once a year. This day symbolizes the soon coming return of Jesus Christ to this earth (Leviticus 23:24-25; 1 Corinthians 15:52; 1 Thessalonians 4:16), and our resurrection or change to immortality, to be born again into the Kingdom or Family of God (1 Corinthians 15:50-54, 42-49; 1 Thessalonians 4:16-17; John 3: 3, 5-8).”

The Feast of Trumpets must be seen in connection with the Feast of Pentecost, as Pentecost reminds us that only very few are chosen at this time to receive the gift of God’s Holy Spirit and to prepare for the time when God will replace Satan and restore His government on and over all the earth (Revelation 5:10). These few are being taught and trained by God so that they can later teach mankind to reject the rule of Satan and to submit to God’s authority. That time of massive re-education will begin when Jesus Christ returns—in great power and great glory—as the KING of kings and the LORD of lords. He is coming back once (not twice; a secret rapture is nowhere taught in Scripture) to restore ALL THINGS on this earth. God wants us to keep the annual Holy Day of the Feast of Trumpets as a reminder of the monumental future event of Christ’s return. Those in Christ still alive when He returns will be changed to immortality, and those who have died in Christ, will be resurrected from the dead to eternal life. This will be the time when we will be born again; when we will be born of the Spirit; when we will BE Spirit (John 3:6).

Following the Feast of Trumpets is the Day of Atonement which we observe, as we state in our Statement of Beliefs, “once a year by refraining from partaking of any and all solid food or liquid for a period of 24 hours. This day symbolizes those called by God during this life, having received at-one-ment with God; those who can receive at-one-ment with God after Christ’s return; and the transfer of sin to Satan as the one who is ultimately responsible for all sin (Leviticus 16:1-34; Leviticus 23:27-32; Acts 27:9).”

This is not God’s world, but it is Satan the Devil’s world. In order to bring perfect peace and happiness to this earth, Satan—the arch-enemy of God and man—will have to be removed from his power over this earth (compare Revelation 2:13). Only then can man truly become “at one” with God. God created the annual Holy Day of Atonement to foreshadow the event of Satan’s removal in the near future (Romans 16:20). In order to impress on us the seriousness of this event, we are commanded to fast for 24 hours (people with serious health concerns should consult a doctor before fasting; and young children should not be compelled to fast.)

Following the Day of Atonement, we state in our Statement of Beliefs  that we observe the “Feast of Tabernacles once a year, for seven consecutive days, by attending one of the Church’s designated sites around the world. This period symbolizes the reign of Christ for 1,000 years, together with His saints made immortal, during which time Satan will be bound and the entire world will be living under the government of God (Leviticus 23:33-35; Daniel 7:27; John 7:2-8, 10-14; Revelation 20:4).”

After Satan has been removed, Christ and His saints will begin the awesome task of restoring all things on earth. Those who qualify will rule with Christ on this earth (not from heaven over this earth) for 1,000 years (the “Millennium”) (Revelation 20:4), governing those human beings who survived the incredible time of suffering just prior to Christ’s return, as well as those who will be born during the Millennium. Under Christ’s leadership—and along with Him—the saints will restore what had been taken away through Satan’s rebellion and what Adam and Eve failed to restore (see Daniel 7:27). We celebrate this unique and unparalleled time in the entire history of mankind every year for seven days when we observe the Feast of Tabernacles (see John 7:2–14).

The first day of that seven-day Festival is to be observed as an annual Holy Day. The entire time will be observed in “temporary housings” such as hotels or motels, and barring extraordinary circumstances (such as poor health), members of the Church should be assembling at and attending one of the designated Feast sites of the Church for the entire time. The idea of just building a “booth” in which to eat a meal, while living in our homes, is not biblical.

In order to be able to finance staying in hotels and eating in restaurants for the entire time of the Feast of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day (discussed below), God has instituted the concept of a SECOND tithe (or a second ten percent of one’s earnings or other income). This is an additional tithe of one’s “increase” (Deuteronomy 14:22-26). Soncino confirms that Deuteronomy 14:23 discusses the “second tithe.” They state, “This refers to the second tithe, because the first tithe was to be given to the Levites who were allowed to eat it anywhere (cf. Num. xviii. 26, 31).” The Ryrie Study Bible has a similar comment pertaining to Deuteronomy 14:22-27, confirming the existence of a “second tithe.” So does “The New Bible Commentary: Revised,” copyright 1970, on page 220: “This is the so-called ‘second tithe,’ as contrasted with that tithe of the produce given to maintain the Levites (see Nu. 18:26-28).”

The individual who wants to obey God by keeping the Feast of Tabernacles (FOT) in the correct way saves the second tithe each year for his or her use in observing God’s annual Holy Days – mainly the Feast of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day, as members are commanded to travel for the FOT to one of God’s designated feast sites. This tithe is to be saved for use by the individual. Only “excess second tithe” — the portion of the second tithe exceeding appropriate individual use — should be sent to the Church. The “excess second tithe” can be used by the Church for members who were unable to save sufficient second tithe for the Holy Days, and for necessary Church-related Feast expenses (such as hall rentals). As mentioned, the Second Tithe is mainly for the observance of the Feast of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day, but it can also be used, in addition, for the other Holy Days (such as costs for travel and restaurants), as long as sufficient funds remain for the FOT.

We explain in our Statement of Beliefs that we also keep one more Holy Day, the “Last Great Day which immediately follows the Feast of Tabernacles, once a year. This day symbolizes a 100-year period called the ‘Great White Throne Judgment,’ during which all persons who have ever lived and who were never called by God for salvation during this life, will have their first opportunity to accept Christ as their Savior (Leviticus 23:36; John 7:37; Revelation 20:11-12). At the end of that period, there will be a judgment during which all people who have ever lived and who have refused to accept Christ as their Savior, will be finally condemned to eternal death and destroyed in Gehenna fire (Revelation 20:13-15).”

Church members keep the entire time of the Feast of Tabernacles and the Last Great Day in temporary housing (such as hotels) at one of the designated feast sites.

The final annual Holy Day of the Last Great Day, which immediately follows the Feast of Tabernacles, symbolizes a period of—most likely—100 years (Isaiah 65:20), called the “Great White Throne Judgment” (Revelation 20:11–12). This is that time during which all persons who had not been called before will be resurrected to physical life and will then be given their first real opportunity to accept or to reject God’s calling (John 7:37).

The fact that the Bible reveals more than just one resurrection is neither understood nor believed by many professing Christians, let alone the rest of the world, but Revelation 20:4-6, 11-12 clearly describe the SECOND resurrection—the resurrection of those who will live again AFTER the thousand years are finished.

Most of the dead, who were not in the first resurrection, will be in the second resurrection—a resurrection to physical life. They will be taught God’s way of life and they will then be judged according to their works. Jesus Christ will be their Judge (Acts 17:30–31). It does not say that they are judged based on the works that they did in their prior life, although this might be included.

Sadly, though, there are those who have had their chance, but have rejected it. At one time, they knew and understood perfectly well that they had to submit to Christ, but they permanently refused to do so. In most cases, they had received the gift of the Holy Spirit, but they had subsequently lost it. They became bitter, hateful, resentful and malicious. They made the unchangeable decision NEVER to repent again! If a person has reached the stage that he can no longer repent, because he has made a firm decision NOT to repent, then God will not force repentance on such a person. God grants repentance, but a person must want to receive it. A person who maliciously rejects Christ, would only continue to live in misery and pain, and that is why God will save such a person from eternal misery, by destroying him in a lake of fire.

After those described in Revelation 20:11–12 are resurrected in a second resurrection, a third category of people is addressed in verses 13–15. These will be raised in a third resurrection, to receive their sentence and be thrown into the lake of fire—to be exterminated, permanently. This is another truth which virtually nobody outside the Church of God understands (and even some in the Church of God who once understood this truth of a third resurrection have rejected it as well). Nowhere does the Bible teach an everlasting hell fire in which the “souls” of the unrepentant sinners would be tortured forever and ever. Rather, the soul is mortal as the soul IS the person. Those in the third resurrection will be resurrected to physical life to be DESTROYED in the lake of fire.

Those who will have become immortal born-again members in the very Family of God, will rule with God and Christ for all eternity over all things (Revelation 22:5). This will be the KINGDOM OF GOD ruling over creation, with God’s plan for mankind having been completed.

For more information on the subject of this installment, please read our free booklets, The Meaning of God’s Spring Holy Days and The Meaning of God’s Fall Holy Days:

In the next and last installment, we will discuss remaining major differences between doctrines of the spiritual Body of Christ—the Church of God—and deviating teachings and practices of “orthodox” Christianity.

(To Be Continued)

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

“Meet the Real Stephen Bannon,” is the title of a new StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

Is Stephen Bannon really the second most powerful man in Washington? If so, who is Mr. Bannon? Why are many concerned? This program will quote some of his most controversial statements, as reported in the American, British and Israeli press.  And it encourages you to look at the facts objectively, in the light of biblical prophecy.

“Gottes Heilige Festtage—Warum die Kirche des Ewigen Gottes? Teil 6,” is the title of this Sabbath’s German sermon. The title in English: “God’s Holy Feast Days—Why the Church of the Eternal God? Part 6.”

“Prophetic Developments in the USA and Europe,” a special report presented last Sabbath during the sermonette time by Norbert Link, is now posted. Here is a summary:

What are the facts behind President Trump’s executive immigration order regarding a “travel ban,” and its worldwide condemnation? Why did a federal court temporarily block the ban? Why do we in God’s Church report about these events? Do they have prophetic significance? And are some, if not many members still too much involved in this political world?

“Establish Our Hearts,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Michael Link, is now posted. Here is a summary:

Our emotions and desires dwell within our hearts.  What does it mean when we put our hearts into something? How do we establish our hearts and for what reason?

The Church Conference for 2017 will be conducted in Escondido, California, with arrivals on March 23 and ending on March 28.

On February 4, 2017, Norbert Link will present a special report, titled, “Prophetic Developments in the USA and Europe,” and Michael Link will present the sermon, titled, “Establish Our Hearts.”

The live services are available, over video and audio, at http://eternalgod.org/live-services/ (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time; 8:30 pm Greenwich Mean Time; 9:30 pm Central European Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

For as long as I can remember, I have had a certain weakness. It’s an innocuous one, but regardless, I’ve been affected by it numerous times in my life, and I will probably continue to be affected by it. My weakness is that whenever someone tells me that he or she thinks that I would be good at doing something, I’m inclined to believe that I can do it too. In addition, almost every sincere claim results in me giving it a try, as long as it is not an ungodly venture, of course. The statements don’t even need to be based on much. I once joined a soccer team because the coach saw me kick a single ball, and asked if I would like to play. Sometimes my attempts at an endeavor that begins with another’s belief in me result in success, but quite often failure.

I recall an early example when I was a member of a Tee-ball team at my grade school. My best friend’s father was the coach of the team, and he told me that he thought I would be a good catcher. In Tee-Ball, the batters hit a baseball from a tee instead of from a pitch, so the role of a catcher only involves catching a ball when a runner is coming into home base. Because of this, I really didn’t have to do very much. I thought that I would be a good catcher too, so I gave it a try. After losing our first couple of games, I was moved to the position that I was destined for—right field. Since I didn’t have to actually catch many balls in that position, I did much better. In this case, I really wasn’t very good at what someone thought that I would be, but I recall giving it my best effort because someone believed in me.

Something that I have become aware of through experience is that when others express their faith in me, I feel like I’m not alone in a pursuit of success. When someone else is involved in my own personal achievement, the support is a huge motivator. As a result, the activities that I get involved in are more meaningful, fulfilling, and even easier when I know that I have someone else standing behind me. I’m sure that many of those reading this share the same feeling – being supported in the pursuit of a virtuous endeavor is extremely motivating.

While I may find that the support and belief of other people in my abilities might sometimes be misplaced, God’s belief in me and His support are not. God’s faith gives me confidence that I can achieve the tasks He sets before me. This is true for all of us. If we find motivation when we are supported by another person, how much more should we be encouraged when we read this, “God is faithful, by whom you were called into the fellowship of His Son, Jesus Christ our Lord” (1 Corinthians 1:9).  God is faithful in us! Knowing that the Almighty Creator of heaven and earth believes in us should give us all the support, encouragement, and edification that we need to continue trying our best to answer the call that He has given us! God has faith that we can succeed in the great task of overcoming sin through Jesus Christ.  We can do this because God the Father believes that we can!

The proof of this godly support abounds in the Bible, and when it is all taken together, it should offer us tremendous and unquenchable encouragement. God calls us to perform a job for a purpose, and not for the purpose of failure. No, we must be encouraged to succeed, “being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ” (Philippians 1:6). If God has blessed us with the understanding of the Truth, this gives us the evidence that He has faith in us, individually.

With the faith of God supporting us, and with His Holy Spirit working within us, we have all the raw materials that we need to succeed in turning away from sin to live a life that seeks the Kingdom of God. If we neglect the support that God provides, this is tantamount to choosing death. God can do nothing more to help us if we turn away from Him. However, if we accept His support and allow His Spirit to lead us to righteousness, we are promised salvation. We must always remember, “If God is for us, who can be against us?” (Romans 8:31).

America is in turmoil, and the world hates it more and more. In less than two weeks, President Donald Trump, due to controversial executive orders, has managed to turn the world upside down, defiantly seeing to it that America’s already bad reputation in the world has reached an unparalleled low point.

The following information is discussed in our new StandingWatch program, “The World Condemns Trump—Why?”  and also in our German AufPostenStehen program, “Die Welt Verurteilt Trump—Warum?”

Mr. Trump’s executive order blocks for 120 days all refugees from entering the country, with an indefinite ban on those from Syria, and prevents for 90 days entry into the United States by citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen.

Confusion abounded as to whether the ban includes green card holders. First, a spokesman for the Department of Homeland Security stated that it does, according to Reuters. This was confirmed by the fact that persons with green cards were detained at American airports. Subsequently, courts in New York, Massachusetts, Virginia and Washington ruled that detentions of persons with visas or green cards were unconstitutional, and Homeland Security Secretary John Kelly affirmed Sunday night that the ban would not apply to permanent residents. He said that: “In applying the provisions of the president’s executive order, I hereby deem the entry of lawful permanent residents to be in the national interest.”

This declaration came after Washington stated the exact opposite earlier on Saturday, according to Bild, dated January 30. But even after Kelly’s “clarification,” it was apparently stated (according to Bild) that even green card holders needed to undergo a personal interview at the American consulate, before permission could be granted to travel into the USA. Then, on Wednesday, it was stated by the White House that legal permanent residents, or green card holders, “no longer need a waiver because if they are a legal permanent resident they won’t need it anymore.” Mr. Trump’s chief of staff, Reince Priebus, on Sunday contradicted himself in stating whether the ban applied to permanent residents. He first told NBC’s “Meet the Press” that “as far as green card holders moving forward, it doesn’t affect them.” But minutes later, he said, “Of course it does.”

The Times of Israel reported on January 29 that “The administration walked back the initial inclusion of green card holders in the travel ban, as the United States was hit Sunday by a second day of protests denouncing Donald Trump’s policy of banning travelers from seven Muslim countries. Meanwhile, the president stood unrepentant in the face of judicial stays and global outrage.”

This reversal and backpedaling over the initial inclusion of green card holders must be viewed as an embarrassing defeat of parts of Mr. Trump’s confusing executive order.

It also emerged that the travel ban applied initially to those persons who have dual citizenship. This fact sparked further worldwide outrage. AFP reported on January 29 about the situation in Britain:

“Foreign Minister Boris Johnson said it was ‘divisive and wrong to stigmatise because of nationality’… But later on Sunday Johnson won an exemption for British citizens and dual nationals after he discussed the matter with Washington.

“The foreign ministry subsequently announced the order would only apply to individuals travelling directly to the US from one of the seven listed countries — Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria, Yemen and Sudan. ‘If you are travelling to the US from anywhere other than one of those countries (for instance, the UK) the executive order does not apply to you and you will experience no extra checks regardless of your nationality or your place of birth,’ the foreign ministry said in a statement. ‘If you are a UK national who happens to be travelling from one of those countries to the US, then the order does not apply to you — even if you were born in one of those countries.’

“The foreign ministry added that dual nationals might have extra checks if they are coming from one of the seven named countries, ‘for example a UK-Libya dual national coming from Libya to the US’.”

As this is worded, it should also include waivers for persons in Germany and France, who have dual citizenship—another stated concern in those countries which caused additional outrage and condemnation of Mr. Trump’s new policy. Die Welt reported on January 31 that Germans with dual citizenship are indeed exempted from the ban, but uncertainties remain, as our articles point out. In addition, the statement from Die Welt came one day after a statement from Bild, dated January 30, setting forth the opposite. Both Die Welt and Bild quoted statements from the Trump Administration for their respective reports. This confusion, reversal and backpedaling over the inclusion and ban of persons with dual citizenship must be viewed as another embarrassing defeat of parts of Mr. Trump’s confusing executive order.

Many employers and attorneys advised or instructed their clients or employees with passports from any of the affected countries NOT to leave the USA, even though they may have valid visas, as it is unclear as to whether the practical application of the executive order includes or excludes travelers with temporary visas. In addition, in light of the incredible chaos and confusion caused by Mr. Trump’s executive order, it might be too premature to fully rely on Washington’s current stated position regarding green-card holders and persons with dual citizenship.

The order also includes biometric tracking for all travelers when they arrive and leave the United States. This could see all tourists being finger printed not only when they arrive in the USA, but also on departure.

To clarify, the order suspends immediately the Visa Interview Waiver Program, not the Visa Waiver Program. Quartz wrote on January 27: “The Visa Interview Waiver Program allows travelers to renew travel authorizations without an in-person interview. The action is not expected to have any effect on the widely popular Visa Waiver Program, familiar to many by its front-line system, ESTA. That program allows nationals of 38 countries—including much of Europe—to enter the US without securing a visa at a consulate first.”

But Die Welt Online explained on January 31 that the Visa Waiver Program does not apply to Germans (and arguably to other nationals) who have dual citizenship. They must instead apply in person for a visa.

Many Americans are angry, in uproar and stunned by these new developments. Even though Mr. Trump said very clearly on his campaign trail what he intended to do, many did not take him seriously; thinking that he could not possibly resurrect measures reminiscent of the darkest days in the 20^th century. Others cheered and voted for him, not realizing the real consequences of his proposed actions. Then, there were and are many who approve of his conduct. So, we can add another reason for God’s anger against those in the USA with arrogant, unmerciful and ungodly hearts.

It is also widely felt that the order is in compliance with Mr. Trump’s earlier promise during his campaign to ban Muslims from entering the US. President Trump now slammed the media for “dishonestly reporting” that his order constituted a Muslim ban, even though his order bars citizens of seven Muslim-majority countries from entering the United States for the next 90 days, while potentially excluding persons of a minority religion (i.e. Christian). In addition, after repeatedly using the word “ban” in describing the order, the Trump Administration subsequently denied that it is a ban, and blamed the media for using this word.

The following sets forth the worldwide confusion and condemnation which Mr. Trump has caused by his executive order. We will also quote articles about the initial ban of green-card holders and persons with dual citizenship, just to show the incredible confusion of the Trump Administration and the worldwide anger against Mr. Trump, even though he later backpedaled on those categories of people, at least to an extent, as the picture is still somewhat confusing. At the same time, the outrage remains pertaining to the remainder of his order which is viewed by many as unconstitutional for numerous reasons, allegedly including the overstepping of his authority and his applying a religious test; and many lawsuits in this regard are expected to be filed.

We can be very thankful that in the world tomorrow, when Jesus Christ rules this earth, such confusing, unjust, contradictory and unmerciful policies will NEVER be enacted.

Worldwide Condemnation of Trump Immigration Ban

Deutsche Welle reported on January 28:

“Airlines across the globe are turning back would-be passengers from countries affected by a US immigration ban that bars them from entering the United States. Leading political and business figures moved quickly to condemn the ban… keeping citizens of Iraq, Syria, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia or Yemen from entering the United States for 90 days. The executive order has also been applied to people with permanent residence permits, known as green cards.

“In Europe, German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel decried the order during a press conference with his French counterpart, Jean-Marc Ayrault, in Paris. Gabriel said Trump’s refugee policy contradicted America’s Christian traditions of ‘love thy neighbor.’ During the same press conference, Ayrault said the policy ‘can only worry us,’ and that ‘welcoming refugees who flee war and oppression is part of our duty.’…

“In the United States, Democrats called the measures ‘un-American.’ Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer tweeted late on Friday, ‘Tears are running down the cheeks of the Statue of Liberty tonight as a grand tradition of America, welcoming immigrants, that has existed since America was founded has been stomped upon.’… In Canada, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau tweeted on Saturday ‘To those fleeing persecution, terror and war, Canadians will welcome you, regardless of your faith. Diversity is our strength. Welcome To Canada.’…

“A study from the US Cato Institute found that foreigners from the seven nations affected by the immigration ban have killed zero Americans in terrorist attacks on US soil between 1975 and the end of 2015.”

Bild wrote on January 28 that a high official within the Trump Administration confirmed that the seven countries listed are probably just the beginning, and that the government was considering very aggressively which countries were to be added. See also the next articles.

More to Come

The New York Times wrote on January 27:

“Announcing his ‘extreme vetting’ plan, the president invoked the specter of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Most of the 19 hijackers on the planes that crashed into the World Trade Center, the Pentagon and a field in Shanksville, Pa., were from Saudi Arabia. The rest were from the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Lebanon. None of those countries is on Mr. Trump’s visa ban list.”

The Los Angeles Times wrote on January 27:

“President Trump signed an executive order Friday that temporarily halts the nation’s refugee program and ushers in the most sweeping changes in more than 40 years to how the U.S. welcomes the world’s most vulnerable people… Trump’s action, seen as part of his campaign pledge to ban Muslims from entering the country, sparked an international outcry, given the historic role that the U.S. and other industrialized nations have long played in embracing victims of war and oppression. The last major change in U.S. refugee policy came during the Vietnamese resettlement programs of the mid-1970s.

“In the ABC interview, Trump said… residents of countries left out of the ban – Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia – will nonetheless face what he calls ‘extreme vetting’…

“Critics called Trump’s order a betrayal of long-held American ideals…  Several of those who condemned Trump’s order noted that it was signed on Holocaust Remembrance Day, a reminder that thousands of Jews fleeing Nazi Germany were denied safe harbors in the United States and elsewhere, forcing them back to Nazi-controlled territory, where many were murdered. ‘Donald Trump is retracting the promise of American freedom to an extent we have not seen from a president since Franklin Roosevelt forced Japanese Americans into internment camps during World War II,’ said Steven Goldstein, executive director of the Anne Frank Center for Mutual Respect in New York City.”

Will Even “Dreamers” Be Affected?

Reuters reported on January 30:

“Divisions have emerged among advisers to President Donald Trump over whether to rescind a signature policy of his predecessor, President Barack Obama, that shields young immigrants from deportation, according to congressional sources and Republicans close to the White House. Even though Trump campaigned on a promise to roll back Obama’s executive orders on immigration, the Republican has so far left intact an order safeguarding 750,000 people who were brought to the United States illegally as children, known as the ‘dreamers.’

“The issue has become a flashpoint for White House advisers divided between a more moderate faction such as chief of staff Reince Priebus and immigration hardliners Stephen Miller and Steve Bannon, said a former congressional aide who has been involved with immigration issues in Washington.

“Priebus has said publicly that Trump will work with Congress to get a ‘long-term solution’ on the issue. Meanwhile, Miller, said to have mastered the thinking of his former boss and anti-immigration advocate Jeff Sessions, Trump’s nominee for U.S. Attorney General, as well as Bannon, former head of right-wing Breitbart News, have pushed Trump to take a harder approach and rescind the protections…

“House Speaker Paul Ryan told a woman protected by DACA, at a townhall hosted by CNN Jan. 12, that there should be a solution for people like her to get ‘right with the law’ and not be separated from their families. Just two days prior, Sessions, a Senator, told a Senate panel considering his confirmation that it would ‘certainly be constitutional’ to repeal DACA…”

British, French and German Citizens Affected by Trump Ban

The Telegraph wrote on January 28:

“The US State Department said that Britons with dual nationality with the countries Syria, Iraq, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Somalia and Yemen will be stopped at the American border for the next 90 days…

“Politicians said tens of thousands of Britons could be caught up in the border chaos as Mr Trump’s new immigration rules impact on holidays and business trips.

Der Spiegel added on January 28 that Trump’s ban includes tens of thousands of Germans with dual citizenship, including a parliamentarian of the Green party, who has a German and an Iranian passport. In this context, Bild Online added on January 29: “Horror at Ban: Trump also Locks out Germans.” Subsequent developments changed this picture somewhat, but we still can’t be sure as to what extent, as some of the following articles discuss.

Merkel Slams Trump over Muslim Travel Ban

The Local wrote on January 29:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Sunday slammed the restrictions on immigration imposed by US President Donald Trump, saying it was ‘not justified’ to target people based on their background or religion… Merkel’s condemnation comes a day after she spoke by phone with the new US president, when they discussed a range of issues from relations with Russia to the situation in the Middle East and NATO.

“Statements released by both sides after the call made no mention of the immigration ban, but Seibert on Sunday said Merkel had reminded the US billionaire of his human rights responsibilities.”

The Local wrote on January 30:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Monday reaffirmed her criticism of a US travel ban slapped on travellers from seven countries, saying it smacked of anti-Muslim bias. ‘The essential and also resolute fight against terrorism in no way justifies general suspicion against people of a specific faith, in this case people of the Muslim faith or people of a certain background,’ she told reporters in unprompted remarks about measures enacted by US President Donald Trump. ‘This approach in my view contradicts the basic tenets of international aid to refugees and international cooperation,’ she said…”

Schulz Slams Trump

Deutsche Welle wrote on January 29:

“Martin Schulz, the Social Democrat’s nominee to challenge Angela Merkel… has also slammed US President Donald Trump’s clampdown on minorities as an ‘intolerable’ taboo breach… Schulz accused US President Donald Trump of attacking minorities in the United States with ‘shameless and dangerous’ statements… Germany and Europe… had to make it clear to Trump that international human rights also apply to him, Schulz insisted…”

Trump Retaliates by Attacking Germany—“Top Trump Aide Blasts Germany for ‘Exploiting’ US on Trade”

AFP wrote on January 31:

“A top economic adviser to US President Donald Trump bashed Germany for exploiting an undervalued euro to take advantage of its trading partners, the Financial Times reported Tuesday. The public rebuke of a major trading partner is the latest example of the brash tactic that has become a feature of the new US administration, with Trump himself using public attacks and Twitter to criticize businesses and allies, including Mexico.

“Peter Navarro, who advised Trump during the campaign and heads the White House’s new National Trade Council, said in an interview with the FT that Germany ‘continues to exploit other countries in the EU as well as the US with an “implicit Deutsche mark” that is grossly undervalued.’…

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel, speaking in Stockholm, deflected the criticism, saying the currency value is the responsibility of the European Central Bank… France’s Finance Minister Michel Sapin hit back saying, ‘The decisions of the new US administration pose a serious risk to the world trade order.’ He warned that ‘history reminds us that protectionist retreats are the worst of solutions,’ and said neither France nor Europe ‘will be able to watch helplessly what might risk being a dislocation of our economic institutions.’”

“Arnold Schwarzenegger Says Trump’s Refugee Ban ‘Makes Us Look Stupid’”

Newsmax wrote on January 30:

“Arnold Schwarzenegger… said that the new president’s executive order on refugees and immigration was poorly vetted and that it ‘makes us look stupid’ when the White House ‘is ill-prepared to put this kind of’ directive out there. Schwarzenegger [was] was governor of California from 2003 to 2011…

“‘To go and ban people who have a green card, that means that the United States of America has given you permission to work here permanently and you are on the way to permanent citizenship. … I was in that position. … It’s crazy. It’s crazy and makes us look stupid when the White House is ill-prepared to put this kind of executive order out there,’ he said. Schwarzenegger is an immigrant from Austria, who came to the United States in 1968.”

These statements were run in European papers as the “quote of the day.” How “stupid” and “crazy” we look can be seen in the next article.

US Handcuffs Five-Year-Old Boy for Hours

The Mirror wrote on January 30:

“The White House says a five-year-old boy was held for five hours and reportedly handcuffed because he could have been a ‘threat’ to the United States. The boy was one of more than 100 people detained for hours at airports across the country, after Donald Trump signed an Executive Order banning travel from seven majority Muslim countries.

“In a briefing tonight, Donald Trump’s Press Secretary Sean Spicer said: ‘To assume that just because of someone’s age and gender that they don’t pose a threat would be misguided and wrong.’ The boy, who was identified by Senator Chris Van Hollen as a US citizen who lives in Maryland, was detained at Washington DC’s Dulles airport on Saturday. He was seen being showered with kisses by his mother, who is believed to be Iranian-born, after they were reunited.

“Senator Van Hollen said it was ‘outrageous’ that the boy had been held for so long – adding that he was detained despite giving the authorities advance notice of his arrival. When he called to see if he had been released, Senator Van Hollen said airport authorities refused to say.”

Major Tech Firms Oppose Trump’s Executive Order on Travel Ban for Muslims

Forbes wrote on January 29:

“Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz is adding his voice to those who are alarmed and upset by President Donald Trump’s executive order on immigration — and he’s upping the ante on corporate responses, vowing to hire 10,000 refugees over the next five years. Trump’s executive order… has sparked an outpouring of criticism, including from chief executives and founders across America.

“Airbnb founder and CEO Brian Chesky said his company will offer free housing to refugees and anyone not allowed in the U.S.; Google co-founder Sergy Brin joined a protest at San Francisco International Airport; and the CEOs of Tesla, Facebook, Apple and Microsoft have tweeted, emailed or otherwise publicly voiced disapproval.”

Wired added on January 30 that in addition, the following tech firms are opposing the order, so far: Viber, Uber, Slack, Elon Musk, Facebook, Twitter and Lyft.

Google Asks All Travelling Employees to Return to USA Immediately

Newsmax wrote on January 28:

“Alphabet Inc.’s Google delivered a sharp message to staff traveling overseas who may be impacted by a new executive order on immigration from President Donald Trump: Get back to the U.S. now. Google Chief Executive Officer Sundar Pichai slammed Trump’s move in a note to employees Friday, telling them that more than 100 company staff are affected by the order…

“The comments underscore a growing rift between the Trump administration and several large U.S. technology companies, which include many immigrants in their ranks and have lobbied for fewer immigration restrictions. Pichai’s note echoed similar statements from tech peers voicing concerns about the harm such policies could have on their businesses… ‘We are advising our clients from those seven countries who have green cards or any type of H-1B visa not to travel outside the U.S.’ said Ava Benach, a partner at immigration law firm Benach Collopy LLP…”

“It Took Her Long Enough”—May Disagrees

The Independent wrote on January 29:

“Theresa May ‘does not agree’ with a contentious ban on immigration implemented by Donald Trump, Downing Street has said. In a statement released late on Saturday evening, and responding to mounting anger from within her own party, the Prime Minister passed judgment on the President’s executive order on immigration…”

The Times of Israel added on January 29:

“Iraqi-born MP Nadhim Zahawi tweeted that he had had ‘confirmation that the order does apply to myself and my wife as we were both born in Iraq,’ even though the pair have British passports. ‘A sad, sad day to feel like a second class citizen! Sad day for the USA,’ he added… Olympic champion runner Mo Farah, born in Somalia, was another British citizen potentially affected by the ban…

“Tory MP Sarah Wollaston called Trump ‘a sickening piece of work’ and demanded that he not be allowed to address both of Britain’s Houses of Parliament when he makes a state visit later in the year, when he will be hosted by Queen Elizabeth II…”

“Clearly a Muslim Ban”

The Mirror wrote on January 30:

“Tonight, British MPs passed a motion calling on Donald Trump to repeal the Muslim ban. It came after former Labour leader Ed Miliband was granted an emergency debate on the Muslim ban. In a passionate speech during the debate, Mr Miliband said: ‘It clearly is a Muslim ban. Why do I say that? Because it was the president’s original intention.’”

Many Jews Strongly Oppose Trump’s Immigration Ban by Referring to the Holocaust

The Times of Israel wrote on January 29:

“… many Jews saw something akin to what their forebears endured as they attempted to flee Nazi-occupied Europe. Some noted cruel irony in the president’s order coming down on Friday, which was International Holocaust Remembrance Day. Chava Brandress, a corporate lawyer, said she belongs to a pro-bono legal listserv, and her email ‘began exploding’ Saturday afternoon with tales of foreign nationals being detained after landing at Dulles. ‘I felt, “I can’t understand how this is happening again,”’ said Brandress, 36, recalling how Jews, fleeing Nazi persecution, were turned away from US shores…”

Newsmax wrote on January 26:

“Anne Frank and her family – led by father Otto Frank’s late and futile attempts – were denied entry visas into the U.S. during World War II… Otto Frank’s efforts to get his family to the United States ran afoul of restrictive American immigration policies designed to protect national security and guard against an influx of foreigners during time of war…

“Anne Frank died at the age of 15 in a German concentration camp, but… Anne Frank could be a 77-year-old woman living in Boston today – a writer.”

The Travel Ban and Green Card Holders

JTA wrote on January 31:

“Among the travelers delayed for hours by the Trump administration’s executive orders banning travel from seven predominantly Muslim countries were seven people with ties to the Syrian Jewish community… federal authorities had detained the seven people for over six hours disembarking at Port Canaveral from a Royal Caribbean cruise ship. At least three of them were U.S. born… One woman, the mother to the three U.S. natives, was Syrian but was not a citizen. She had permanent residency – a green card – and had lived in the United States for 20 years.

“… there have been multiple instances since President Donald Trump issued the order last Friday of authorities detaining green card-holding travelers who have citizenship in one of the seven banned countries, one of which is Syria…”

Israelis with Dual Citizenship Still Affected

The Times of Israel wrote on January 31:

“The US Embassy in Tel Aviv has clarified that President Donald Trump’s travel ban will largely not affect the tens of thousands of Israeli Jews born in Middle Eastern countries.  A Tuesday statement said the controversial executive order would not be enforced against Israelis from those countries unless they possess a valid passport from one of the seven Arab countries banned under the directive.  ‘If you have a currently valid US visa in your Israeli passport and were born in Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, or Yemen, and do not have a valid passport from one of these countries, your visa was not cancelled and remains valid,’ the statement said.

“Regarding those Israelis born in the seven countries who do have a valid passport from one of those countries, the embassy did not have definitive information, but seemed to indicate this would be handled on a case-by-case basis. ‘Authorization to enter the United States is always determined at the port of entry’, it said in the statement. ‘Similarly, we continue to process visa applications for applicants born in those countries, so long as they do not have a valid passport from one of those countries…’

“… Israel is home to around 140,000 people born in the seven countries covered by the Trump order, including around 45,000 Iranians and 53,000 Iraqis… The majority are over the age of 65 and many fled persecution. Their Israeli passports say where they were born, but most do not retain citizenship in their birth country. Israel has no diplomatic relations with any of the seven countries…

“Trump’s order was met with near-immediate condemnation from world leaders across the globe, with presidents, prime ministers and senior government members from the UK, France, Germany, Canada, Turkey, Iran and a host of other countries panning the initiative.”

However, this ruling regarding Israelis with two valid passports creates further confusion, as nothing was said before in this respect regarding other nationals with dual citizenship, including Brits, Germans, French, Canadians or Swiss nationals.

Foreign Airlines React

AFP wrote on January 28:

“Foreign airlines are barring Iranians from traveling to the United States following President Donald Trump’s temporary order barring visas for seven Muslim countries, travel agents in Tehran said Saturday.  Two agencies told AFP they had been instructed by Etihad Airways, Emirates and Turkish Airlines not to sell US tickets or allow Iranians holding American visas to board US-bound flights… An Iranian studying in California who was visiting home said Saturday that she could not return because her ticket had been cancelled under the new restrictions.”

Affected Countries Retaliate

Reuters reported on January 28:

“Iran said on Saturday it would stop U.S. citizens entering the country in retaliation to Washington’s visa ban against Tehran and six other majority-Muslim countries announced by new U.S. President Donald Trump. ‘While respecting the American people and distinguishing between them and the hostile policies of the U.S. government, Iran will implement the principle of reciprocity until the offensive U.S. limitations against Iranian nationals are lifted,’ a Foreign Ministry statement said.

“‘The restrictions against travel by Muslims to America… are an open affront against the Muslim world and the Iranian nation in particular and will be known as a great gift to extremists,’ said the statement, carried by state media. The U.S. ban will make it virtually impossible for relatives and friends of an estimated one million Iranian-Americans to visit the United States.”

Newsmax wrote on January 30:

“Iraqi lawmakers voted Monday to call on the government to enact a reciprocal travel ban on Americans if Washington does not withdraw its decision to bar Iraqis, officials said… The travel restrictions, which come on the heels of repeated assertions by Trump that the US should have stolen Iraq’s oil before leaving in 2011, risk alienating the citizens and government of a country fighting against militants the president has cast as a major threat to America.”

Nomination of Supreme Court Judge Receives Mixed Reactions from Jewish Community

JTA wrote on January 31:

“President Donald Trump nominated to the Supreme Court Neil Gorsuch, a federal judge known to favor protections of religious belief in the public square and for business owners. The nomination, likely to trigger a vigorous confirmation battle, is already splitting the organized Jewish community, with the Reform movement expressing concerns and an Orthodox Union official describing his record as ‘encouraging.’…

“Gorsuch, 49, is on the U.S. Court of Appeals in Denver covering six Western states. He would replace one of the high court’s most stalwart conservatives, Antonin Scalia, who died last year.

“Among his opinions most attracting Jewish interest was Burwell vs. Hobby Lobby in 2013, when the appeals court upheld the right of a private business to reject the government mandate to provide contraceptive care under employee health plans. The Obama administration had offered leeway on such coverage to faith-based nonprofits but would not extend them to private businesses.

“Gorsuch joined the majority in the appeals court ruling, which was upheld the next year by the U.S. Supreme Court… Gorsuch has also favored displays of crosses on public lands, and has tended in his rulings toward the rights of gun owners, in favor of the death penalty and against abortion rights…

“The nomination is likely to face a fight, with Democrats suggesting they may filibuster. Democrats are still stung by the refusal of Senate Majority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., to allow a hearing for President Barack Obama’s nominee to replace Scalia, Merrick Garland, a moderate judge… Garland, had he been confirmed, would have brought to four the number of Jewish justices on the court.”

Newsmax added on January 31:

“Gorsuch has strong academic qualifications, with an Ivy League education: attending Columbia University and, like several of the other justices on the court, Harvard Law School. He also completed a doctorate in legal philosophy at Oxford University, spent several years in private practice and worked in George W. Bush’s Justice Department…

“As long as Kennedy and four liberals remain on the bench, the court is not expected to pare back abortion rights as many U.S. conservatives fervently hope. The Supreme Court legalized abortion in the landmark 1973 Roe v. Wade ruling. In June, the justices ruled 5-3 to strike down a Texas law that restricted abortion access, with Kennedy and the liberals in the majority… If any of those three is replaced by a Trump appointee, conservatives would be eager to bring cases challenging the Roe v. Wade ruling in the hope it would be overturned, long a goal for many Christian conservatives.”

Trump’s First Military Attack Since Becoming President

Deutsche Welle reported on January 29:

“In the first confirmed US raid under Donald Trump’s presidency, at least 14 militants were killed in Yemen, along with a US soldier and several civilians…

“The raid targeted the homes of three tribal chiefs linked to al Qaeda, tribal sources told AFP… But Apache helicopters also targeted a school, a mosque and a medical facility…

“It was the first military attack… attributed to the United States since President Donald Trump took office on January 20. Yemen was one of the seven Muslim-majority countries listed on Trump’s immigration ban. “

Trump’s Safe Zones—a Declaration of War?

Global Research wrote on January 28:

“A… draft EO authorizes the establishment of safe zones for Syrian civilians, saying ‘(p)ursuant to the cessation of refugee processing for Syrian nationals, the Secretary of State, in conjunction with the Secretary of Defense, is directed within 90 days of the date of this order to produce a plan to provide safe areas in Syria and in the surrounding region in which Syrian nationals displaced from their homeland can await firm settlement, such as repatriation or potential third-country resettlement.’…

“It lacks details of where they’ll be located, how they’ll be protected, how much the scheme will cost, whether a no-fly zone will be implemented, and the risk of US/Russia confrontation over this very sensitive issue. Safe zones will illegally redraw Syria’s map, violating its sovereignty and territorial integrity, what Damascus and Moscow strongly oppose.

“Last year, Joint Chiefs chairman General Joseph (‘fighting Joe’) Dunford said implementing safe and no-fly zones ‘require(s) us to go to war with Syria and Russia.’ Former Joint Chiefs Chairman General Martin Dempsey warned about greater intervention in Syria, including the perils of establishing safe and no-fly zones, saying it could involve thousands of US troops.

“Costs could run ‘in the billions.’ The plan requires ‘hundreds of ground and sea-based aircraft, intelligence and electronic warfare support, and enablers for refueling and communications.’ Dempsey estimated over $1 billion a month in cost, explaining around 70,000 US troops would be needed, warning the entire scheme could backfire. Greater regional conflict could follow, turning a bad situation into potential disaster.

“Syria needs humanitarian aid, peace, stability, reconstruction, and employment for its displaced people so they can begin rebuilding their lives. Obama’s war wrecked them. Greater US intervention for the wrong reasons risks escalated conflict instead of all-out efforts to resolve it. Trump’s safe zones scheme sounds more like a declaration of war than a good faith effort to end it.”

Donald Trump the Least Popular US President in at Least 40 Years

Yahoo News reported on January 30:

“It took former President George W. Bush 1,205 days to reach a majority disapproval rating. Former President Barack Obama crossed that threshold in 936 days. And President Donald Trump did it in just over a week.

“The Republican, who was sworn in on Jan. 20 as the least popular president in at least 40 years, hit majority disapproval in a record eight days, a new Gallup poll… finds. As of Saturday, 51 percent of Americans disapproved of Trump.

“Trump’s majority disapproval rating comes after a tumultuous first week in office… By contrast, it took at least several hundred days for the majority of Americans to disapprove of the past five presidents…”

“Stocks Fall Most This Year”

Newsmax on January 30:

“Major U.S. stock indexes posted their largest drop so far in 2017 on Monday as investors worried that a curb on immigration ordered by Donald Trump was a reminder that some of the U.S. president’s policies are not market-friendly. An executive order issued by Trump on Friday banned immigration from seven Muslim-majority countries…

“Airline stocks fell, with American Airlines down 4.4 percent and United Continental down 3.6 percent. At least one analyst cited worries over the travel ban to the United States. ‘The concern is that (Trump’s) travel ban starts to encompass more countries or that there are more stringent restrictions on travel to the U.S.,’ or other countries retaliate, said Stifel analyst Joseph DeNardi…”

Brexit Under Way

BBC News reported on February 1:

“MPs have voted by a majority of 384 to allow Prime Minister Theresa May to get Brexit negotiations under way. They backed the government’s European Union Bill, supported by the Labour leadership, by 498 votes to 114. But the SNP, Plaid Cymru and the Liberal Democrat leadership opposed the bill, while 47 Labour MPs and Tory ex-chancellor Ken Clarke rebelled.

“The bill now faces further scrutiny in the Commons and the House of Lords before it can become law. The prime minister has set a deadline of 31 March for invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty, getting official talks with the EU started… Talks with the EU are expected to last up to two years, with the UK predicted to leave the 28-member organisation in 2019.”

Tusk Attacks Trump, Pleads for European Unity

Deutsche Welle wrote on January 30:

“The Trump administration has joined Russia, China and radical Islam as a geopolitical challenge for the European Union, EC President Donald Tusk said in a letter. Tusk also called on EU member states to stand together. In a letter to the European Union’s (EU) national leaders, European Council (EC) President Donald Tusk said Tuesday that the bloc’s current challenges ‘are more dangerous than ever before in the time since the signature of the Treaty of Rome 60 years ago.’

“Tusk highlighted an ‘assertive China,’ ‘Russia’s aggressive policy’ in Eastern Europe, and ‘radical Islam’ as key external threats to the EU. These factors ‘as well as worrying declarations by the new American administration all make our future highly unpredictable,’ he said, referencing the Trump administration.

“Tusk’s [letter] reflects the worries of many European national leaders regarding the Trump presidency. ‘Particularly the change in Washington puts the European Union in a difficult situation; with the new administration seeming to put into question the last 70 years of American foreign policy,’ Tusk wrote.”

Der Spiegel wrote that Tusk did “right” in responding in this way to the “provocations of the White House,” and that it is hoped that the European leaders will support Tusk in this and not shy away from it.

“EU Needs Strong Military Force”

The Prague Daily Monitor wrote on January 30:

“The European Union cannot further rely on doing without a military force if it wants to keep influence on the international scene, Czech Foreign Minister Lubomir Zaoralek [said]. The EU has too long believed that it can do with ‘soft capabilities’ only, but it needs to enhance its defence capability in future, otherwise its influence will decline, Zaoralek said. A similar effect could be seen in connection with the recent peace talks on Syria in Astana, Kazakhstan, to which the EU was not invited, Zaoralek said.

“‘A ceasefire is being discussed by those who have weapons and are present in Syria, but we are unwilling to make a military intervention in the country. As a result, we have been ousted from [the negotiations] that concern us immensely. All of us know that the fate of Syria, its peace and reconstruction are crucially tied with the safety and fate of Europe,’ Zaoralek said.

“The EU has not intervened in the Syrian conflict by sending in soldiers, but mainly by providing humanitarian aid to the afflicted regions. This, however, will not be enough in [the] future, if the EU is to keep influence on the international scene, Zaoralek said… He said he would welcome it if the EU started to intensively work on forming its own military units…

“The debate on forming a European military has been promoted in Brussels by Czech Prime Minister Bohuslav Sobotka… and the idea was jointly supported by the Visegrad Group (V4) comprised of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia.

“Europe’s capability of making a military intervention and acting unitedly is also crucial in relation to the USA, Zaoralek said. A number of EU countries, many of which are members of NATO, consider their NATO membership a guarantee of their safety. However, the new U.S. president, Donald Trump, previously said the USA would ponder on whether to help them as a NATO ally, if attacked, if their spending on defence failed to meet their promises…”

Trump–Nightmare for Europe?

Deutsche Welle wrote on January 30:

“The European Union’s chief Brexit negotiator said Donald Trump’s presidency is the newest threat to the European Union. Speaking to a group of scholars at a public policy institute in London, Guy Verhofstadt said the EU is facing a three-pronged attack from radical Islamists, Russia’s Vladimir Putin and now US President Trump. ‘I have just come back from US and my view is that we have a third front that is undermining the EU… and that is Donald Trump,’ Verhofstadt said in a speech at the Chatham House think-tank…  Verhofstadt was the prime minister of Belgium for nine years, and has been a member of the European Parliament since 2009…

“In addition to Verhofstadt’s recent trip to the US, Trump’s choice for ambassador to the EU – Ted Malloch, a long-time EU critic – raised eyebrows when asked by a BBC presenter on Friday why he wanted to be the US ambassador to the EU. ‘Well,’ he replied, ‘I had in a previous career a diplomatic post where I helped bring down the Soviet Union, so maybe there’s another Union that needs a little taming.’”

Will Trump Make Europe Great Again?

ETF Daily News reported on January 30:

“Donald Trump’s promise to put America first might actually help make Europe great again.

“First, while the new U.S. administration aims to discourage imports into the U.S. and boost domestic production, European exporters should still be able to increase their market share in the U.S. for some time…

“Switching demand away from foreign to domestic goods could work eventually, but in the near term, there simply isn’t enough quality and capacity in U.S. manufacturing to fill the gap. Most of the ‘Make America Great Again’ hats that Trump supporters were sporting at the inauguration were manufactured in China or Vietnam, and it will take a while, and a major relative price change, before we see the more affluent Americans favor Chevrolet, Lincoln, Chrysler and Jeep over BMW, Mercedes, Lexus and Range Rover.

“Second, the prospect of a more protectionist U.S. administration, together with existing local pressures from populist movements, will likely provoke policy responses in Europe aimed at stimulating domestic demand and potential growth…

“Third, a more isolationist U.S. foreign and defense policy could catalyze a new joint European defense initiative. Committing to a common defense budget, financed by joint issuance, to counter actual or perceived external threats is a much easier sell than other forms of fiscal union…”

Is Ivanka Trump Really Jewish?

The Times of Israel wrote on January 26:

“Last summer, Israel’s religious authorities issued a ruling that raised doubts about her conversion to Judaism… President Donald Trump’s daughter converted to Judaism under a prominent Orthodox rabbi in Manhattan before her 2009 marriage to Jared Kushner, an observant Jew.  In its ruling last July, an Israeli state religious court rejected the legitimacy of another conversion by the same rabbi. Although it didn’t directly affect Ivanka Trump, it raised questions as to whether Israel’s powerful religious establishment would recognize her as being Jewish.

“But in early December, just weeks after Trump’s election victory, Israel’s chief rabbis said they would work to change the rules for recognizing conversions performed abroad – and they singled out Ivanka Trump… Israeli activists say the sudden policy change appears to be an attempt to curry favor with the new US president. Ivanka Trump’s husband has been appointed a senior adviser to Trump and is expected to focus on Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts… ‘The timing is certainly suspicious,’ said Rabbi Seth Farber, director of ITIM, an organization that represents converts seeking recognition from the rabbinate. ‘My biggest fear is that the rabbinate will find some way to find Ms. Trump kosher, to recognize her conversion, but leave thousands of other converts behind, simply saying they’re not Jewish enough for us.’

“… Israel’s Orthodox establishment does not recognize conversions performed by the more liberal Reform and Conservative streams of Judaism, to which most American Jews belong… Secular Israelis often wed in civil ceremonies abroad to avoid the rabbinate, while many ultra-Orthodox Jews dismiss the rabbinate’s certification of kosher food as too lax…”

Is Jared Kushner’s Influence Diminishing?

JTA wrote on January 31:

“Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump have been called the two most influential Jews in America, owing to their proximity to Ivanka’s dad. But is Shabbat preventing them from having the president’s ear? That’s the contention of an article in Vanity Fair, which claims that Jared and Ivanka were unaware of the growing protests over President Trump’s ban on refugees and other travelers from predominantly Muslim countries because Trump signed the executive order close to sundown on Friday. Shabbat observance includes abstaining from electronics from Friday at sundown until Saturday night, and usually renders observant Jews incommunicado for that 25-hour period.

“The article says Shabbat may also have been to blame for Ivanka’s tweet, posted just after midnight Sunday morning, showing her and Jared in the formal wear they wore during that night’s exclusive Alfalfa Club dinner, at the same time that protesters were massing in airports nationwide against what critics were calling a ‘Muslim ban.’ Because Shabbat had just ended, the article says, Ivanka was only ‘obliquely’ aware of the unrest…

“Trump signed the order at 4:42 p.m. Friday. Candle-lighting, the moment when many observant Jews begin Shabbat observance, came in at 5:06. Sundown, the latest possible time by which Shabbat must begin, was 18 minutes later, at 5:24. Shabbat ended Saturday at 6:08 p.m…

“Shabbat hasn’t been an obstacle to other observant Jews in senior government roles. Jack Lew, a Shabbat observer who served as President Obama’s chief of staff and treasury secretary, would get on the phone during moments of crisis…

“Perhaps the most famous Orthodox Jew in government, former Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman, also made Shabbat observance work with his obligations to the country. During the debate over universal health care in 2010, Lieberman once walked five miles across Washington, D.C. so he could attend synagogue and then participate in a vote, according to The Hill. The article also said Lieberman answered his phone during ‘times of national emergency.’

“Even Jared and Ivanka themselves have reportedly bent the rules of Shabbat in deference to their new advisory roles. The couple allegedly received a rabbi’s permission to travel in a car after sundown on January 20 so they could safely attend post-inaugural events… Jewish law prohibits the observant from discussing their business matters on Shabbat, although wide latitude is giving for those involved in public safety or life-saving professions.

“Others have speculated in the past that Shabbat has undermined the moderating role Jared and Ivanka are expected to play within Trump’s inner circle. A September Huffington Post profile of Ivanka posited that some of Trump’s most inflammatory tweets came on Shabbat and Jewish holidays, when similar restrictions apply…

“The Vanity Fair’s most significant contention, at least from the perspective of Jared and Ivanka watchers, is that the couple’s influence in the nascent administration is ‘flagging.’ ‘Less than a fortnight into his new post, Kushner appears unable to control both his father-in-law and those around him. (On the same day as Trump’s visit to the Pentagon, the White House acknowledged International Holocaust Remembrance Day in a statement that omitted mention of the Jews.),’ according to the article.”

The Vanity Fair’s article of January 30 also stated this:

“Kushner appears unable to control his father-in-law—and is ‘furious’ that his efforts are being undermined… As the work week came to a close, Trump quietly announced from a wooden desk what would surely be the most controversial measure of them all: a ban on refugees from around the globe. Trump would temporarily halt migration, in particular, from seven predominantly Muslim countries, such as Libya, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Sudan. Saudi Arabia, where the plotters behind the 9/11 attacks had hailed, was notably absent, among other nations. As others have noted, Trump has business interests in Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates…

“Last week, the president personally called the Park Service on the morning after his inauguration to inquire about the size of the crowds who came to watch him take the oath of office. He subsequently delivered a widely derided speech at C.I.A. headquarters that afternoon, during which he blathered on about the media’s treatment of him and his inaugural crowd size. He then sent his press secretary, Sean Spicer, into the briefing room to falsely claim that it was the largest audience for an inauguration in history. During the tumult, some noticed the conspicuous absence of Kushner’s allegedly calming presence. ‘He wasn’t rolling calls on Saturday when this happened,’ one person close to Kushner told me last week. ‘To me, that’s not a coincidence.’…

“… his most pivotal role within Trumplandia may have been his ability to manage the more severe messages being pushed out by the likes of Stephen Bannon and Stephen Miller. As one source put it to me last week, Kushner has been the ‘secure line’ into the White House… Kushner’s influence on his boss may be flagging. Last week, Kushner spent 24 hours trying to broker a meeting between Trump and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto… Ultimately, Peña Nieto agreed…  Less than 12 hours later, though, it all fell apart… the meeting was canceled. ‘Kushner was… furious,’ the source told me…”

The Vanity Fair article has received great attention in Germany as well. Bild Online published a lengthy article about the perceived fall-out between Mr. Trump and Mr. Kushner, while providing a link to the article of Vanity Fair.

The Pig-Human Embryo

National Geographic write on January 26:

“In a remarkable—if likely controversial—feat, scientists announced today that they have created the first successful human-animal hybrids. The project proves that human cells can be introduced into a non-human organism, survive, and even grow inside a host animal, in this case, pigs… The team created what’s known scientifically as a chimera: an organism that contains cells from two different species…

“In the past, human-animal chimeras have been beyond reach. Such experiments are currently ineligible for public funding in the United States… Public opinion, too, has hampered the creation of organisms that are part human, part animal.

“But for lead study author Jun Wu of the Salk Institute, we need only look to mythical chimeras—like the human-bird hybrids we know as angels—for a different perspective. ‘In ancient civilizations, chimeras were associated with God,’ he says, and our ancestors thought ‘the chimeric form can guard humans.’ In a sense, that’s what the team hopes human-animal hybrids will one day do…”

“Weird” is the right word… and an understatement.

In this installment, we will discuss the remaining aspect of the commission given to the Church, which is, as stated in our Statement of Beliefs under The Church’s Commission, “… to feed the flock of Christ—the Church—spiritually and physically.” The correct understanding of properly feeding the flock distinguishes us substantially from most other Church organizations.

To begin with, we will address the responsibility of the Church to feed the flock spiritually. This task is foremost assigned to the ordained ministry of God’s Church. We discussed in previous installments that the Church of God is a spiritual organism, which is physically organized.

We read in John 21:15-17:

“So when they had eaten breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, ‘Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me more than these?’ He said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.’ He said to him, ‘Feed My lambs.’ He said to him again a second time, ‘Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?’ He said to Him, ‘Yes, Lord; You know that I love You.’ He said to him, ‘Tend My sheep.’ He said to him the third time, ‘Simon, son of Jonah, do you love Me?’ Peter was grieved because He said to him the third time, ‘Do you love Me?’ And he said to Him, ‘Lord, You know all things; You know that I love You.’ Jesus said to him, ‘Feed My sheep.'”

The task of feeding Christ’s lambs and feeding and tending His sheep, is primarily accomplished through the ministers’ inspired speaking and teaching of God’s Word, and through ministerial counseling. In this regard, the ministry is to look after and protect Christ’s disciples by “feeding” and “tending” the flock”—which includes, standing up to savage wolves which might come in with the attempt to spiritually destroy and devour the sheep (Acts 20:29; compare also John 10:11-13).

Matthew 24:45-46 adds this admonition: “Who then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his master made ruler over his household, to give them FOOD IN DUE SEASON? Blessed is that servant whom his master, when he comes, will find SO doing.”

Ephesians 4, beginning with verse 11, says in the Revised Standard Version: “And His [Christ’s] gifts were that some should be apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, to equip the saints for THE WORK of ministry, for building up the body of Christ.” As Spirit-begotten children, we must grow in the knowledge and understanding of the truth (2 Peter 3:18). We are desirous of the pure milk of the word (1 Peter 2:2), being nurtured by our “mother” (Galatians 4:26)—the church of God—as a new-born human child is being fed and cared for by his or her human mother. Paul tells us in Ephesians 4:11-16 that Christ gave to His Church ministers to feed and edify the flock, so that “we should no longer be children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine” (verse 14).

Brethren need Christ’s ministers to be fed. Romans 10:14-16 tells us that we cannot hear “without a preacher.” We are also told, however, that God must send the “preacher.” We are encouraged to “test the spirits, whether they are of God; because many false prophets [or preachers] have gone into the world” (1 John 4:1).

In the first part of this series, we warned against deception which is prophesied to occur—including in the Church of God. Feeding the flock includes a warning against deception, lying spirits and the falling away from the Truth. In part 2, we continued to address the importance of not deviating from the Truth. To ensure that this doesn’t happen, the ministry of God’s Church has the duty to feed the flock by preaching the Truth in season and out of season (2 Timothy 4:1-2).

In part 3, we discussed the Church’s commission of preaching the gospel of the Kingdom of God in all the world as a witness. Having explained what the gospel is, it is clear that this commission is not to neglect the Church membership; rather, preaching the gospel constitutes a necessary part of feeding the flock. In addition to the preaching of the gospel, the Church members are to be taught more fully by the ministry (Matthew 28:19-20).

We also stated in part 4 that a warning message must go out to members and prospective members of the Church of God, including a message about prophecy which should help us to see more clearly how close we are to Christ’s return.

All of this requires a sincere, honest, dedicated and functioning ministry. In this context, the doctrine of laying on of hands (Hebrews 6:2) is extremely important, as it is an integral part of the Church’s commission to feed the flock.

There is no promise in the Bible that since the foundation and establishment of the New Testament Church in 31 A.D., someone would receive the Holy Spirit without prior proper baptism as an adult—after repentance and belief in Christ’s Sacrifice and the gospel—and the laying on of hands by God’s ordained ministers (Acts 8:12-17; 19:5-6). This symbolic act sets the baptized person aside or sanctifies him or her for the divine purpose of receiving from God His Holy Spirit. Therefore, only ordained ministers of God should perform baptisms. Unordained members who decide to baptize others and “lay hands on them” (Acts 8:17-18; 19:5-6) should realize that they would not have a biblical basis to justify their action. This would be true, even if their particular Church organization, or a particular minister, may “authorize” such behavior, as it would not be supported by God’s written Word, and we must obey God rather than man (Acts 5:29; 4:19).

Further, only God’s ministers were given special authority from God to lay their hands upon the sick, when praying for them (while anointing them with oil). This is clearly taught in many passages, including James 5:14-15; Mark 6:13; Mark 16:18; Acts 9:17-18; and Acts 28:8. In addition, if a personal ministerial visit is not possible, then God’s ordained elders are permitted to use and pray over a cloth, anointing it with a drop of oil as the symbol of the Holy Spirit, laying or placing their hands on the cloth, and asking God to heal the sick person who will receive this cloth. This is based on numerous passages in the Bible, including Acts 19:11-12 which shows that “God worked unusual miracles BY THE HANDS OF PAUL, so that even handkerchiefs or aprons were brought from his body to the sick, and the diseases left them and the evil spirits went out of them.” The reference to the “hands of Paul” seems to indicate that Paul laid his HANDS on the apron, anointed it with a drop of oil and prayed over it, before sending it to the sick. This is the exact method used by God’s ministers today.

In the case of a proper Church wedding, the minister emphasizes the purpose of marriage, and that the couple is entering into a life-long COVENANT with God. He places his hands on the couple, while asking God in prayer to sanctify the marriage and to set aside the couple for the holy purpose of the marriage relationship.

The Church of God sets aside a time during the annual Feast of Tabernacles celebrations to bless little children, by the ministers placing their hands on them, asking God to grant them His protection and guidance (compare Mark 10:16; Matthew 19:13-15).

Ordinations of deacons and deaconesses and elders are done strictly through the ministry, and they are always accompanied by the laying on of hands—setting the ordained person aside for the godly office of a deacon or deaconess or a minister (Acts 6:2-6; 1 Timothy 4:14; compare also 1 Timothy 5:22). Notice especially 2 Timothy 1:6: “Therefore I remind you to stir up the gift of God which is in you THROUGH THE LAYING ON OF MY HANDS.” This procedure is also applied when a deacon is raised to the office of an elder, and when an elder is raised to a higher rank within the ministry, such as pastor or evangelist.

The doctrine of laying on of hands requires and demands a functioning godly ministry, who are God’s representatives (Malachi 2:7), if they are truly chosen and ordained by God (Hebrews 5:4). God has decreed that an ordained minister of God is necessary for proper baptism (leading to the receipt of the Holy Spirit); healing; Church weddings; the blessing of little children; and ordinations as deacons and elders. All of this serves the purpose of feeding the flock.

But to carry out this responsibility of feeding the flock, there must be a willingness of the Church members to be fed. One cannot feed someone if that person rejects the food. The ministry of God is here to serve and feed God’s sheep. God’s sheep will recognize the voice of God, as it is being preached through His shepherds, and they will follow them (John 10:1-5). This is the attitude we ought to have toward God’s ministry, as so strongly and boldly put by John, an apostle of Jesus Christ: “We are of God. He who knows God hears us; he who is not of God does not hear us” (1 John 4:6). Didn’t Christ Himself say: “If they kept My word, they will keep yours also” (John 15:20)? And: “I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word” (John 17:20)?

Someone who rejects God’s ministers, thinking that he has no need of them, is in mortal spiritual danger. Someone who is unwilling to submit to the ministry of God is guilty of rebellion, which is as bad as sorcery and witchcraft (1 Samuel 15:23). Paul encouraged the brethren to follow him, as he followed Christ. He URGED the brethren to follow or imitate him (1 Corinthians 4:16). He said: “Imitate me, just as I also imitate Christ” (1 Corinthians 11:1). He reminded the Thessalonians that they “became followers of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit” (1 Thessalonians 1:6). As it is the duty and responsibility of God’s ministers to feed the flock and protect it from harm, the “sheep” and the “lambs” are told by God to accept and obey the guidance and protection from God’s true ministers (Hebrews 13:17; 2 Thessalonians 3:13-15).

In addition to the commission to feed the flock spiritually, God’s Church needs to feed those within the flock physically who are in need of such help. We say in our Statement of Beliefs, under Tithing:

“We believe in the godly institution of tithing to enable the Church to carry out its commission of preaching the gospel and feeding the flock. We believe that needy members are to be helped and taken care of, including through the tithing system described in the Bible, by other members of the Church (Luke 3:11; 1 Timothy 5:8; James 2: 15-16).”

This is talking about two different types or categories of tithing. The one type deals with the payment of 10% of our income or increase for the purpose of preaching the gospel. It is commonly referred to as the “First Tithe.” First Tithe is the first ten percent of one’s “increase,” referring to his or her job earnings and/or other income, such as proceeds from rental, interest or gains from stocks or other investment. It is to be sent to God’s Church in furtherance of the preaching of the gospel (compare Malachi 3:8-10; Matthew 23:23, note especially the last sentence). It is up to the member to decide whether to pay tithe from the gross (before taxes are deducted from our paychecks) or from the net (after deduction of taxes).

There is a different type of tithe which should be paid to the Church by those who are able to do so, for the purpose of helping needy members. (In fact, there is still another type of tithe, but that tithe is not to be paid to the Church, but it is to be saved by the members for themselves to enable them to participate in observing God’s annual Holy Days. More about that in the next installment.) The tithe for those in need of support is commonly referred to as the “Third Tithe.” It is FOR the poor and needy, not BY the poor and needy. It is, therefore, not necessary for a “poor” person to pay third tithe. Someone who receives assistance from the government does not have to pay Third Tithe (nor does he have to pay First Tithe from such assistance). Additionally, it would also be following a wrong principle to take out a loan in order to be able to pay Third Tithe. However, each individual is responsible before God to determine whether he or she is “poor” or “needy” and therefore excused from paying Third Tithe. The ministry is available to help with questions relating to such determination.

At the time of Moses, Third Tithe was paid on the third and sixth year out of a cycle of seven years. On the seventh year, no Third Tithe was to be paid, as the land rested during the seventh year, Leviticus 25:4. The principle of paying Third Tithe on the third and sixth year out of a cycle of seven years still applies today. Many members begin counting their Third Tithe years from the annual festival (usually the Feast of Tabernacles) nearest the date of their baptism. It is the responsibility of each member to decide when he or she should begin the cycle, and the observance of that cycle should be carefully maintained. (The ministry would be available to answer any questions as to how to determine someone’s individual seven year cycle.) God promises us His blessing if we pay Him His Third Tithe during the appropriate times (compare Deuteronomy 26:12-15).

Paying First and Third Tithe to the Church of God enables the ministry to fulfill the Church’s commission to preach the gospel of the Kingdom of God, which includes a warning message to all nations, and to feed those of the flock who are in need of financial help.

In the next installment, we will continue pointing out substantial differences between most of the Christian churches and organizations and the Church of the Eternal God and its international affiliates, when discussing the biblical command to observe the weekly Sabbath and the annual Holy Days.

(To be Continued)

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

“The Fall and Rise of the Jewish People,” our newest booklet, is now being printed. We have published this on our website: www.eternalgod.org. If you would like to receive a printed copy, please send your request. Those who regularly receive our Member Letter and other printed material will be sent a copy once printing is complete.

The translation of a new German booklet, “Do You Know the Jesus of the Bible?,” has been printed and received from the printer.

“The World Condemns Trump—Why?,” is the title of a new StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

America is in turmoil. In less than two weeks, President Donald Trump, due to controversial executive orders, has turned the world upside down. This program discusses in detail his order and its practical application pertaining to refugees, immigrants and non-immigrants from designated countries, which has been described by some as a Muslim travel ban. Great uncertainties developed regarding green card holders and persons with dual citizenship, as well as persons with non-immigrant visas.  Major American tech firms oppose the order, as do many Jews and virtually all countries around the world. Federal Courts have issued temporary restraining orders pertaining to most of the new rules, but will they be followed? Especially the European reaction has been very forceful, which is telling in the light of biblical prophecy.

“Die Welt Verurteilt Trump—Warum?,” is the German title of a new AufPostenStehen program in which Evangelist Norbert Link’s presentation covers the same topic as described above.

“Die Kirche Weiden—Warum die Kirche des Ewigen Gottes?” (Teil 5), is the title of this Sabbath’s German sermon. Title in English: “Feed the Church–Why the Church of the Eternal God?” (Part 5).

A NEW Video clip, promoting the German booklet “Kennen Sie den Jesus der Bibel?” (a translation of our English booklet, “Do You Know the Jesus of the Bible?”), has been produced by Michael Link and posted on the Web.

“Inauguration 2017 – The Hidden Meaning,” the sermonette presented last Sabbath by Michael Link, is now posted. Here is a summary:

There was a lot said during the Inauguration of 2017, including anticipations, goals, blessings and prayers for this nation. But what does the Bible have to say about the future of this nation? What is prophesied and are we prepared for what is coming?

“The Weightier Matters,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Kalon Mitchell, is now posted. Here is a summary:

In a world that is ripe with self-importance, self-justification and disregard for God,  what is our charter?  What is it that God really expects from us as true Christians and eventually from the entire world?  What truly matters in God’s view?

The Church Conference for 2017 will be conducted in Escondido, California, with arrivals on March 23 and ending on March 28.

by Erica Bourque

On a recent Friday afternoon, we decided to “go for a drive.”  My husband Joe felt very strongly about a certain route and a particular picnic spot for the afternoon.  He wanted to drive our van, which we usually do not take on shorter day trips.  The temperature was barely above freezing, and it was partly cloudy, so a raging fire and hot dogs for a late lunch sounded like a great plan.  Dry wood was packed, along with our small propane heater, extra goodies to eat and hot water for hot chocolate.

A short distance into our trip, the paved forest road became intermittently covered in ice, and due to my uneasiness, we debated whether to turn around.   We reached a mutual determination to continue, so we stopped at a picnic area which was much closer; one we were well familiar with.  We arrived around 3pm, about 20 miles up the mountain.  When our fire was “just right” to start cooking, Joe turned to me and said he thought he heard someone.  How could that be?  We listened again and again.  A distinctive “help” was heard in a man’s voice, along with the faint voice of a woman.  A little skeptical, we decided to walk up the road toward the voices.  Sure enough, a young man and a woman in their 20s, along with their dog, were walking towards us, waving their hands, crying and asking for help. They were in despair; stating they had been stranded for a week in the snow further up the mountain.  Their only clothing was jeans and a sweatshirt, and their hands and face were red from the cold. We were able to provide warmth inside our van, hot food and drinks, and we safely transported them off the mountain into the nearest town.

We truly feel God had directed our actions that day and that He had prepared beforehand an opportunity for good works to walk in them. We just had to be there, because we feel that otherwise, the couple might not have survived the night, as the closest cell reception was at least 10 miles away. Upon reflection, we stand in awe of God’s mercy and how He directs our lives.  We were able to fulfill the couple’s physical needs, as God’s Spirit of love was guiding us, and we gained much spiritual insight. Experiencing firsthand the despair this couple felt, we were also reminded of the many people who will be led out of captivity in the future, and we are thankful to have been given this opportunity to learn more perfectly how to respond to people in such dire circumstances.