On July 9, 2016, Norbert Link will present a special message, titled, “Developments in Light of Biblical Prophecy,” and Michael Link will present the sermon, titled, “Individually and Collectively.”

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.

Prophetic developments are speeding up. The Brexit; a rigged political system in the USA;Donald Trump’s rising popularity; new presidential elections in Austria; attempts to establish a United States of Europe and to create a European army; increasing terrorist attacks and wars all over the world; terrible weather conditions; the spread of immorality; the preaching of the gospel of the Kingdom of God in all the world as a witness…  the list of significant biblical events seems to be endless.

Jesus Christ told us that we must observe the signs of the times, which would indicate to us when His return is near (Matthew 24:32-33; Luke 21:29-31).

However, some engage in unfounded speculations. They feel that there must be first a seven-year contract between the “beast” (a military leader) and other nations (the candidates for those other nations vary; some claim it would be Arab nations; then they say it would be the State of Israel; and finally, they even think it could be a combination of Israel and Arab countries). They are also waiting for the arrival of a “king of the south,” “a Mahdi,” who is supposed to unite Arab nations under his lead. Or they wait for the appearance of a red heifer as a “necessary step” towards building a third temple.

Interestingly enough, the Bible does not predict any of this. For instance, there is no prophetic requirement for a seven-year contract. But following their misguided concept, even IF the “beast” would arrive in 2016 and such a treaty would still occur within that year, Christ could not come back prior to 2023. At the same time, we are NOT suggesting either that Christ WILL come back within less than seven years.

The truth is, we do NOT know when Christ will return (Matthew 24:42). Even He does not know; and neither do the angels (Mark 13:32). It is within the Father’s SOLE prerogative, authority and discretion to DECIDE when that time has arrived (Acts 1:7).

It is so important that we do not lose focus. As we have preached time and again, we must live in a way that we are always spiritually ready for Christ’s return (Matthew 24:44). (After all, we could die tonight, and we had better be ready when we die). At the same time, we are to live our lives as if we had many more years ahead of us. Over the centuries, many Christians made the big mistake of giving up God’s Way of Life when their expectancy of Christ’s return at a given date did not materialize; or they ceased from fulfilling their physical responsibilities for themselves and others (including their children), thinking that because Christ would come back soon, they did not have to prepare anymore for the future.

Christ gave us many admonitions, showing that we must continue with our physical duties until the very end, while of course never neglecting our spiritual obligations.

Christ said that the servant is blessed whom his master, when he comes, will find him doing his job (Matthew 24:46). He told us that two will be in the field, apparently working, while one is taken, and the other one is left behind (Matthew 24:40). He told us that two women will be grinding at the mill, when one is taken and one is left behind (Matthew 24:41).

He told us to use the talents and abilities which God gave us; rather than hiding them (Matthew 25:24-30).

Paul gives us the timeless command to work when we want to eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10). Proverbs 21:25 tells us that the “desire of the lazy man kills him, For his hands refuse to labor,” and Proverbs 31:27 adds that the “virtuous woman” “does not eat the bread of idleness.” We are given the timeless truth that a good person will leave an inheritance for his children and grandchildren (Proverbs 13:22; compare 2 Corinthians 12:14), and that he will help his needy parents (Mark 7:9-13). These are ONGOING obligations, and there is no time limit for these commands. Rather, we are told that WHATEVER our hands find to do, we must do it with all of our might (Ecclesiastes 9:10; compare also Ecclesiastes 11:1, 6).

We must never make the mistake of trying to predict the exact time of Christ’s return, or to invent man-made prerequisites which “must” be fulfilled first. We must never cease from fulfilling our physical obligations, because of our personal conviction that Christ will return very soon. We are not to worry about the future with anxious thoughts. Rather, we are to seek God’s Kingdom and God’s righteousness first (Matthew 6:25-34), but if we fail to fulfill our physical responsibilities, we have become worse than an unbeliever and have denied the faith (compare 1 Timothy 5:8). If we develop a mentality of thinking, “Now is not the time,” then this will surely contribute to our spiritual and physical downfall.

We begin with interesting developments in Austria where the presidential election must be repeated, due to irregularities and electoral fraud. New elections are anticipated in September or October. It will be interesting to see whether this time Norbert Hofer from the anti-immigration Freedom Party will secure victory, after he lost in May to Green-backed candidate Alexander Van der Bellen by a mere 0.6 percent of the vote. The new vote for the Austrian Presidency will only be held between Van der Bellen and Hofer.

We continue with Hillary Clinton’s email-scandal. (In this context, please view our new StandingWatch program, “FBI’s Recommendation in Clinton Scandal Suggests Corrupt and Rigged System.”) We start with reporting on a clandestine meeting between Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch, while criminal investigations against Hillary Clinton (and by extension, Bill Clinton) were still pending, and the subsequent controversial declarations of Mrs. Lynch, followed by the stunning and incomprehensible announcement by the FBI that in spite of Hillary Clinton’s proven reckless conduct, potentially placing in jeopardy the security of this country, they still do not recommend criminal charges against her. Donald Trump was quick in pointing out quite correctly how rigged our corrupt political system is. House Speaker Paul Ryan tweeted this: “While I respect the professionals at the FBI, this announcement defies explanation. No one should be above the law.”  

As Newsmax reported on July 5, “Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani Tuesday blasted FBI Director [and Obama appointee] James Comey… saying ‘this is the special exemption for the Clintons.’ ‘It would be unreasonable for a prosecutor not to go forward with it and almost an abdication of duty,’ Giuliani [said], who was in office during the 9/11 attacks… ‘What was just laid out is what we would call a no-brainer in the attorney’s office that Jim Comey worked at, he was one of my assistants… The minute you say someone is extremely careless, you are saying they’re grossly negligent,’ he told Fox. ‘What do we mean by gross negligence? We mean extremely careless.’”

Congressman Darrell Issa (R-CA), chairman of the House Oversight Committee, stated in an interview with Breitbart News: “‘We are in a crisis,’ and Hillary Clinton is a ‘criminal involved in a criminal enterprise’.”

As CNN reported on July 5, even some of Bernie Sanders most die-hard supporters were also extremely upset about the FBI’s recommendations not to indict Hillary Clinton.

One does not have to believe in conspiracy theories to see the incredible development in this case:

First, a private meeting between Bill Clinton and Loretta Lynch; followed by Mrs. Lynch’s refusal to recuse herself and saying instead that she will abide by the recommendations of the FBI; followed by Hillary Clinton’s lengthy 3 ½ hour interview with eight federal agents on Saturday, being accompanied by at least four attorneys; followed by President Obama’s announcement that he would fly together with Hillary Clinton on Airforce One in order to campaign for her in North Carolina; followed by the publicly announced recommendation by the FBI on Tuesday not to indict Hillary Clinton, while Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton were on the plane. And we are to believe that before the FBI’s announcement on Tuesday, nobody “knew” what would be recommended by the FBI? As the New York Post wrote: “The fix was in.” Subsequently, as was to be expected, the Attorney General made it official on Wednesday that the email investigation against Hillary Clinton was closed, and that no charges will be filed against her.

We also report on Donald Trump’s possible running mates and a sharp attack by French President François Hollande against Mr. Trump, while Europe is preparing for its own military empire.

We continue with the concept of “Brexecution”; the European position that Brexit cannot be cancelled; and the growing concept for a Nordic power bloc in competition to the EU.

We speak on ISIS terrorism in Bangladesh and Iraq; and we conclude with transgender mania in the USA and revelations from former Pope Benedict pertaining to the reasons for his resignation.

Austria’s Presidential Election Must Be Repeated

Breitbart wrote on July 1:

“Austria’s Constitutional court has today ordered May’s presidential election be annulled and another called after ‘particularly serious cases’ of voting fraud were detected in the photo-finish vote. The Green party-backed candidate Alexander Van der Bellen originally snatched victory by a mere 0.6 per cent in the second round vote, which was taken to decide the new president of [the] central-European state Austria in May. He had made it to the round alongside Freedom Party (FPO) candidate Norbert Hofer, who campaigned to protect Austria from mass migration and Islamification.

“Now the Austrian Constitutional court has upheld a complaint by the FPO about conduct in the election. The party had alleged that there were voting ‘irregularities’ in 94 of the 117 total electoral constituencies in the country… It is not known how many of the 94 areas alleged to have voting irregularities have been investigated, but the court identified ’20 particularly serious cases’ after interviewing 67 witnesses…

“Given that the election was carried by just 30,863 votes, and up to 740,000 postal votes are in question, the Constitutional court has now ruled the vote should be re-run, although the date for this has not yet been announced. Until the new vote in Autumn, the role of Austria’s Presidency will be fulfilled by a three-member National President Council (Präsidium des Nationalrats) — on which the FPO presidential candidate Norbert Hofer already sits.

“[The] President of the constitutional court Gerhart Holzinger said the ruling ‘does not make you a loser or a winner’ to representatives of the two parties present in the court room this morning, and said the sentence had been passed to ‘strengthen confidence in the rule of law and democracy’, reports Germany’s Die Welt… The decision comes just seven days before Green-backed candidate Alexander Van der Bellen was due to be officially sworn in as President of Austria.

“Even before the allegations of electoral fraud, the vote was already considered extraordinary as it is the first time in modern Austrian history where none of the candidates in the final round were [representatives] of the mainstream parties…”

Deutsche Welle added on July 1:

“Austria’s constitutional court annulled May’s president election on Friday, upholding a legal challenge by the anti-immigation Freedom party (FPÖ) and opening the way for a repeat poll in September or October. ‘The challenge brought by Freedom Party leader Heinz-Christian Strache against the May 22 election… has been upheld,’ said constitutional court head Gerhard Holzinger.”

Norbert Hofer: Austrians Will Not Accept Turkey’s EU Membership

Express wrote on July 3:

“Norbert Hofer said Turkey joining the bloc could be the game changer that forces Austrians to call for an EU referendum in a bid to break away.  He said: ‘I believe that people are able to learn, that political structures are able to develop, and that Austria will contribute to making Europe better. There is one exception, however, that is if the EU decides to let Turkey join the Union. Austrians will have to be asked whether they want this.’

“His remarks come amid fresh discussions between Turkey and EU bigwigs after Ankara demanded an acceleration on its application in return for taking back migrants seeking asylum in Europe. The European powerhouse and Turkey have been locked in a high-stakes standoff over Ankara’s refusal to reform its strict terror laws in return for visa-free travel and £2.5billion to clamp down on the migrant crisis.”

AG Loretta Lynch Accepts Findings and Recommendations of the FBI in the Clinton Case

CNN wrote on July 1:

“Attorney General Loretta Lynch will accept the determinations and findings of the FBI and career prosecutors who are investigating Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server while she was secretary of state, Lynch said Friday. Lynch made the pledge Friday at Aspen Ideas Festival, following questions raised when she met privately with former President Bill Clinton at a Phoenix airport earlier this week… The meeting instantly drew criticism from Republicans and even some Democrats, who said that just the decision for the two to interact was a mistake while the Justice Department is conducting an investigation of Clinton’s private email server…

“The meeting and its fallout are sure to worry some Democrats who see Clinton as the only candidate standing between Donald Trump and the White House. Not only is the fate of her campaign largely in the hands of the Justice Department, but this was an entirely avoidable incident that hits her on one of her most persistent vulnerabilities — how voters doubt her trustworthiness.

“The No. 2 Republican in the Senate, Texas Sen. John Cornyn, called for a special counsel Thursday to take over the investigation into the private server, citing the appearance of impropriety.

“This incident does nothing to instill confidence in the American people that her department can fully and fairly conduct this investigation, and that’s why a special counsel is needed now more than ever,” Cornyn said in a statement. The conservative legal watchdog group Judicial Watch that has led the charge in suing for access to Hillary Clinton’s email records also jumped on the news, calling for an investigation into what transpired between Lynch and Clinton.  ‘Attorney General Lynch’s meeting with President Clinton creates the appearance of a violation of law, ethical standards and good judgment,’ the group said in a statement. ‘Attorney General Lynch’s decision to breach the well-defined ethical standards of the Department of Justice and the American legal profession is an outrageous abuse of the public’s trust.’”

Showing Extremely Poor Judgement

In a related article, CNN published the following opinion piece by Paul Callan, “a CNN legal analyst and a former media law professor. He is a former New York City homicide prosecutor and criminal defense attorney”:

“The Arizona tarmac meeting between former President Bill Clinton and U.S. Attorney General Loretta Lynch will certainly raise the eyebrows of more than a few law enforcement professionals and voters throughout the United States.

“The reason: the AG is the Cabinet officer who is nominally in charge of the FBI’s ‘email server’ investigation which in part focuses upon the conduct of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

“Since the email server was located in the Clinton’s private residence in Chappaqua, N.Y., most members of the public would reasonably assume that Mr. Clinton himself would have more than a passing knowledge regarding the use and maintenance of the server. He would also be intensely interested in keeping his candidate wife clear of any allegations of criminal wrong during her presidential campaign.

“Under the circumstances, the tarmac soiree between Clinton and Lynch demonstrates incredibly bad judgment on the part of two seasoned legal and political professionals.  Both should have instantly realized that their private meeting might create public suspicion that something improper must have occurred. After all Donald Trump has been tossing corruption accusations at Hillary Clinton with the frequency of firings on ‘The Apprentice.’

“If the conversation, which took place on a private plane parked at the Phoenix Airport, was, as has been reported, merely a polite exchange of pleasantries and family news, no illegality occurred. Lawyers, however, are not bound by merely the black letter of the law but also by the lawyer’s ‘Code of Professional Responsibility’ which in theory holds them to a higher ethical standard. The lawyer’s ethical code historically prohibited them from engaging in activities that create an ‘appearance of impropriety’ and undermine public confidence in the justice system. The tarmac meeting here certainly feels improper. That code binds Lynch but possibly not the former president, whose law license was suspended by Arkansas for five years after the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

“The attorney general should have had better sense than to permit the meeting with the always charming and persuasive former president. It will erode public confidence in the Justice Department she leads.  As attorney general, Lynch is in charge of federal prosecutors, who must decide if there is sufficient evidence to submit charges to a federal grand jury in the Clinton email case or whether a termination of the probe without charges is warranted. Undoubtedly, it is difficult for even the powerful attorney general of the United States to throw a former president off her plane. In the future she had better summon the strength and courage to do so as the reputations of the thousands of honest Justice Department employees depend on her understanding that even when a former president seeks refuge from the heat of an Arizona tarmac in summer, appearances matter.”

The New York Times wrote on July 1:

“By not recusing herself, Ms. Lynch retains all the legal authority as the nation’s top law enforcement official. That means her remarks are not binding and she is not obligated to accept what the F.B.I. recommends. But by making her plans public, Ms. Lynch risks causing a political firestorm if she were to later overrule those recommendations…

“The F.B.I. is investigating whether Mrs. Clinton, her aides or anyone else broke the law by setting up a private email server for her to use as secretary of state. Internal investigators have concluded that the server was used to send classified information… For the Justice Department, the central question is whether the conduct met the legal standard for the crime of mishandling classified information…”

There are further complicating factors in this case. The investigation evolved also around emails pertaining to the Clinton Foundation in which both the Clintons have an interest. And Young was nominated in 1999 by then President Bill Clinton to serve as the U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York. According to some legal scholars, this fact shows personal impropriety of a meeting between Bill Clinton and Lynch, while an investigation was pending against Hillary Clinton (and, by extension, her husband).

It was also felt that Lynch’s announcement to abide by the FBI’s findings and recommendations had compromised Lynch’s impartiality even more, as she was now no longer able to disagree with the FBI, if there would be reason, in her mind, to do so. The entire affair had become extremely tainted by the subsequent public recommendations of the FBI NOT to indict Hillary Clinton.

FBI Recommends NOT to Press Charges against Hillary Clinton!

Breitbart wrote on July 5:

“Though [FBI director James] Comey found ‘evidence of potential violation’ of classified information laws on [Hillary] Clinton’s part, and though Comey noted that people who did similar things would be punished, Comey nevertheless told the American people that the FBI does not recommend an indictment against Clinton. Comey confirmed numerous details of the email scandal including the fact that Clinton had information on her private server that was classified when sent…  But Comey said that no reasonable prosecutor would take on the case.

“Comey’s harsh criticisms of Clinton’s conduct, paired with his inexplicable decision not to call for an indictment, suggest that Comey might have torn sympathies regarding the case…

“Comey also confirmed that Clinton did not hand over [‘several thousand’] of her [work-related] emails, even though she signed a sworn affidavit that she had done so. Whether or not Clinton will be charged with perjury is still up to the Department of Justice. Even the Washington Post left the door open for a possible ‘making false statements’ charge, though it seems unlikely considering the political implications here…

“‘To be clear, this is not to suggest that in similar circumstances, a person who gauged this activity would gauge no consequences. To the contrary, those individuals are often subject to security or administrative sanctions but that is not what we are deciding now,’ Comey said.”

On Wednesday, the Attorney General accepted the “recommendations” of the FBI, as she had promised to do, following her controversial clandestine meeting with Bill Clinton, and she made it official that no charges would be filed against Hillary Clinton.

Clearly, Hillary Clinton Should Have Been Indicted

On July 5, the Daily Mail summarized the FBI’s outrageous recommendation in this way:

“[The] FBI recommends NO charges against ‘extremely careless’ Hillary despite her sending top-secret information on private server which was ‘possibly’ hacked… The Espionage Act prescribes lengthy prison terms for government officials who cause classified material to be moved to an unsecured location, either willfully or through ‘gross negligence.’”

The Daily Mail also said that “Comey’s conclusion, which he insisted no politician in the Obama administration was aware of in advance, amounted to a declaration that Clinton and her aides were ‘extremely careless’ with their handling of classified material… ‘Although there is evidence of potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information, our judgment is that no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case…’”

As stated above in our introductory comments, “extreme carelessness” is the same as “gross negligence.”

National Review wrote on July 5:

“There is no way of getting around this: According to Director James Comey… Hillary Clinton checked every box required for a felony violation of Section 793(f) of the federal penal code (Title 18): With lawful access to highly classified information she acted with gross negligence in removing and causing it to be removed… from its proper place of custody, and she transmitted it and caused it to be transmitted to others not authorized to have it, in patent violation of her trust. Director Comey even conceded that former Secretary Clinton was ‘extremely careless’ and strongly suggested that her recklessness very likely led to communications (her own and those she corresponded with) being intercepted by foreign intelligence services. Yet, Director Comey recommended against prosecution of the law violations he clearly found on the ground that there was no intent to harm the United States.

“In essence, in order to give Mrs. Clinton a pass, the FBI rewrote the statute, inserting an intent element that Congress did not require. The added intent element, moreover, makes no sense: The point of having a statute that criminalizes gross negligence is to underscore that government officials have a special obligation to safeguard national defense secrets; when they fail to carry out that obligation due to gross negligence, they are guilty of serious wrongdoing. The lack of intent to harm our country is irrelevant.

“… there are other statutes that criminalize unlawfully removing and transmitting highly classified information with intent to harm the United States. Being not guilty (and, indeed, not even accused) of Offense B does not absolve a person of guilt on Offense A, which she has committed…”

The New York Post wrote on July 5:

“The fix was in. Tuesday, FBI Director James Comey painted a devastating picture of Hillary Clinton’s reckless lawbreaking with her emails and the damage it likely caused — but then recommended no charges against her. When it comes to the Clintons, say goodbye to the rule of law. [The evidence presented by the FBI] seems enough to convict (never mind indict) her — based on Comey’s own criteria…

“So why on earth would Comey let her off the hook? Especially when the agency had recommended charges against others, like Gen. David Petraeus, who had similarly failed to protect classified information. The answer: The Clintons enjoy a different standard. They are above the law.

“Indeed, the sheer number of scandals for which Bill and Hillary Clinton have escaped punishment is simply astonishing. There’s always some ‘technicality’ or ‘lack of evidence’ or other pathetic excuse. Comey just dealt a powerful blow to the public’s faith in the concept of equal justice. Hillary will now claim falsely she’s been exonerated — even though the FBI found her in violation of the law. Is there any wonder so many voters this year are outraged by the ‘rigged’ system?”

None of this will help Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama if God has determined that she will lose in the Presidential Election.

“The Fix Is In”–Clinton’s Statements to FBI Were NOT Recorded

Breitbart wrote on July 7:

“During testimony before Congress on Thursday, FBI Director James Comey stated that the FBI’s interview with presumptive Democratic presidential nominee former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was not under oath or recorded, but it still would be a crime to lie to the FBI. Comey stated that he did not personally interview Clinton, and did not talk to all of the ‘five or six’ who did interview Clinton. He was then asked, ‘did she testify or talk to them under oath?’ Comey answered, ‘No.’ But added that ‘it’s still a crime to lie to us.’ When asked if there was a transcript of the interview, Comey stated that there wasn’t one because the interview wasn’t recorded, but there was an analysis of Clinton’s interview.”

This is perplexing and VERY troublesome, as Comey was also asked whether Hillary Clinton rectified to the FBI her prior lies to Congress and the public, and Comey responded that he did not specifically inquire into that. He was then asked to do so and provide Congress with the written documentation as to Clinton’s testimony to the FBI.

The conduct by most Democratic members of the Congressional House Oversight and Government Reform Committee was appalling. As foreseeable, the hearing was another circus. While determined to exonerate Hillary Clinton and justify her unjustifiable conduct, Democrats tried to launch mean-spirited attacks against Republican members, Republicans in general and Donald Trump in particular (who was not even the subject of the hearing). Most Republican members did an excellent job in establishing a strong case against Clinton, coupled with their expression of dismay as to the FBI’s recommendations in spite of all the evidence. 

Comey seemed to admit rewriting the law, stating that even though Congress had passed legislation, specifically requiring gross negligence and no intent, in practice, intent had to be proven by a prosecutor beyond reasonable doubt, according to Comey. In addition, as Breitbart stated on July 7, “Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) demolished FBI director James Comey’s claim Thursday that the government lacked sufficient evidence of criminal intent to prosecute former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton for mis-handling classified information. Gowdy, referring to his background as a prosecutor, and peppering Comey with questions, demonstrated that the kind of evidence the government already had on Clinton — such as hiding her private email server — was often used to show intent.”

“US State Department to Reopen Hillary Clinton Email Probe”

Deutsche Welle reported on July 8:

“State Department spokesman John Kirby said the internal review would resume now that it was clear the Justice Department would not be pursuing criminal charges against Hillary Clinton… The State Department launched a probe into the emails in January after stating that 22 messages sent from Clinton’s private server were ‘top secret.’

“The review was put on hold in April, however, so as not to interfere with an FBI inquiry to determine whether she had broken the law. That investigation ended this week, with the Justice Department announcing it would accept the FBI’s recommendation not to prosecute Clinton.

“‘Given the Department of Justice has now made its announcement, the State Department intends to conduct its internal review,’ Kirby said. ‘We will aim to be as expeditious as possible, but we will not put artificial deadlines on the process,’ he added…”

Obama Not a Devout Christian

The Daily Mail wrote on July 7:

“Bill O’Reilly shared photos of Barack Obama in traditional Islamic dress on his program Wednesday night claiming they were from his half-brother Malik’s wedding. The Fox News host said it was ‘very difficult’ to verify the exact location of the photographs – a similar set of which were first released back in 2004 by Malik and previously published on DailyMail.com – but claimed they were taken in Maryland in the early 1990s. ‘According to his half-sister, Barack Obama attended his half-brother’s wedding in the early 1990s. Malik Obama was a Muslim,’ said O’Reilly…

“Malik was married in 1981 for the first time and President Obama was his best man at that ceremony. He now has multiple wives. O’Reilly used the photos in a monologue alleging the President’s ‘deep emotional ties to Islam’ have stopped him effectively combating ISIS while also saying he believes the photos prove that President Obama is not a ‘devout Christian.’

“He did this while attacking President Obama hours after he revealed he would not be withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, saying: ‘President Obama, as we all know, will not even use the words Islamic terrorism. Again today when telling the nation that America will maintain eight-thousand troops in Afghanistan, the president did not accurately describe the situation there, putting forth that it was more about politics than Islamic terror.’

“O’Reilly claims the President Obama’s failure to identify the terrorist threat facing America has allowed ISIS to run amok in the Middle East, a mistake he claims the Commander-in-chief will not acknowledge. ‘There is no question the Obama administration’s greatest failure is allowing the Islamic terror group ISIS to run wild, murdering thousands of innocent people all over the world, including many Muslims,’ said O’Reilly…

“He went on to say during the program: ‘I base my analysis on the fact that in my opinion – and I could be wrong, but I’m not – President Obama’s sympathetic treatment of Muslims put the country in danger because he has not elevated the risks that we have to the level it should be. And he allowed ISIS to be created because of his foolish decision to withdraw troops in Iraq and to pretty much run wild for five years. So another president, angry about the jihad, would not have done that.’…”

Trump’s Possible Running Mates

The Washington Post wrote on June 30:

“Donald Trump’s campaign has begun formally vetting possible running mates, with former House speaker Newt Gingrich emerging as the leading candidate, followed by New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. But there are more than a half dozen others being discussed as possibilities, according to several people with knowledge of the process. Given Trump’s unpredictability, campaign associates caution that the presumptive Republican nominee could still shake up his shortlist. But with little more than two weeks before the start of the Republican National Convention, Gingrich and Christie have been asked to submit documents and are being cast as favorites for the post inside the campaign. Gingrich in particular is the beneficiary of a drumbeat of support from Trump confidants such as Ben Carson…

“The contenders under the most serious consideration, such as Gingrich and Christie, have been asked by attorney Arthur B. Culvahouse Jr. to answer more than 100 questions and to provide reams of personal and professional files that include tax records and any articles or books they have published… With Gingrich, 73, or Christie, 53, the 70-year-old mogul would be joined by a well-connected Republican who shares his combative style and his ease at being a ubiquitous media presence. Both men have won Trump’s favor by actively supporting him — Gingrich primarily through television appearances and Christie through behind-the-scenes talks with party leaders and leading GOP donors…

“Gingrich would bring with him a history of battling with presumptive Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton, going back to their public fights over health care and Bill Clinton’s agenda and ultimate impeachment in the 1990s during her husband’s presidency. For years, Gingrich was seen by Clinton allies not just as an opponent but a nemesis with a penchant for grandiose rhetoric and barbed attacks — traits that Trump is said to welcome…

“Cruz is seen as someone Trump would like to bring into the fold because of his political capital with the conservative movement. But their bitter clashes during the primary have left a mark, and Cruz has so far declined to endorse Trump. That has not stopped members of Trump’s team from reaching out to members of Cruz’s circle and trying for a reconciliation… Robert Jeffress, a Dallas pastor who has become close with Trump during the campaign, said in an interview that while he has not spoken to Trump about the vice-presidential slot, Trump has made clear that he ‘wants someone who can help get his legislative agenda through Congress.’”

France’s Hollande Attacks Trump, Advocates European Military ”Defense”

The Telegraph wrote on July 1:

“The president of France has launched a scathing attack on Republican candidate Donald Trump, saying relations between the US and Europe would be complicated if the New York tycoon wins the White House. In comments that were surprisingly outspoken for a sitting head of state about another country’s political candidate, François Hollande urged Democrats to work to ensure the victory of Hillary Clinton. He said those who believed it was impossible for Mr Trump to win, were the same people who failed to predict the outcome of Britain’s referendum on EU membership…

“Mr Hollande, a socialist, likened Mr Trump’s controversial policies to the fear-mongering tactics of far-right movements in the EU… ‘fear of the wave of immigration, stigmatisation of Islam, questioning of representative democracy,’ he said.

“Mr Hollande also accused Mr Trump of hypocrisy denouncing elites and said that the 70-year-old was the ‘most obvious incarnation’ of those very elites… Asked if he believed a Trump presidency would be ‘dangerous’, he answered in the affirmative… ‘His election would complicate relations between Europe and the United States. But let’s look beyond this scenario and become aware of a deep and lasting trend in the US – Americans no longer [intend] to be the policemen of the world. Europeans should understand and plan accordingly for their defence. For their economies. For their commercial policy. And for the protection of their cultural industries.’”

“Europe Wants Its Own Empire”

Express wrote on July 1:

“The EU wants to expand its influence as far and wide as Asia and Africa – with critics fuming it shows Brussels are planning to form ‘its own empire’. The latest EU foreign policy document, titled Global Strategy, calls for an extended reach into new spheres as distant as the Middle East and sub-Saharan Africa… Ukip’s defence spokesman Mike Hookem said: ‘The EU wants its own Empire as former Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso made clear when he was in charge. This global strategy by the EU is yet another reason why last Thursday’s result was a lucky escape for the UK.”

The New York Times wrote on July 1:

“Britain’s vote to leave the European Union comes as the 28-nation bloc is grappling with more than its usual economic issues… As France and Germany fill the leadership void, they will have an opportunity to pursue a shared goal that Britain has blocked: expanding the European Union’s integration to include military policy…

“The European Union already has a military affairs office, known as the European Defense Agency, but it is weak and decentralized, lacking even a permanent headquarters. Britain has long opposed strengthening this arm of the union, preferring that all military coordination go through NATO, where its voice is amplified by its close alliance with the United States. Days after Britain’s referendum, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, presented a long-awaited memo articulating the body’s ‘global strategy.’ At its center is a call, long sought by French and German officials, for beginning to integrate Europe’s military policies.”

Brexecution

The Washington Post wrote on July 1:

“A day after staging a political ambush that reshaped the race to be Britain’s next prime minister, [justice minister] Michael Gove said Friday he acted out of ‘conviction, not ambition’ to open yet another head-spinning drama amid the fallout from Britain’s snub of the European Union… Gove initially signaled he would back a former London mayor, Boris Johnson, as Cameron’s replacement. But just hours before Johnson was to announce his bid for the job, Gove on Thursday launched his own campaign. Johnson withdrew less than three hours later to add another word to Britain’s increasingly dark political lexicon: ‘Brexecution.’

“Gove insisted on Friday that he did not want to be prime minister but felt he had no choice after concluding that Johnson… was not up to the job… The betrayal has scrambled an already chaotic picture in British politics. Gove and Theresa May, who leads the country’s domestic security operations as home affairs minister, are now considered the front-runners to replace Cameron.

“Gove’s move against Johnson left Britain reckoning with one more betrayal in a political season full of them. It rattled an already dazed nation, and left no doubt — if any remained — that Britain is divided, directionless and leaderless as it prepares for a leap into the unknown of life outside the E.U.

“Gove now must rebuild his image to win over voters stung by his Machiavellian moves, and make a case for how he will negotiate the best terms for Britain as it breaks ranks with the other 27 E.U. nations…

“May would be the second female prime minister in British history, after Margaret Thatcher. May’s unsmiling public persona and hard-line conservative politics have drawn occasional comparisons to the Iron Lady.

“Much of the response Friday to Gove’s last-minute announcement that he would challenge Johnson was unfavorable. A succession of leading Conservative politicians threw their weight behind May. So did the Daily Mail, Britain’s rabidly anti-E.U. tabloid. The endorsement came despite the fact that May backed the ‘remain’ campaign. [But she said subsequently that she will abide by the British vote, as “Brexit means Brexit.”] Gove’s wife, Sarah Vine, is a Daily Mail columnist. ‘A party in flames and why it must be Theresa,’ was the paper’s banner headline Friday.

“The Sun, another top-selling British tabloid, used a picture of Johnson on its cover with the word ‘Brexecuted’ underneath…”

Der Spiegel called Gove the “Brexit Brutus.” Daily Mail referred to him as “Judas” who “sticks his knife into Boris [Johnson] AGAIN.”

“Brexit Cannot Be Cancelled or Delayed, Says Francois Hollande”

The Independent wrote on July 1:

“Francois Hollande echoed comments made by some other European leaders who have called for the UK to start the process of leaving the EU immediately… ‘the decision has been taken – it cannot be delayed… or cancelled. Now we must take the consequences.’…

“Michael Gove said that as Prime Minister he would only act after ‘extensive preliminary talks’, and most probably not before the end of this year, while Theresa May said: ‘There should be no decision to invoke Article 50 before the British negotiating strategy is agreed and clear.’”

“UK Should Join Nordic Alliance of Non-EU Countries, Says Iceland’s President”

Express wrote on July 1:

“Iceland wants the UK to join a Nordic alliance of non-EU countries in the wake of Brexit to create a ‘super triangle’ of nations. After knocking England out of the Euros, Iceland is now keen to join forces to create a new union.

“President of Iceland Olafur Ragnar Grimsson said Brexit ‘is the most serious setback the leadership of the EU has seen for a long time’ as he called for a new alliance. Mr Grimmsson said: ‘First of all, it is now obvious that here in the North Atlantic will be a triangle of nations that all stand outside of the European Union: Greenland, Iceland, Great Britain, Faroe Islands and Norway. This key area in the North will be outside of the influence of the European Union…”

Norway Not Too Happy About UK Membership in EEA and EFTA

EUObserver wrote on July 1:

“Norway is far from enthusiastic about the prospect of the UK remaining a member of the European Economic Area (EEA) via the European Free Trade Area (EFTA). The reason for this is that only Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein have membership in the EEA thanks to the EFTA agreement. If the UK gets a good deal, this may turn the tide in Norway. EEA members are all EU countries plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway. With Switzerland they all form the EFTA. Both associations are aimed at extending the EU single market to willing non-EU countries. By comparison, the UK is a giant and would most likely run the show, thus reducing Norway’s influence.

“Membership of the EEA makes Norway and the other two countries that access the single market via EFTA ‘three-quarter’ members of the EU… EEA membership [allows] Norwegian businesses access to the European single market without the country having to join the Euro or agree to a closer union… Norway agreed to accept all EU legislation regarding the single market, and to accept all future legislation that the EU might adopt for the single market, regardless of what this might be. Parliament approved this while revoking any Norwegian legislation, regulations, and administrative decisions that might be in breach of the basic principles of the EU Treaty or any EU legislation on the single market. Norway has effectively renounced the right to adopt national legislation that may be in violation of the single market’s legislation.  In return, Norwegian businesses and people get free access to the European single market… Since 1994, Norway has had to swallow over 10,000 EU laws… The three countries support the 15 economically weakest EU member states by way of a membership fee for access to the single market…

“Norway has also acceded to other agreements, including the Schengen Agreement… Although Norway has no voting rights in EU bodies, it does attend certain informal ministerial meetings… Theoretically, Norway can say ‘no’ to new legislation if Norway feels it conflicts with its national interests or is irrelevant to the EEA. Until now, this has not happened. The reason is simple: If Norway, Iceland, or Liechtenstein prohibit the implementation of an EU law, they can be punished. This means that the EU can revoke entirely unrelated elements of the agreement. For example: Norway threatened to reject the EU directive on additives in baby food, to which the EU responded by threatening to throw Norway out of the agreement on veterinary co-operation. This would be a disaster for Norwegian exports of fish. Ultimately, Norway always gives in… The EEA is undemocratic and not without constitutional problems. Norway has waved goodbye to much of its sovereignty to gain access to the single market. It would be ironic beyond measure if the British were to end up in the same boat. They voted to leave in order to have more control over their legislation, yet membership of the EEA via EFTA would only serve to reduce this control…

“There is growing scepticism about the agreement within the Norwegian trade union movement. The free movement of labour has led to social dumping in some industries, such as construction. It is primarily workers from Eastern Europe who pose this threat. The Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions (LO) currently supports the EEA agreement, but this is likely to be a hotly debated topic at its next congress in light of social dumping. It means that those opposed to EU membership and who are increasingly sceptical of the EEA agreement, will be following Brexit particularly closely. If the UK gets a good deal, this may turn the tide in Norway. It may strengthen opposition to the EEA agreement, for such a deal may prove that it is possible for individual countries to negotiate a deal with the EU that is a worthy alternative to membership in the EEA.”

UK’s Nigel Farage Quits… but Not Quite

The Times of Israel wrote on July 4:

“United Kingdom Independence Party leader Nigel Farage, a major driving force behind Britain’s vote to leave the European Union, stepped down as leader of his party on Monday… This was not the first time Farage resigned as the leader of the party, but he said this time it was definite. Farage first quit as party leader in 2009 over party infighting and again in 2015 after failing to become an MP, but on both occasions decided to stay…

“Though he stepped down from internal British politics, Farage said he would retain his seat in the European Parliament to scrutinize the negotiations for Britain’s exit from the EU. ‘I will watch the renegotiation process in Brussels like a hawk and perhaps comment in the European Parliament from time to time,’ he said. ‘Whilst we will now leave the European Union the terms of our withdrawal are unclear,’ he added. ‘If there is too much backsliding by the government and with the Labour party detached from many of its voters, then UKIP’s best days may be yet to come.’”

British Chancellor Osborne’s Interesting Proposals

The Telegraph wrote on July 4:

“George Osborne wants us to know: he’s still here. Maligned by Tories and Lefties alike after the EU referendum, the Chancellor…  is nonetheless determined to grab column inches rather than fading away into the background…

“Mr Osborne had a helpful suggestion today. Britain needs to act fast to signal to international investors that it is going to be a hospitable and profitable place to do business. His statement that Britain should aim for corporation tax rate of 15 per cent is not a bad start. That would be a cut of 5 percentage points and give us the lowest rate in the G7 by some margin…

“Britain should do everything in its power to appeal to large corporations that employ people across the EU: it improves our negotiating position… getting a good deal from the EU is going to be extremely tough, because there are powerful forces on the continent determined not to grant us full single market access if we want any concessions on free movement.

“One strategy we should use to loosen their resolve is to give the EU an idea of what an excluded Britain on the edge of the market might look like. And one potential answer to that is obviously: a giant tax haven… The logic of cutting taxes in response to Brexit is obvious. If the EU decides to make it more expensive and difficult for businesses based here to sell their goods and services into its market, we will need to offset that cost in order to encourage a similar level of investment as we currently enjoy…

“The underlying message it sends to the EU is a harsher one: if you wilfully lock us out of your market, you leave us only one way to compete. And you won’t like it.”

Terrorism in Bangladesh

Deutsche Welle reported on July 2:

“Twenty people were found dead in a cafe in Bangladesh’s capital after police stormed it, killing six militants and capturing one. The operation ended an overnight standoff that the ‘Islamic State’ took credit for.  On Saturday, Bangladesh security forces ended a 10-hour siege at an upscale eatery in Dhaka, where about 35 people had been held captive by heavily armed militants. Thirteen hostages were freed, six of the hostage takers were killed in the operation, and one was captured, officials said.

“The Bangladesh army reported that 20 foreigners – a mix of Italian and Japanese nationals – had been found killed inside the cafe, many apparently stabbed and slashed.”

Terrorism in Iraq

The Telegraph wrote on July 3:

“At least 125 people have been killed in two separate bomb attacks in Baghdad, Iraq.  A pickup truck packed with explosives blew up outside a crowded market in Karada killing at least 115 people and wounding up to 187 others, officials said. The attack struck as families and young people were out on the streets after breaking their daylight fast for the Muslim holy month of Ramadan.

“Most of the victims were inside a multi-story shopping centre, where dozens burned to death or suffocated. The dead included 15 children, 10 women and six policemen, a police officer told the Associated Press.

“Isis claimed responsibility for the attack, releasing a statement to say a suicide car bomber targeted Shiites and warning ‘the raids of the mujahedeen [holy warriors] against the Rafidha [Shiites] apostates will not stop’.

“Shortly after the first bombing, an improvised explosive blew up in in eastern Baghdad, killing at least five people and wounding 16. There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the second attack… Many of the dead were children, according to a team from The Associated Press at the scene…

“Hours after the bombing, Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi visited the site, where he was met by an angry crowd. The attacks came just over a week after Iraqi forces declared the city of Fallujah ‘fully liberated’ from Isis… Despite the government’s victories on the battlefield, Isis has repeatedly shown it remains capable of launching attacks far from the front-lines. The terror group remains in control of Iraq’s second largest city of Mosul, as well as significant areas of territory in the country’s north and west.”

Transgender Mania

Breitbart wrote on June 29:

“With transgender mania in full swing across the progressive half of the nation, two transgender candidates have won their respective Democrat primaries to become the first transgender candidates to appear on a general election ballot from one of the nation’s two major parties. Transgender candidates have won Democrat primaries in both Colorado and Utah, and coincidentally enough, both males have adopted ‘Misty’ as their female name.

“… an Oregon law recently allowed a jury to award $60,000.00 to a transgender teacher because other teachers declined to use the teacher’s preferred pronoun, which is “they” rather than “him” or “her.” New York City has also establish similar forced-speech rules…”

Former Pope Benedict to Reveal Reasons for His Resignation

Newsmax added on July 1:

“Former Pope Benedict says in his memoirs that no one pressured him to resign but alleges that a ‘gay lobby’ in the Vatican had tried to influence decisions, a leading Italian newspaper reported on Friday. The book, called ‘The Last Conversations’, is the first time in history that a former pope judges his own pontificate after it is over. It is due to be published on Sept. 9.

“Citing health reasons, Benedict in [2013] became the first pope in six centuries to resign… In the book, Benedict says that he came to know of the presence of a ‘gay lobby’ made up of four or five people who were seeking to influence Vatican decisions. The article says Benedict says he managed to ‘break up this power group’.

“Benedict resigned following a turbulent papacy that included the so-call ‘Vatileaks’ case, in which his butler leaked some of his personal letters and other documents that alleged corruption and a power struggle in the Vatican. Italian media at the time reported that a faction of prelates who wanted to discredit Benedict and pressure him to resign was behind the leaks.

“… rights campaigners have long said many gay people work for the Vatican and Church sources have said they suspect that some have banded together to support each other’s careers and influence decisions in the bureaucracy.

“Benedict, who now has the title ‘emeritus pope,’ has always maintained that he made his choice to leave freely and… in the book Benedict ‘again denies blackmail or pressure’… The former pope… says that he was ‘incredulous’ when cardinals meeting in a secret conclave chose him to succeed the late Pope John Paul II in 2005 and that he was ‘surprised’ when the cardinals chose Francis as his successor in 2013. Anger over the dysfunctional state of the Vatican bureaucracy in 2013 was one factor in the cardinal electors’ decision to choose a non-European pope for the first time in nearly 1,300 years.”

In the first installment of this series, we will address the Church’s position on violence and self-defense, as the answer is critical for the understanding as to what kinds of sports a true Christian may or should not participate in. What is the Church’s position on “violent” sports such as football, soccer, boxing, paintball and laser tag, as well as shooting with a gun or with an arrow? What is the Church’s position on “defensive” sports such as karate and jiu-jitsu; and how would the Church look at “war games” such as chess? Should our motivation be considered when watching or participating in certain sports and other related activities?

In a Q&A, titled, “Do You Believe in and Teach Self-Defense?,” we set forth the following, while quoting to a large extent from our free booklet, “Should You Fight in War?”:

“Do we believe in God and rely on Him for our protection, having the faith that it is GOD who is our protecting shield, or do we think that we must have additional security in the form of a handgun or some sort of firearm? Do we think that God is incapable of helping us in certain circumstances? We should, of course, do everything that we can do to avoid getting into dangerous situations. We obviously should not go to places where gangs assemble, and we should not get involved with people who are known to be active in crimes…

“We are also told in Proverbs 26:17 that he who passes by and meddles with strife belonging not to him, is like one who takes a dog by the ears…

“The most important of all the things you can do to avoid using violence is to pray to God, on a daily basis: ‘Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil’ (compare Matthew 6:13)… God… will also provide a way of escape for you. This is sometimes literally the case. Sometimes you need to actually flee, to run away! Christ did so on occasion. We read in John 10:39: ‘Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand.’… When we find ourselves, or others, in a dangerous, challenging, life-threatening situation, we must PRAY to God, with faith, to HELP us out of that situation. To fight our fight for us! To give us the wisdom and the power NOT to do the WRONG thing, however tempting it may be.

“We must realize that no matter what harm we may WANT to do physically in a given situation, we must not seriously injure or kill the attacker… If we carry a gun with us or have one handy, say, next to our bed, we will certainly try to use it, but then may be killed in the process… In any case, to use a gun and shoot the attacker would be against the clear Biblical teaching of prohibiting killing. But what about just trying to injure him? In the heat of the moment, you may not be able to do just that, even if you wanted to. And if the attacker would only be injured, he would still have the chance to kill you or others who are with you. Christ told Peter, when he pulled his sword in defense of Christ and just injured the servant, to put his sword away. Christ’s protection did not depend on human weapons. It depended on God the Father and His angels. So, too, with us. Our real protection comes from the same source….

“The whole issue really comes down to where we place our trust and confidence for our protection, in EVERY situation… we must firmly keep in mind God’s limitless power and His willingness to help His disciples, who place their trust and confidence in Him… To resort to violence with the intent to seriously injure or kill another person, even for the purpose of self-defense or defending others, is not in conformity with Christ’s teaching… God has assigned angels for our protection…”

We will discuss in the next installment how these comments would not only apply to a hand gun or a firearm, but also to potentially “violent sports” and “activities,” involving self-defense with the potential of seriously harming another person.

Let us consider further questions regarding the issue of violence.

We read in James 5:6: “You [the rich] have condemned, you have murdered the just; he does not resist you.” The new Luther Bible translates: “He does not defend himself.” (In German: “… er wehrt sich nicht.”)

This brings to mind the famous passages in Matthew 5:38-41 and in Luke 6:27-30, where Christ says that we must not resist an evil person; pointing out that when we are being hit, we are to turn the other cheek; when someone tries to take our cloak, we ought to leave him our tunic, and vice versa; and when someone compels us to go one mile, we must go with him two miles–the famous extra mile. Does all of this mean that we have to passively give in to violent conduct and that we can do nothing in our defense?

We answer these questions in part 6 (pages 49-56) of our free booklet, “Old Testament Laws—Still Valid Today?:

“Jesus… addressed the principle of ‘an eye for an eye.’ He stated, in Matthew 5:38-39:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I tell you not to resist [forcefully, by resorting to violence and thereby injuring or killing] an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.” According to the Lamsa Bible, the concept of ‘turning the other cheek’ is another Aramaic idiom, meaning, ‘Do not start a quarrel or a fight.’

“… In order to prevent personal vengeance, as well as an unwillingness to forgive, to reconcile, and to live peaceably with all men, Christ continued to encourage His followers, in Matthew 5:40, to settle a claim with their adversaries out of court, without insisting on their ‘rights.’

“Paul cautioned us in the same way in 1 Corinthians 6:1-7, especially when lawsuits before worldly courts involve spiritual brethren. He said, in verse 7: ‘… it is already an utter failure for you that you go to law against one another. Why do you not rather accept wrong? Why do you not rather let yourselves be cheated?’

“Finally, in Matthew 5:41, when encouraging His followers to go the ‘extra mile,’ Jesus referred to the Roman practice that ‘obliged the people not only to furnish horses and carriages [for government dispatches], but to give personal attendance, often at great inconvenience, when required. But the thing here demanded is a readiness to submit to unreasonable demands of whatever kind, rather than raise quarrels, with all the evils resulting from them’ (Jamiesson, Fausset and Brown, Commentary on the Whole Bible).

“In conclusion, the Old Testament ‘lex talionis’ of an eye for an eye principle was never meant to be applied literally by actually maiming an offender. It was meant to outlaw personal vindictive ‘self-help’ and to allow, instead, a magistrate or a judge to consider the case and render righteous judgment by ordering the offender to pay just compensation to the victim. Jesus Christ addressed a wrong understanding of His listeners who thought they could avenge themselves. He cautioned all of us to be forgiving and kind, and He encouraged us to avoid fights and especially violence, even, if need be, at the price of foregoing our legal rights.”

As we can see, Christ did not mean to imply that we are to be helpless and passive victims and bystanders when confronted with violence. Rather, He told us not to treat violence with violence and revenge, including in our dealing with (unrighteous) acts of the government or in the context of improper conduct in legal settings.

Generally to the concept of violent conduct, we would like to quote from an Editorial by Norbert Link, titled, “Violence No More?,” where the following was stated:

“Our fascination with guns and violence will not contribute to the end of the misuse of guns and violent conduct—it will not create a better world. What is needed is a change of heart—how we think, and for what we stand. In the famous millennial passage of Isaiah 2:2-4, we read about a new world which will be so much different from what we are confronted with today. Satan will have no more influence over unsuspecting and gullible people. Instead, God’s law will be taught (verse 3). The consequence will be unparalleled in human history and truly earth-shaking: ‘They shall beat their swords into plowshares, And their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, Neither shall they learn war anymore.’

“Their mind will be receptive to God’s way of life. God’s law will be in their heart (Isaiah 51:7). They will walk in God’s statutes and do them (Ezekiel 11:19-20). They will learn to live peaceably with their neighbor and with other nations. They will finally realize that committing violence against our fellow man will only bring destruction… When God’s law of love rules in our heart—and love does no harm to our neighbor (Romans 13:10)—then we would not even think of using a gun or a knife against someone. We would not even think of resorting to violence against another human being.”

But since most, if not all, sports have the potential of harming another person (quite physically or at least emotionally), and since cheering for one’s team or athlete might be viewed as wanting to harm the opposing team or athlete, should a Christian therefore totally abstain from watching or participating in competitive sports?

Another Editorial from Norbert Link, titled, “Enjoy Sports–The Right Way,” pointed out:

“Sadly, all sports have terribly deteriorated, and soccer is by no means an exception. Although originally designed as a ‘no-touch’ game, which did not permit a player to as much as intentionally ‘touch’ another player (except for using one’s shoulder to touch the opponent’s shoulder), we see more and more ‘professional fouls,’ and we are used to referees issuing warnings and giving out yellow cards and even red cards (signifying expulsion from the game).

“Therefore, some have concluded that God does not approve of any competitive sports. But this conclusion is not necessarily correct.

“In 1 Corinthians 9:24-26, Paul draws a spiritual analogy to competition in sports. This passage does not seem to allow for the conclusion that such competition is necessarily wrong. Paul says: ‘Do you not know that those who run in a race all run, but one receives the prize? Run in such a way that you may obtain it. And everyone who competes for the prize is temperate in all things. Now they do it to obtain a perishable crown, but we for an imperishable crown. Therefore I run thus: not with uncertainty…’ David draws another analogy in the book of Psalms, comparing the sun with ‘a bridegroom coming out of his chamber, And rejoices like a strong man to run its race’ (Psalm 19:5)…

“But God does not want us to have an attitude of harming or injuring an opponent, or of wishing that he be injured so that ‘our’ team will get an advantage. When ‘competition’ reaches that destructive level, it is wrong. But to want ‘our’ team to win in a game is not wrong. And ‘our’ team had better make every right effort to win, so that it is deserving of ‘our’ support (Ecclesiastes 9:10). But once a game is finished, we are to go on with life and our responsibilities. I remember Mr. Armstrong commenting once that he was enjoying watching a basketball game with the L.A. Lakers, but once the game was over, he would return to his duties. Some get so involved in the support of their team that they get all upset and can’t sleep at night if their team has lost. They might even get drunk to ‘forget their pain.’ That, of course, is not indicative of a healthy and Christian attitude.

“Sports can be good entertainment. They can contribute to our health and relaxation. They can be exciting. But they must never take first place in our lives… And even though watching sporting events can be good and clean fun, that should be all. In this world, ‘the race is not to the swift, Nor the battle to the strong… Nor favor to men of skill; But time and chance happen to them all’ (Ecclesiastes 9:11). So, let’s enjoy sporting matches in a right way, while never getting our priorities mixed up.”

In the next installment, we will continue to show how concepts of violence and revenge apply to sports and other related activities, and what kinds of sports a Christian should view with disfavor.

(To Be Continued)

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

Due to an address change, Pastor Brian Gale requests that mail sent to the Global Church of God in the UK be addressed as follows:

Global Church of God
PO Box 44
MABLETHORPE
LN12 9AN
United Kingdom

“FBI’s Recommendation in Clinton Scandal Suggests Corrupt and Rigged System,” is the title of a new StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

Regarding former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified E-mail information on her private unsecured E-mail servers, the FBI has determined that she not only repeatedly lied to Congress and the public, but that she also acted with extreme carelessness or gross negligence and thereby violated the Federal Penal Code and committed a crime under the Espionage Act. Still, FBI Director James Comey recommends not to prosecute Mrs. Clinton; thereby raising questions pertaining to former President Bill Clinton, Attorney General Loretta Lynch and President Barack Obama. Many are outraged and claim that the rules of law were purposefully re-written for the Clintons. Evangelist and Attorney Norbert Link explains why this entire dubious affair is another example of terrible corruption within the USA.

“Ehrlich Währt am Längsten,” is the title of this week’s new German sermon. This is another sermon in our series on money. Title in English (it’s a German proverb): “Honesty Endures the Longest.”

“Other People,” the sermonette presented last Sabbath by Dave Harris, is now posted. Here is a summary:

In our world of violent extremism, other people don’t seem to matter! However, we must reject this approach, because Christians are people who love other people!

“The Forerunner to Destruction,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Robb Harris, is now posted. Here is a summary:

When we focus our energy away from Godliness, it inevitably leads to a prideful attitude. No matter the motivation for reaching this state, this mindset divorces us from a relationship with God, and ultimately, destroys our eternal life.

On July 2, 2016, Dave Harris will present the sermonette, titled, “Other People,” and Robb Harris will present the sermon, titled, “The Forerunner to Destruction.”

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.

History has been made and prophecy is being fulfilled before our eyes.  A week before the June 23, 2016, referendum in Great Britain, I was asked by someone I know, who is not in the church, what I thought about the Brexit and if the United Kingdom would vote to stay or leave the EU.  I answered him, saying that I believe they will decide to leave, if not on June 23, then sometime in the future, although I hinted at the great possibility that it would happen on June 23.  He didn’t necessarily agree with me and then brought up all kinds of explanations for his belief that they would vote to stay.

A day before the referendum, he asked me again if I thought that the Brexit would happen, but now he added if I would “bet on it.”  I gave him the same answer, and this time I added the reason why I was so convinced that they would ultimately leave, without placing a bet, as it would prove to be an unfair outcome on his end.  Since I knew that he didn’t really believe in the Bible, I told him what I believed and that based on biblical prophecy, the UK leaving the EU would happen.  However, it wouldn’t end there.  I explained to him that out of the present EU, very powerful core European countries would emerge. He also wondered how the stock market would be affected, and I merely responded to be prepared.

What we in the church have been saying for years is coming to fruition, and we have been able to back it up BECAUSE we understand biblical prophecy.  We have produced videos, messages and literature for many years, warning about Great Britain leaving the EU and ten European countries or groups of nations emerging that will unify and become militarily strong (compare Daniel 2:42). These ten nations or groups of nations will only rule for a short time, and they will give their power and authority to a charismatic political personage – the “beast” (Revelation 17:12-13), who will also work together with a religious figure, called “the false prophet.” Our free booklet, “The Ten European Revivals of the Ancient Roman Empire,” explains all of this in great detail.

Now that we see more and more how prophetic situations are developing in the world, we must ask ourselves just how prepared we are, for we are accountable for ourselves and others. Do we have our priorities straight or are we “delaying” the return of Christ?  Would we be ready if the great tribulation was to occur very soon, or do we need to make changes so we can be counted worthy to escape all these terrible events that will occur during the great tribulation?  Are we close enough to God and do we place Him first?  These are important questions that we need to ask ourselves because the future is also dependent on us!

People who don’t know the truth and who don’t understand biblical prophecy and the actual significance of what is happening now in the world, will be caught off guard, as more and more prophetically described events start to take place in the near future.  We, however, who KNOW the truth and who UNDERSTAND what the Bible is saying, MUST continue to be on guard, for Christ warns that “if you will not watch, I will come upon you as a thief, and you will not know what hour I will come upon you” (Revelation 3:3).  Paul also expounds upon this in 1 Thessalonians 5:2-10 where he says, “For you yourselves know perfectly that the day of the Lord so comes as a thief in the night.  For when they say, ‘Peace and safety!’ then sudden destruction comes upon them, as labor pains upon a pregnant woman. And they shall not escape. But you, brethren, are not in darkness, so that this Day should overtake you as a thief.  You are all sons of light and sons of the day. We are not of the night nor of darkness.  Therefore let us not sleep, as others do, but let us watch and be sober.  For those who sleep, sleep at night, and those who get drunk are drunk at night.  But let us who are of the day be sober, putting on the breastplate of faith and love, and as a helmet the hope of salvation.  For God did not appoint us to wrath, but to obtain salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who died for us, that whether we wake or sleep, we should live together with Him.”

Interesting times are indeed ahead of us, and we are witnessing “a change in the making.”  We must continue to watch and pray always that we “may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man” (Luke 21:36).

We begin with reports on the last terror attack in Istanbul, Turkey, following Turkey’s announcements regarding improved relationships with Russia and Israel; and we continue with several reports about the situation in Great Britain and continental Europe, following the British referendum to exit from the EU. British politicians from both camps are trying to delay the process, while many Europeans demand speedy action. The divorce between Britain and Europe has been described as messy, ugly and dirty.

At the same time, some continental Europeans are pursuing their vision of Europe, and in the wake of the Brexit vote, a German-French proposal recommends an even tighter “collaboration” and the creation of a United States of Europe, while others seem to be pushing for a European army. Please view our new StandingWatch program on the subject, titled, “No Exit from Brexit”; as well as last week’s program, titled, “Brexit Won—Now What?” 

We continue with a controversial decision of the US Supreme Court regarding abortion and a misleading article, falsely suggesting and complaining about an alleged big change in the US Naturalization procedures.

We quote further upsetting comments by Pope Francis, including his ideas regarding homosexuals, the blessing of weapons, Martin Luther and the Reformation, and the role of Pope Benedict; and we conclude with an eye-opening article, putting to rest the hoax that the Holocaust never happened, while warning of a potential repetition in European architectural design.

Terror Attack in Istanbul

Deutsche Welle wrote on June 29:

“The bombing at Ataturk Airport is the most recent attack in a long line of lethal assaults Turkey has seen over the past year. The country is struggling to defend itself against Kurdish militants and Islamist terrorists.

“Turkey is still in shock after three suicide bombers killed at least 41 people and injured 239 more at Istanbul’s Ataturk International Airport on Tuesday. Among the victims were travelers from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Tunisia, Uzbekistan, China, Iran, Ukraine and Jordan.

“The attack was the latest in a string of violent terrorist acts that have rocked Turkey since 2015. On July 20, 2015, the terrorist group ‘Islamic State’ (IS) first attacked in Turkey, killing 34 leftists and Kurds in the southern town of Suruc. Turkish forces retaliated by bombing IS strongholds in Syria.

“IS’ first bombing in Suruc triggered a spiral of violence. The activists were on an aid mission to Kobane, where months earlier Syrian Kurdish figh[t]ers affiliated with the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) had defended against an IS onslaught with the help of US airstrikes. The Turkish government’s mute response to the ‘Battle for Kobane’ – which became a source of nationalist pride for Kurds across the Middle East -raised sentiment among Turkish Kurds that the government was backing IS against their ethnic brethren in Syria.

“The PKK responded to the Suruc attacks by murdering two police officers in retaliation for what it views as Turkish support for IS to counter the Syrian Kurds. Turkey’s government had been in peace talks with the militant PKK for two and a half years in a bid to end more than three decades of fighting. But after the killing of the two police officers and subsequent Turkish retaliatory airstrikes, the peace was shattered. Ever since then, the country has been struggling with violence from two sides: IS terrorists and Kurdish militants.

“No one has taken responsibility for the most recent bombing at Ataturk Airport, but Turkish authorities are blaming IS. The Islamist terrorists were definitely responsible for several other deadly attacks in Turkey since July 2015. Aside from the attack in Suruc, they also killed 102 people and injured 400 at a leftist and Kurdish peace rally in Ankara on October 10, 2015. Another IS suicide attack in Istanbul’s heavily touristed Sultanahmet district in January killed 12 people, mostly German tourists…”

The Guardian wrote on June 30:

“According to Turkish government officials, the three attackers who stormed the airport’s lower-level arrivals terminal came from Russia, Uzbekistan and Kyrgyzstan. The authorities believe the trio carried out their suicide mission on behalf of Islamic State.”

“Erdogan Went to Sleep with Dogs and Woke Up with Beasts…”

JTA wrote on June 29:

“Exactly two years since Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi announced the establishment of the ‘Islamic State,’ Baghdadi’s life project looks less like a country and more like the most vicious and sophisticated terror group the world has ever known. And that’s even taking al-Qaeda into account. Time after time, IS proves capable of carrying out massive attacks at resonant targets (like Turkey’s busiest airport), with major potential consequences (such as a drastic fall in tourism)…

“Its ambitions are not limited to the Middle East, either. IS is doing all it can to export terror attacks across the Bosphorus, to Europe and also to the United States. One or more of these attempts is likely to succeed sooner or later…

“And here is where Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Turkey enters the picture. The president and his government for years ignored the stream of fighters that traveled through their country to territories controlled by the Islamic State. They preferred to concentrate their military efforts against the Kurds. They preferred to cooperate with IS, the Nusra Front and others by looking the other way, hoping to weaken their other enemy – Bashar Assad, the president of what is left of Syria.

“More recently, however, US pressure bore fruit, and Erdogan instructed Turkish intelligence to try to stop the flow of IS volunteers from Turkey, and to tackle the black market for IS oil. That’s how Erdogan, an Islamist from the Muslim Brotherhood ilk, an overt supporter of the Hamas terror group, became the man who went to sleep with dogs and woke up with beasts, how he became the enemy of Islamic State…”

Consequences of the Brexit Vote

The Washington Post wrote on June 25:

“… political aftershocks rocked both sides of the English Channel following Britain’s historic vote to leave… British voters and their European peers began… to digest the full and enormous consequences of the historic decision to break with Europe. In Berlin, foreign ministers from the six original members of the E.U. spoke with one voice, effectively telling the British that now that they have decided, there should be no delay to the exit door.

“Cameron has sought a looser timetable to give his Conservative Party a chance to choose his successor, whose task it would be to fashion a withdrawal deal over the course of two years. But technically, negotiations can’t start until Britain triggers the bloc’s Article 50 — the never-before-used mechanism to leave it. Cameron has given no indication of pulling that lever fast. But for European officials stung by the vote, patience was wearing thin…

“At the same time, deep intrigue reminiscent of ancient European power plays using knights and swords instead of the ballot box swirled over the future of Scotland. Scottish voters, unlike the English or Welsh, voted on Thursday to remain in the E.U… some E.U. politicians have said that if Scotland extends a hand, the E.U. should take it… ‘If Scotland wants to be a member of the European Union as an independent country, then they are welcome,’ said Manfred Weber, the chair of the European Parliament’s center-right European People’s Party and an ally of German Chancellor Angela Merkel…

“Britain could undergo even further dismantling if the nationalists in Northern Ireland, which also voted to remain in the E.U., press ahead with their calls for a vote on Irish reunification. Signs at the main post office in Belfast warned all who entered that it had already run out of applications for passports from Ireland.

“In the tumult, Jonathan Hill, Britain’s European commissioner, announced his resignation Saturday, citing his disappointment at the outcome of the referendum. His departure as Britain’s most senior official in Brussels was expected, but it nonetheless was another reminder of how the vote Thursday is quickly shrinking the country’s role in European affairs…”

What Will Scotland Do?

The Telegraph wrote on June 29:

“Nicola Sturgeon’s hopes of negotiating a deal to keep Scotland in the EU has suffered a major setback after Francois Hollande ruled out talks and the Spanish Prime Minister [Mr Rajoy] said it has to leave with the rest of the United Kingdom… A series of other member states, including Germany, also said they would not get involved in ‘internal’ British politics…

“Mr Rajoy… told a news conference following a summit of European leaders in Brussels: ‘… Scotland does not have the competence to negotiate with the European Union. Spain opposes any negotiation by anyone other than the government of United Kingdom.’

“Mr Rajoy’s uncompromising stance appears to make a second independence referendum more likely, as Ms Sturgeon has said that she will propose one if that is the ‘best or only way to protect Scotland’s place in the EU.’

“But [Mr Rajoy’s] statement also suggests that a separate Scotland would start life outside the EU and have to negotiate entry, a process that could take years and involve adoption of the euro, a hard border with England and tight public spending controls.”

In the Wake of the Brexit… Anti-Semitism in Corbyn’s Labour Party

JTA wrote on June 28:

“Only a week ago, Jeremy Corbyn seemed to have survived his biggest public relations debacle as the leader of Britain’s Labour Party: the proliferation of anti-Semitic rhetoric among its members. Yet this week, the British vote to leave the European Union achieved what Corbyn’s opponents failed to do in their attacks against him over anti-Semitism.

“On Tuesday, 172 Labour lawmakers among the total 229 in the Parliament said they had no confidence in Corbyn, opening the door to a challenge that if co-signed by 51 lawmakers will lead to internal elections. The previous day, the party’s leadership abandoned Corbyn in a mass walkout over his perceived failure to effectively lobby against the Brexit, which a majority of voters supported in Thursday’s referendum.

“Relying on strong popular support in the Labour rank-and-file and ignoring calls to resign by former supporters who quit in protest of his leadership, Corbyn is holding on to his seat. Critics say he risks splitting and ruining a party that used to be a natural political home for British minority groups, including many from the Jewish community…

“Under fire by senior party members who accused him of either doing too little to curb the phenomenon or of contributing to it with his open endorsement of anti-Israel terrorists, Corbyn took a serious beating in the mainstream media. The pressure mounted after Ken Livingstone, a former mayor of London, said Adolf Hitler was a Zionist. Livingstone was suspended from the party…”

More Outcry Against Corbyn

The Guardian wrote on June 30:

“Jeremy Corbyn was engulfed in a fresh row over Israel when he appeared to compare the government of Binyamin Netanyahu to Islamic State at the launch of an independent review into antisemitism in the Labour party. In prepared remarks, Corbyn said: ‘Our Jewish friends are no more responsible for the actions of Israel or the Netanyahu government than our Muslim friends are for those of various self-styled Islamic states or organisations.’,,,

“Responding to the report, Jonathan Arkush, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews… added: ‘It is deeply regrettable that [Corbyn] went on to establish some sort of equivalence between Israel and terrorist groups such as Isis. This is completely unacceptable.’…

“The Labour MP Ruth Smeeth walked out of the press conference after being accused of colluding with the Daily Telegraph in a row over leaflets allegedly describing MPs opposed to Corbyn’s continued leadership as ‘traitors.’ Corbyn refused to take questions on the challenge to his leadership or whether he intended to remain at the helm of the party. ‘I am the leader,’ he said…

“Corbyn, who was greeted with whoops and cheers as he stood at the podium, criticised ‘hateful language’ used by some of the most prominent pro-leave campaigners in the referendum debate, naming Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Nigel Farage…

“Danny Rich, senior rabbi of Liberal Judaism, said although he did not believe the Labour party was institutionally antisemitic, Livingstone’s comments and other rhetoric had made an independent inquiry necessary. He added: ‘Jeremy Corbyn’s comment at the press conference, which paralleled Israel and Islamic State, makes me wonder whether he, at least, has learned anything at all from the inquiry.’”

EC Founding Members: “No Time to Lose!”

Deutsche Welle added on June 25 :

“‘The people have spoken and we need to implement this decision,’ Luxembourg Foreign Minister Jean Asselborn said on the British vote to leave the EU. The UK should not ‘play a game of cat-and-mouse’ by delaying divorce talks, he added… ‘There is no time to lose,’ said French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault. ‘Of course a new (British) prime minister must be appointed, that will probably require a few days but this is quite urgent,’ he added.

“Dutch Foreign Minister Bert Koenders said Europe could not accept a political vacuum. ‘This will not be business as usual,’ he said.

“The present-day European Union originated from the European Economic Community, which was established in 1957 by West Germany, France, Italy, and the Benelux countries. The UK joined the organization in 1973.”

Is Britain Trying to Stall?

Deutsche Welle wrote on June 27:

“Germany’s EU Commissioner Günther Oettinger on Monday joined the chorus of voices calling on Britain to clarify its intentions after the Brexit vote, telling broadcaster Deutschlandfunk that the Conservative Party under Prime Minister David Cameron must swiftly decide on what course to take… His comments echoed those made at the weekend by the president of the European Parliament, Oettinger’s compatriot Martin Schulz… On Monday, Merkel’s spokesman Steffen Seibert also said that the chancellor rejected any long delay in Britain’s departure from the bloc…

“However, Britain’s Cameron has so far refused to invoke Article 50 of the EU’s Lisbon Treaty and has signalled that he wants to wait several months before beginning the country’s exit from the bloc, leaving his European partners in a state of limbo… By Cameron’s timetable, a replacement should be found ready for the Tories’ party conference in October, a delay that might not prove palatable on the continent.

“Even those British politicians behind the ‘Leave’ campaign seem to be in considerable doubt as to how to proceed without damaging British interests. Boris Johnson, who is favorite to become the next Conservative prime minister, has tried to allay fears about the country’s economic future by claiming that it would continue to have access to the EU single market. What he could not explain, however, was how Britain can continue to partake in free trade in Europe without accepting precisely the EU regulations that those in the ‘Leave’ campaign want to jettison, including rules on freedom of movement for EU citizens.”

Daily Mail added on June 27:

“… the result continues to cause deep divisions within the UK, with departing Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne criticised for a lack of leadership, while Leave campaign figurehead Boris Johnson has also come under fire for ‘backtracking’ on arguments he made in favour of Brexit.”

Europe Angry with Britain

The Associated Press wrote on June 27:

“The European Union wants a quickie divorce, but Britain wants time to think things over… EU Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker warned that the split was ‘not an amicable divorce’ but noted it was never ‘a tight love affair anyway.’…

“… French Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron expressed the frustrations that many EU politicians feel, accusing Britain of taking the EU ‘hostage’ with a referendum called to solve a domestic political problem: challenges to Cameron from right-wing euroskeptics…

“Legally, there is little the EU can do to force Britain’s hand, since Article 50 must be triggered by the country that is leaving. But political pressure and economic instability may force British politicians to act more quickly than they had hoped…

“Britain will remain an EU member until the divorce is finalized, but its influence inside the bloc is already waning. Leaders of the bloc will hold a summit in Brussels next week, and the second day, Wednesday, will take place for the first time without Britain…”

UK Loses Top Credit Rating

BBC wrote on June 27:

“The UK has lost its top AAA credit rating from ratings agency S&P following the country’s Brexit vote. S&P said the referendum result could lead to ‘a deterioration of the UK’s economic performance, including its large financial services sector’.

“Rival agency Fitch lowered its rating… forecasting an ‘abrupt slowdown’ in growth in the short-term.”

The Associated Press wrote on June 27:

“The referendum has already triggered financial turmoil around the world… Credit rating agency Moody’s downgraded the U.K.’s economic outlook from stable to negative, saying Britain faces ‘a prolonged period of uncertainty … with negative implications for the country’s medium-term growth outlook.’”

Europe Stands Firm Against Britain

Deutsche Welle wrote on June 28:

“Great Britain cannot expect special treatment during negotiations to leave the European Union, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Tuesday… ‘Whoever wants to leave this family cannot expect to have no more obligations but to keep privileges,’ she said, adding that there will be no ‘cherry-picking’ during the talks. ‘There must be and will be a noticeable difference between whether a country wants to be a member of the European Union family or not,’ she said… Even after Article 50 has been triggered Merkel reminded that Great Britain remains a part of the EU ‘for as long as the negotiations take place.’ ‘All the rights and duties that come with this membership are to be fully respected and held until the actual exit,’ she said…

“Access to Europe’s market also depends on ‘accepting Europe’s fundamental freedoms and the other rules and commitments that go with it,’ she said, adding that this rule ‘applies to Britain as it does to everyone else.’ The freedom of movement is one of the EU’s basic principles, but the UK ‘Leave’ campaigners drew a great deal of support for rejecting the bloc’s immigration rules…

“Merkel’s coalition partners, the Social Democrats (SPD)… called for a tough stance on the UK. ‘Those who decide against Europe must also face the consequences,’ said SPD faction head Thomas Oppermann. Although good relations with Britain should be maintained, Oppermann urged: ‘There can’t be an award for the exit, for nationalism and for anti-europeanism.’”

CNN wrote on June 29:

“The most vocal architect of Britain’s seismic decision to leave the European Union [Mr. Farage] thumbed his nose at the EU Parliament Tuesday as members booed and turned their backs on him, in the most visible clash of ideologies between Britain and Europe since last week’s vote…

“Britain’s divorce from the EU is shaping up to be messy, with Prime Minister David Cameron also in Brussels and at loggerheads with EU leaders over how to even begin…

“During his speech, Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, turned to confront Farage and said he was surprised he was there. ‘That’s the last time you are applauding here,’ he said to the British Brexiters. ‘You were fighting for the exit, the British people voted in favor of the exit. Why are you here?’”

No Way to Reverse the Brexit

Der Stern reported on June 28 that “Angela Merkel (CDU) does not see any possibility to stop and reverse” the Brexit, “which was voted upon by the British people.” She added that “all would be well advised to accept realities” and that “this is not the hour of wishful thinking.”

Der Spiegel and The Associated Press added that Merkel also said: “I fully expect that Britain will formalize the exit from the EU by invoking Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty.”

Brexit Means Brexit

Express wrote on June 30:

“Home Secretary Theresa May this morning launched her bid to replace David Cameron as prime minister by promising to ‘build a better Britain’… Despite supporting Britain remaining in the EU, Mrs May ruled out a second referendum on membership of the bloc. She said: ‘Brexit means Brexit. The campaign was fought, the vote was held, turnout was high and the country gave their verdict. There must be no attempts to remain inside the EU, no attempts to rejoin it through the backdoor and no second referendum.’

“Mrs May promised to put controls on open-door EU migration as part of the Government’s Brexit negotiations… Mrs May vowed to set up a new Government department to deliver a Brexit deal, which she confirmed would be headed by a Brexit-supporting Tory MP.”

May Now the Favorite?

The Sun wrote on June 30:

“Boris Johnson sensationally pulled out of the Tory leadership race today after former ally Michael Gove brutally torpedoed his chances of becoming the next PM. The Conservative leadership race was blown wide open this morning as the Justice Secretary announced he was running for leader while also knifing Boris in an extraordinary attack on his credentials.

“… Mrs May, now the favourite to succeed Mr Cameron, launched her bid to ‘reunite the Conservative Party and Britain’ in the wake of the referendum… she promised not to trigger Article 50 and kick-off the two-year process of negotiating withdrawal until the UK’s negotiating strategy is agreed – probably not before the end of this year.

“The 59-year-old said she would create a new Government department, headed by a Cabinet-level minister who had campaigned for Leave, to oversee the UK’s departure from the EU. The timetable for the contest – which will end with a new Prime Minister being named on September 9 – was formally approved by the backbench 1922 Committee yesterday.”

… And Now—The EU Super State?

Express wrote on June 27:

“European political chiefs are to take advantage of Brexit by unveiling their long-held plan to morph the continent’s countries into one. The foreign ministers of France and Germany [revealed] a blueprint to effectively do away with individual member states in what is being described as an ‘ultimatum’. Under the radical proposals EU countries will lose the right to have their own army, criminal law, taxation system or central bank, with all those powers being transferred to Brussels. Controversially member states would also lose what few controls they have left over their own borders, including the procedure for admitting and relocating refugees.

“The plot has sparked fury and panic in Poland – a traditional ally of Britain in the fight against federalism… Meanwhile Lorenzo Condign, the former director general of Italy’s treasury, has said it is nearly impossible to see Europe opting for more integration at such a time of upheaval…

“But others see the Brexit vote as an opportunity to push ahead with the European elite’s long-cherished dream of creating a United States of Europe. Spain’s foreign minister Jose Manuel Garcia-Margallo has called for ‘more Europe’ whilst Italy’s finance minister, Carlo Padoan, is advocating a common budget for the eurozone states. And Emmanuel Macron, France’s economy minister, wants to go even further and set up a common eurozone treasury which would oversee the permanent transfer of funds from wealthier northern Europe to shore up Mediterranean economies.”

The Local wrote on June 27:

“The foreign ministers of Germany and France on Monday called for ambitious steps to strengthen the European Union after Britain’s shock vote to leave the bloc. ‘We will… take further steps toward a political union in Europe, and we invite the other European states to join us in this endeavour,’ Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Jean-Marc Ayrault wrote in a joint position paper. The top diplomats of the two core EU founding members and biggest economies said that ‘Germany and France have a responsibility to strengthen solidarity and cohesion within the European Union’.

“But they also signalled a willingness to accept a multi-speed union… The two centre-left politicians proposed closer cooperation in three key policy areas – internal and external security, the migrant and refugee crisis, and on fiscal and economic cooperation.

“A spokesman for German Chancellor Angela Merkel, a conservative, said that she had read the paper and considered it one of the many contributions that would shape the way ahead for the EU, as its government leaders agree on a common policy.

“Ayrault and Steinmeier… stressed that ‘Germany and France remain firmly convinced that the European Union is a historically unique and indispensable framework for the pursuit of freedom, prosperity and security in Europe, for fostering peaceful relations between its peoples and for helping bring peace and stability in the world… Our two countries share a common destiny and a common set of values. Both together are the foundation for an ever closer union of our peoples.’”

A European Army?

The Sun wrote on June 28:

“The spectre of an EU army was raised by Brexiteers as a reason to quit the EU. In the wake of a vote for Brexit, EU chiefs have been more brazen about their desire to form [an] EU army. In a document titled ‘EU Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy’, Europe’s chief diplomat said the Brussels bloc must be able to ‘repel, to respond and to protect’. While the paper stops short of explicitly calling for an EU army, it does suggest its members should work more closely on defence matters.

“The paper states: ‘We, as Europeans, need to take on a greater responsibility for our own security. We need to be ready and able to repel, respond and to protect ourselves against aggression, provocations and destabilisation.’

“Possible areas of cooperation include the deployment of unmanned aircrafts, aerial refuelling services, satellite communication and cyber resistance and defence.

“The head of the European Parliament Committee on Foreign Affairs, Elmar Brok, has also argued for ‘more cooperation in the European defence policy’. He said: ‘We need a common (military) headquarters and a coalition (of EU countries) acting in accordance with the permanent structural cooperation of the EU Treaty. From such a group an EU army could eventually emerge.’”

The Daily Mail wrote on June 29:

“The foreign affairs chief of the EU has warned that Europe is unable to rely on NATO for its military without Britain, sparking worries that an EU army may have to be formed following the Brexit vote. EU foreign affairs chief Federica Mogherini on Tuesday urged the bloc to do more in its own defence, just as leaders discussed Britain’s leave vote which will result in the loss of a major military power. While Britain is an active contributor to the currently very limited EU military operations, David Cameron has consistently opposed any idea of a separate EU army.

“Mogherini’s review, a year in the making, lays down ambitious goals for the EU in the face of new security challenges in the east, highlighted by the Ukraine crisis, and in the south, driven by turmoil across Africa and the Middle East… ‘An appropriate level of ambition and strategic autonomy is important for Europe’s ability to foster peace and safeguard security within and beyond its borders.’”

Express added on June 29:

“Downing Street had previously stated there was ‘no prospect of an EU army’. However, with Britain out of Europe it will not be able to veto a treaty change on the combined force.”

Supreme Court Turns More Liberal Towards Abortionists

The Associated Press wrote on June 27:

“The Supreme Court struck down Texas’ widely replicated regulation of abortion clinics Monday in the court’s biggest abortion case in nearly a quarter century. The justices voted 5-3 in favor of Texas clinics that had argued the regulations were only a veiled attempt to make it harder for women to get abortions in the nation’s second-most populous state. Justice Stephen Breyer’s majority opinion for the court held that the regulations are medically unnecessary and unconstitutionally limit a woman’s right to an abortion.

“Texas had argued that its 2013 law and subsequent regulations were needed to protect women’s health. The rules required doctors who perform abortions to have admitting privileges at nearby hospitals and forced clinics to meet hospital-like standards for outpatient surgery…

“Justices Anthony Kennedy, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan joined Breyer… Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito and Clarence Thomas dissented. Thomas wrote that the decision ‘exemplifies the court’s troubling tendency “to bend the rules when any effort to limit abortion, or even to speak in opposition to abortion, is at issue.”’ Thomas was quoting an earlier abortion dissent from Justice Antonin Scalia, who died in February. Scalia has not yet been replaced, so only eight justices voted…”

Big Change in US Naturalization Procedure?

Breitbart wrote on June 25:

“Immigrants seeking to become citizens no longer have to pledge to ‘bear arms on behalf of the United States.’ They can opt out of that part of the Oath. Nor do they have to cite any specific religious belief that forbids them to perform military service….

“It’s true that other Presidents [besides President Obama] have made changes in the Naturalization process by administrative decree and without congressional approval. In 2002, in the wake of the 9-11 terrorist attack, President George Bush by executive order expedited the naturalization process for 89,000 immigrants serving in the armed forces. While many will agree with Bush’s action and even applaud, that change should have been done by act of Congress, not a presidential executive order.”

However, the statements in the article are misleading, at best.

The following “policy alert” is published on the USCIS website, dated July 15, 2015: https://www.uscis.gov/policymanual/Updates/20150721-OathModifications.pdf

“In general, a naturalization applicant must take an oath of allegiance in a public ceremony, in addition to meeting other eligibility requirements, in order to naturalize. The oath includes the clauses to bear arms on behalf of the United States and to perform noncombatant service in the U.S. armed forces when required by law. An applicant may be eligible for certain modifications to the oath to exclude the clauses based on religious training and belief or a conscientious objection.

“This guidance updates Volume 12 of the Policy Manual to clarify the eligibility requirements for the modifications… an applicant may be eligible for modifications based on religious training and belief, or conscientious objection arising from a deeply held moral or ethical code… an applicant is not required to belong to a specific church or religion, follow a particular theology or belief, or to have had religious training in order to qualify… an applicant may submit, but is not required to provide, an attestation from a religious or other type of organization, as well as other evidence to establish eligibility.”

As can be seen, the statements in the quoted Breitbart article are incorrect or at least misleading. For more than half a century, candidates for naturalized citizenship have been permitted to give a “qualified oath,” exempting him or her from serving as a combatant, if his or her religious convictions were opposed to bearing arms. Many court decisions have upheld this right as well, dating back at least to the fifties. The latest USCIS policy change merely establishes guidelines of procedure as to how to uphold the right to a qualified oath in a given situation.

More From the Pope

The National Catholic Reporter wrote on June 26:

“The Catholic church and other Christian communities must apologize to gay people and to many groups they have let down or offended throughout history, Pope Francis has said… ‘When I say the church: [I mean:] Christians,’ Francis clarified. ‘The church is holy. We are the sinners.’

“The pope was responding to a question about remarks German Cardinal Reinhard Marx made last week that the Catholic church should apologize to the gay community for marginalizing them… ‘I will repeat the same thing I said on the first trip,’ Francis said today, referencing the press conference he held on a return flight from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, in 2013. ‘I will also repeat what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: that [gay people] should not be discriminated against, that they have to be respected, pastorally accompanied.’ ‘The matter is a person that has that condition [and] that has good will because they search for God,’ said the pontiff…

“Francis was asked about Martin Luther, and the possibility of removing his excommunication, in relation to the pope’s upcoming October trip to Sweden for the commemoration of the 500th anniversary of the Reformation. ‘I believe the intentions of Martin Luther were not wrong,’ the pontiff responded. ‘He was a reformer.’ ‘Maybe some methods were not the right ones,’ the pope continued. ‘But in that time … the church was not really a model to imitate. There was corruption in the church. There was worldliness; there was attachment to money, power…’ After 500 years, Francis said, it’s time to ‘take up again the path of meeting each other,’ adding that Lutherans and Catholics must pray and work together. ‘This is a very long path,’ the pontiff said. ‘One time I said I know when the day of full unity will come: the day after the coming of the Son of Man.'”

On June 27, CNN added more information regarding the pope’s statements:

“‘I believe that the church not only should apologize to the person who is gay whom it has offended,’ he added, ‘but has to apologize to the poor, to exploited women, to children exploited for labor; it has to ask forgiveness for having blessed many weapons.’… James Martin, a Jesuit priest and editor at large of America magazine, called the Pope’s apology to gays and lesbians ‘a groundbreaking moment.’ ‘While… John Paul II apologized to several groups in 2000 — the Jewish people, indigenous peoples, immigrants and women, among them — no pope has ever come close to apologizing to the LGBT community. And the Pope is correct of course. First, because forgiveness is an essential part of the Christian life. And second, because no group feels more marginalized in the church today than LGBT people.’…

“In response to a question about whether there are two Popes in the Vatican, a story which had received headlines recently because of a comment by Pope Benedict’s personal secretary who said that the Pope Emeritus was part of an ‘expanded papacy,’ Francis said, ‘There is only one Pope.’ ‘[Benedict] is the Pope Emeritus, the wise grandpa. He is the man who guards my back with his prayers.'”

Reuters wrote on June 28:

“Former pope Benedict made one of his rare public appearances on Tuesday to be feted by his successor Pope Francis, two days after Francis denied reports that Benedict was still exercising influence in the Vatican. Benedict, an 89-year-old German, stood without a cane for part of a ceremony in a Vatican hall to mark the 65th anniversary of his ordination to the priesthood. But Benedict, in his first public comments in the presence of his successor, did appear to have difficulty pronouncing a few words as he thanked Francis and a small group of cardinals in Italian.

“In 2013 Benedict, citing health reasons, became the first pope to resign in some 600 years, ending a papacy of nearly eight years marked by a scandal centered around leaked documents that alleged corruption and mismanagement in the Vatican. He has since been living in relative isolation in a convent in the Vatican gardens and has made only a handful of brief public appearances, usually at major Church ceremonies together with Francis such as the investiture of new cardinals.”

Reuters added on June 26:

“Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said that the pope, by saying [that a gay person] ‘has that condition’, did not imply a medical condition but ‘a person in that situation’. In Italian, the word ‘condition’ can also mean ‘situation’.

“… Francis has been hailed by many in the gay community for being the most merciful pope toward them in recent history and conservative Catholics have criticized him for making comments they say are ambiguous about sexual morality. He told reporters on the plane ‘there are traditions in some countries, some cultures, that have a different mentality about this question (homosexuals)’ and there are ‘some (gay) demonstrations that are too offensive for some.’ But he suggested that those were not grounds for discrimination or marginalization of gays.

“The pope did not elaborate on what he meant by seeking forgiveness for the Church ‘having blessed so many weapons’, but it appeared to be a reference to some Churchmen who actively backed wars in the past.”

That puts it mildly, given the fact that throughout the history of the Catholic Church, it has promoted, supported and at times actively participated in brutal wars, especially in wars of extinction against religious minorities.

The Holocaust DID Really Happen!

JTA wrote on June 23:

“It’s been more than 50 years since the Nuremberg trials, yet proving the Holocaust actually happened remains an ongoing project. Why? For one, the Nazis covered their tracks, deliberately leaving gaps in the historical record. (In the death-camp blueprints that survive, for example, gas chambers were often labeled as morgues or ‘undressing rooms.’) As the years pass, survivors and eyewitnesses are dying or suffering dementia. Add in social media — including the rise of the ‘alt-right’ — and it creates an ideal environment for neo-Nazis to swiftly disseminate claims that the Shoah is a fiction.

“Filling the breach in our understanding of the Holocaust is a relatively new discipline called forensic architecture, which analyzes renderings, documents, videos and photographs of buildings and infrastructure and uses them to re-create atrocities, ranging from drone strikes on apartment buildings in wartime to the gassing of millions of Jews at Auschwitz.

“An example of how forensic architecture can be used to set the record straight is on display at this year’s Venice Architecture Biennale. Titled ‘The Evidence Room,’ it runs through Nov. 27… Robert Jan van Pelt, the curator of ‘The Evidence Room’ and a professor at Canada’s University of Waterloo, tells JTA he considers Auschwitz’s crematoria ‘the most important building of the 20th century.’… ‘The Evidence Room’… re-creates some of the definitive evidence used in a landmark British court trial 16 years ago that pitted the American Jewish historian Deborah Lipstadt against the Holocaust-denying British historian David Irving. The trial — soon to be dramatized in a major motion picture — is viewed as a watershed in the ongoing campaign against Holocaust deniers because it relied on actual physical evidence as opposed to anecdotal accounts.

“Some of this evidence is on display in van Pelt’s exhibit, which is located in a 500-square-foot space at the Biennale’s Central Pavilion. The walls are white plaster and adorned with bas reliefs that depict blueprints for the gas chambers, photographs and illustrations based upon eyewitness accounts, including an image of a kneeling naked Jewish woman being shot in the back of the head by a German officer.

“What makes the exhibition stand out from familiar Holocaust museum exhibits, however, are three full-scale models of gas chamber apparatus designed by the Nazis. There’s a mechanical gas canister delivery system encased by sturdy metal grillwork; a rough-hewn door with a grill-covered peephole, and a wood ladder propped against a wall with a small, locked hatch. These items, designed and fabricated by University of Waterloo students and faculty based on photos and eyewitness testimony, are also painted white…

“‘The forensic study of architecture was able to show that Irving had deliberately misrepresented historical evidence,’ Aravena writes in his essay on ‘The Evidence Room’ in the Biennale’s catalog. Van Pelt… has spent decades studying the architecture of Auschwitz and gathering physical evidence to show the workings of the Nazis’ systems. Thanks to his research, many myths have been definitively debunked — including that deadly gas emanated from shower heads. (It actually came from gas canister delivery systems…)

“Van Pelt discovered many of the documents and plans for Nazi death camps in archives in Eastern Europe that were opened after the fall of communism in 1989… He says the history of Auschwitz serves as a warning for architects to be socially conscientious about the impact of the buildings they design. One example: the refugee housing being built in parts of Europe that van Pelt says ‘is starting to approach concentration camp conditions.’ ‘Architects should get the equivalent of the oath of Hippocrates,’ van Pelt says. ‘When I teach my class, I tell them the story of Auschwitz — and I say whatever you do with your career, don’t do this.’”

(Español: ¿Qué revela la profecía sobre Europa y el Brexit?)

In this Q&A, we will give you a prophetic panorama on current and future developments in Europe in light of the Brexit.

The Church of God has been proclaiming for many years that, ultimately, Great Britain would not be a part of the European unification. The main reason for this warning has been that the Bible predicts a devastating war between Great Britain and continental Europe.

We have pointed out this fact in many of our booklets, and we have consistently warned about it in our weekly Updates and sermons. The following sets forth a brief synopsis, but the booklets quoted contain much more material and discussion on the particular issues, while offering much additional biblical proof. Following these quotes, further considerations will be discussed.

We stated the following in our free booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord” (first published in 2002):

“Many falsely believe that the house of Israel and the Jewish people are one and the same. Nothing could be further from the truth. Judah, from whom the Jewish people descended, was just one tribe of the descendants of Jacob, whose name God changed to Israel long ago (Genesis 35:10). In due time they separated from their Israelite brothers and, along with the tribes of Levi and Benjamin, formed the ‘house of Judah.’ The other tribes then became known as the ‘house of Israel.’ The ‘house of Israel’ went into captivity first, never to return to the ‘Promised Land.’ Today, they are known as the ‘lost ten tribes.’ The ‘house of Judah’ also went into captivity but did eventually return to Palestine. Many descendants of the house of Judah are living today in the state of Israel. In due time, as history and archeology reveal, the lost ten tribes of the house of Israel migrated to and settled in Europe and the British Isles. One tribe in particular, the descendants of Manasseh—the older son of Joseph—migrated from there to the United States of America, where they still are today. The descendants of Ephraim—the younger son of Joseph—can still be found in Great Britain and the Commonwealth Nations, including Canada, South Africa, Australia, and New Zealand…

“Incredible as it may seem, the United States and Great Britain, as well as other Commonwealth nations, will be overthrown and enslaved by their former ally and friend—the United States of Europe, led by the modern Assyrians…

“Looking at the present day, some may say that Europe could NEVER attack and successfully conquer Great Britain and the United States. They forget, however, that there have already been plans to do so, and the ONLY reason that it did not happen at the time was because God did not let it happen. Many times, God intervened by sending bad weather to prevent German attacks on British or American troops. Once God withdraws His protection, these things WILL occur as prophesied…”

We wrote in our free booklet, “The Ten European Revivals of the Ancient Roman Empire” (first published in 2013):

“There is strong historical and biblical indication that Britain will not be part of the final unification of Europe… it is highly unlikely that Britain will be part of it… the Bible says that in the very end, the European power bloc, under the leadership of the biblical ‘beast’ (a military leader), will fight a war against Britain.”

In our free booklet, “Biblical Prophecy… From Now until Forever” (first published in 2013), we wrote:

“At the same time this religious persecution of God’s servants during the ‘Great Tribulation’ is taking place, the modern nations and peoples of Judah (the Jews) and of the house of Israel (the English-speaking nations of the USA, the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and others) will be attacked and destroyed in war, mainly by a European power bloc (Matthew 24:15–28; Mark 13:14–20; Luke 21:20–24; Daniel 12:1; Jeremiah 30:10; Hosea 9:3; 13: 16; Amos 6:7; 7:17)…

“The military political leader of Europe, called the beast, will invade the Middle East and conquer Jerusalem, and his forces will, at the same time, successfully attack the USA and the UK—apparently using nuclear weapons, as all the major cities of the USA and the UK will be destroyed or laid waste in this war (compare Ezekiel 6:6; 35:4).

“We are told in Hosea 5:5, in the Authorized Version, that ‘Israel and Ephraim’ will ‘fall in their iniquity’ and that ‘Judah also shall fall with them.’ This is an end-time prophecy that has yet to be fulfilled. In the past, Israel and Judah ‘fell’ at different times, but never together or at the same time. The Tanakh says: ‘Israel’s pride shall be humbled before his very eyes, As Israel and Ephraim fall because of their sin (And Judah falls with them).”

We stated this in our free booklet, “The Book of Zechariah–Prophecies for Today” (first published in 2009):

“Many prophecies in the book of Zechariah deal with the Second Coming of the Messiah. Just prior to the return of Jesus Christ, God will inflict terrible punishment on the MODERN descendants of the ancient houses of Israel and Judah. We understand that the modern descendants of the houses of Israel and Judah include the peoples of the USA, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and South Africa, as well as the modern Jews, who live both inside and outside the present day state of Israel… As God scattered ancient Israel and Judah ‘with a whirlwind’—invasion and war—‘among all the nations,’ so God will scatter the modern houses of Israel and Judah…

“[A] remarkable prophecy for our time, which is directed against the modern English-speaking nations (and the religious and political leaders) of the USA and the British Commonwealth, and their future captivity and slavery, can be found in Zechariah 11… referring to three powerful religious and/or political leaders: ‘(8) “I dismissed the three shepherds in one month. My soul loathed them, and their soul also abhorred me…” (14) Then I cut in two my other staff… that I might break the brotherhood between Judah and Israel.’

“This indicates that in the times just ahead of us, the close relationship between the USA and Britain on the one hand, and the state of Israel on the other hand, will cease. The future will have to show who the three shepherds will be who will be ‘dismissed’ ‘in one month.’”

We set forth the following in our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy” (first published in 2004):

“It has… been learned that the modern German-speaking nations are the descendants of the biblical Assyrians…

“In Ezekiel 39:23, God states, ‘The Gentiles will know that the house of Israel went into captivity for their iniquity; because they were unfaithful to Me, therefore I hid My face from them.’ Even Gentile nations will know why God is allowing this captivity of the modern-day descendants of Israel and Judah. The Germans will be the dominant people of the coming united Europe, which will conquer both the United States of America and Great Britain as well as the Jews, transporting captives to Europe and Egypt. This will all happen just prior to the return of Jesus Christ—for, in the remainder of Ezekiel 39, the prophet reveals that Christ will come to free the captives and bring them back into their land…

“Christ will come back to make an end of the war and destruction going on. Conditions will be so terrible that if Jesus Christ were not to intervene, all of mankind would be annihilated. He states in Matthew 24:22, ‘And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved [alive], but for the elect’s sake those days will be shortened’…

“Isaiah 10:5 reveals more about the person who will launch the world into a devastating war: ‘Woe to Assyria, the rod of My anger and the staff in whose hand is My indignation.’ God will use Assyria to punish Israel and Judah, but afterward, He will deal with Assyria… God Himself is calling the modern house of Israel an ungodly nation because they have forsaken Him!…

“It is interesting to note that at least three leaders, and possibly as many as seven leaders, of the various revivals of the Roman Empire were descendants of the Assyrians. And the Bible informs us that the last leader, called the king of the North, the Beast and King Jareb, will also be an Assyrian. For this reason, we must pay close attention to what is happening in Europe, and among the Germans in particular.”

Our free booklet, “The Fall and Rise of Britain and America” (first published in 2005), points out the following:

“A prophesied World War will occur just prior to the return of Jesus Christ… God yearns for the modern houses of both Israel and Judah to turn to Him and repent. Speaking of the house of Judah, the house of Israel, and, in fact, all nations, God says through the prophet Jeremiah: ‘It may be that the house of Judah will hear all the adversities which I purpose to bring upon them, that everyone may turn from his evil way, that I may forgive their iniquity and their sin… It may be that they will present their supplication before the LORD, and everyone will turn from his evil way. For great is the anger and fury [a reference to the seven last plagues in the book of Revelation, compare Revelation 15:1] that the LORD has pronounced against this people’ (Jeremiah 36:3, 7).”

In our free booklet, “Germany in Prophecy” (first published in 2011, as an English translation of the original German booklet from 2001), we state the following:

“There is currently an apparent concord between Germany and the State of Israel as well as the United States and, to a lesser extent, Great Britain. But according to the Bible, the time will soon come when this friendly relationship will come to an end. The days of calamity are looming, when the United States, Great Britain and the modern state of Israel will seek the help of the modern Assyrians, without receiving it… We read God’s words in Hosea 5:9-14: ‘Ephraim [modern Great Britain and possibly, by extension, the USA] shall be desolate in the day of rebuke; Among the tribes of Israel I make known what is sure. The princes of Judah [modern Jews] are like those who remove a landmark; I will pour out My wrath on them like water. Ephraim is oppressed and broken in judgment, Because he willingly walked by human precept. Therefore I will be to Ephraim like a moth, And to the house of Judah like rottenness. When Ephraim saw his sickness, And Judah saw his wound, Then Ephraim went to Assyria And [the Menge Bible says: ‘…and Judah…’] sent to King Jareb [Note that the ‘Elberfelder Bibel’ explains that ‘Jareb’ means, ‘fighter; or one who seeks quarrels’]; Yet he cannot cure you, Nor heal you of your wound. For I will be like a lion to Ephraim, And like a young lion to the house of Judah. I, even I, will tear them and go away; I will take them away, and no one shall rescue.”

“Considering the former greatness of the British Empire and comparing it with today’s British Isles, we can see how accurate the following descriptions are in Hosea 7:8-9, 11-12. Beginning with verse 8: ‘Ephraim has mixed himself among the peoples; Ephraim is a cake unturned…’

“The Nelson Study Bible has the following interesting annotation: ‘Instead of depending on the Lord for political stability, Israel [Ephraim] formed [and forms] alliances with surrounding nations. The destructive outcome of this policy is compared to a cake that has been placed over a fire and left unturned.’…

“Modern Israel and modern Judah will try in vain, at their time of distress, to obtain assistance from Assyria. Rather, as the Bible reveals, the current ‘amicable’ relationships among certain nations will turn around. Another war is prophesied—the Assyrians will fight against modern Israel and Judah… Enslavement and mass deportation of peoples will be the result. Assyria, which will invade the territories of the modern Israelites and Jews, will bring some of the prisoners into its own country (as in the Second World War many of the imprisoned Poles and Yugoslavs were deported to Germany as forced laborers). Other Israelite and Jewish prisoners of war will be deported to various countries…”

In the above-quoted sections, repeated reference has been made to a unified Europe fighting in war with Great Britain. We read about “Babylon the Great” in Revelation 17 and 18—a mighty economic, military and religious European power bloc, which culminates in the last European revival of the ancient Roman Empire and its violent destruction just prior to the return of Jesus Christ. This destruction will not occur before the “Day of the Lord”—a time of godly intervention which will begin about one year before Christ’s return. It follows then that this mighty European power will continue to exist until that time.

This shows that current speculation is misplaced to the effect that the “European dream” is dead and that the EU will disintegrate and cease to exist. Rather, what prophecy reveals is that out of the current EU (consisting of 28 member states or “countries”, see below) and out of the current Eurozone member states (consisting of 19 “countries” which have adopted the euro, see below), ten nations or groups of nations will emerge, which will receive authority for one prophetic hour together with the “beast”—a charismatic political and military leader.

To emphasize, these ten European nations or groups of nations will receive power together with the beast “for one hour” (Revelation 17:12). They will not receive such power before the beast manifests himself. When he does, THEN they receive power at the same time, which they will then turn over to the beast. The mighty and powerful Babylonian system—“Babylon the Great”—will continue to exist, and so will the euro—the common European currency which glues the Eurozone states together. The concept is biblically untenable that the euro will fail and that the European nations will return to individual national currencies.

Some have asked why we are referring to “ten nations or groups of nations,” as it is believed that the Bible only refers to ten nations. However, the Bible does not specifically use either of those two terms.  It speaks of ten kings or kingdoms in the book of Revelation and ten horns in the book of Daniel. But when reviewing the biblical view point, these kings, kingdoms or horns (powers) do not have to correspond to humanly devised geographical borders, designed by political ambitions.

Note that currently, the EU member states consist of the following 28 EU “countries”:

Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden and the UK.

Currently, the 19 Eurozone member states are designated as follows:

Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Netherlands, Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia and Spain.

It should be clearly seen that God is not viewing some of those “countries” as single and independent entities, and that is the reason why for many years the Church of God has referred to the prophesied end-time member states (or the core European member states) as “ten nations or groups of nations,” because some of the “countries” might be grouped together and are to be viewed as “one” in biblical terminology. For instance, Germany and Austria would be one entity or one group, even though man lists them as two nations. It should also be clear that little islands like Malta or Cyprus would not constitute individual countries or nations in God’s eyes; in all likelihood, Malta would be considered as part of either Italy or France, and Cyprus might be viewed as part of Greece. (This is not to say that the current Eurozone configuration constitutes the prophesied ten nations or groups of nations.)

In addition, consideration might be given to the possibility that in addition to Great Britain, other Israelite nations in Europe might leave the EU and even the Eurozone. Suggestions were recently made that some Nordic countries might form a trading bloc under British leadership and in competition to the Eurozone, and Eurozone members Finland and The Netherlands were specifically mentioned (in addition to EU members Sweden and Denmark, which are not part of the Eurozone). This would be an interesting development as these Nordic EU members are all descendants of the ancient House of Israel.

The modern tribes of the ancient House of Israel (in addition to Ephraim and Manasseh) can be found in the following European countries (compare our free booklet, “The Authority of the Bible,” pages 71 and 72):

Reuben can be found today in parts of modern France; Dan in Ireland and part of Denmark; Benjamin in Norway and Iceland; Zebulon in the Netherlands; Issachar in Finland; Gad in Switzerland; Asher in Belgium and Luxembourg; and Naphtali in Sweden. We are unable to determine the modern identity of Levi and Simeon, as they were prophesied to be scattered among the rest of the tribes of Israel (compare Genesis 49:7). Strong evidence suggests that many in Wales are descendants of Levi, and some Scots—especially around Glasgow—are descendants of Simeon, as well as of Levi. We should mention, of course, that people from many other countries have joined with and settled among all of the above-mentioned nations. This means that not everyone living in the United States, for example, is a descendant of the tribe of Manasseh.

Since the Bible tells us that the ten nations or groups of nations will fight against the modern descendants of the ancient House of Israel, it might be worth considering whether the war will not only be directed against Great Britain and former British Commonwealth nations (such as Canada, Australia and New Zealand), as well as the USA, but also against some of the Israelite nations in Europe. Such war could perhaps come about following a trading bloc of some of these nations in competition with the EU (but again, this would not really damage the wealth of the EU—“Babylon the Great”—but it could be viewed as a potential threat).

On the other hand, the name of Israel should rest specifically on the descendants of Joseph (Genesis 48:16), and biblical prophecies about the modern House of Israel are mainly directed towards them, so that a departure of Israelite nations from the Eurozone or even the EU is not compelling (as they might not become immediate war victims of the European super power). It is possible that many or all of these Israelite nations will stay members of the EU—in case of France, Belgium, Luxembourg or Ireland, this is very likely. Especially none of the descendants of Dan in today’s Ireland are mentioned in the book of Revelation as part of the 144,000 who will be sealed to receive special protection from God (see Revelation 7:4-8).

To summarize, we have been pronouncing the biblical warning for many years that Great Britain and the USA, among other English-speaking nations, will be defeated by a European super power in a coming World War. Sadly, the vast majority of indifferent and at the same time proud, Americans, are sound asleep. They are pursuing unimportant endeavors, and unless they wake up, listen to God and repent, their fate will be unimaginably terrible and devastating.

Big events have already occurred in the recent past, setting the stage for the final crescendo of end time prophecies—including the fall of the Berlin Wall; the unification of Germany; and the introduction of the euro. As another necessary preparatory step, the momentous prophetic event of Britain’s departure from the EU is in the process of being fulfilled. Even though the British government is willing to delay the actual departure as long as possible and the “Remain” camp is demanding a second referendum, continental European leaders have already demanded the initiation of a quick process, leading to the British exit. It is expected that Germany will fill the vacuum left by Britain, especially in the areas of the economy and “European security.”

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

The first draft of our new booklet, titled, “GOD’S LAW OR GOD’S GRACE?” has been sent for initial review. We anticipate having this published before the Fall Holy Days.

“No Exit from Brexit” is the title of this week’s StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

Many are speculating whether Great Britain might reverse the decision of the majority of the people to leave the EU, but political reality and the Bible rule out this possibility. In addition, due to the Brexit, remarkable developments are occurring in continental Europe, paving the way for the further fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

“Kein Zurück vom Brexit”, this week’s AufPostenStehen program, covers the same topic as above in German.

“Brexit Won – Now What?” is the title of last week’s StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

The British people have voted for Great Britain’s exit from the EU. How exactly is this going to occur; how much time will expire; and could it be that Britain will form a Nordic Trading Bloc with certain other European nations, such as Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland and others? What does the Bible say, and why is the Brexit of fundamental prophetic significance?

“Brexit Hat Gewonnnen – Was Jetzt?”, last week’s AufPostenStehen program covers the same topic as above in German.

“Gottes Reichtum und menschliche Geldgier,” is the title of this week’s German sermon. This is the second part of our new series on money. Title in English: “God’s Riches and Man’s Love of Money.”

“The Power of Prophecy,” the sermonette presented last Sabbath by Dave Harris, is now posted. Here is a summary:

What is about to happen to the people of the world and even to planet earth has been foretold by God, and the Church of God has been given a prophetic role to fulfill.

“Imperfection and Improvement,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Eric Rank, is now posted. Here is a summary:

The life of a Christian inherently involves handling imperfection. Whether the origin is our own behavior or the circumstances that surround us, we must develop the skills to handle imperfection gracefully. It is part of the job description of all Christians to continually improve as a way of life, so that perfection can ultimately be obtained.