On February 27, 2016, Norbert Link will present the sermonette, titled, “Fertile Ground?” and the sermon will be presented by Mike Link, titled, “Not of This World.”

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.

As the race for the 2016 presidency gets closer, the debates between the candidates are getting more aggressive in their attempts to capture the votes among the citizens.  Specific questions are being asked as to what they can accomplish once they take office to solve the problems that this country is faced with.

One particular question is how they would tackle the national debt and financial situation plaguing this nation.  We have heard some answers from certain candidates about how they plan on solving this problem, as well as vague ideas that may seem farfetched, which could in all likelihood impact the rest of the world. Ideas of lowering taxes and bringing jobs back from overseas alone will not solve the debt crisis.  The idea of perhaps wiping out the national debt completely by simply not paying what is owed, as has been done in the past, could very well have detrimental effects this time from the rest of the world, as we point out as part of our comments in our update 724 as to how Donald Trump would possibly solve the national debt.  (See also our StandingWatch program, “Trump Shocks Europe.”).

The problem however has been years in the making.  Throughout history, America has struggled with debt and as one candidate recently pointed out, and rightly so, this country has a “saving problem” and this unfortunately stems all the way back to grade school.

CNBC published an article in January 2016 entitled, “US Schools Get Failing Grade for Financial Literacy Education.” Out of the 50 states, only 20 states currently mandate that high school students take economics, according to the Council for Economic Education, and only 17 of those states require high school students to take a course in personal finance.  Those who are required to take personal finance courses have better average credit scores and lower debt delinquency rates as young adults, according to data recently released.  Being properly trained and educated is the key.  Many at a young age lack basic personal finance skills because they haven’t received the proper education at home which in turn sets them up for failure in the years immediately following high school graduation.

The article points out that “a 2012 study of nearly 30,000 teenagers from 18 countries found more than 1 in 6 students in the U.S. failed to reach the baseline level of proficiency in financial literacy.  Overall, American students fall in the middle of the pack globally.  Financial education classes offered in the K–12 [kindergarten through high school] setting don’t delve into complex concepts… Instead, they teach students practical life skills, like how to balance a checkbook, the effect of interest rates and how investments can benefit from compounded growth. To be successful, most kids don’t need to learn about collateralized debt instruments, but they do need to know how to open a bank account, how much they need to save each month to reach their goals and, if they borrow this amount of money, how much money they will need to earn to pay it back.”

This common sense thinking of how to save money from an early age could have lasting results in the future, which this country has failed to do.  Instead, they spend and borrow, borrow and spend, and the cycle repeats itself, which is why the national debt continues to increase even at this very moment you are reading this editorial.  Proverbs 21:5 states that “The plans of the diligent lead surely to plenty, But those of everyone who is hasty, surely to poverty.”  Also Proverbs 21:20 states (Authorized Version): “There is treasure to be desired and oil in the dwelling of the wise; but a foolish man spendeth it up.”  The Ryrie Study Bible comments: “The wise man plans and saves for the future, but the foolish person squanders what he has.”

Applying the principle of the parable of the talents in Matthew 25:14-30 when it comes to saving is very beneficial and could also have life-long benefits.  One of the ways that God provides for us is through money and it is our duty to manage that money well.  Just imagine if this nation had utilized this way of thinking from the beginning instead of letting it get out of hand as we see today.  Saving money demonstrates good stewardship of the resources God gives us and we are accountable to God how we use everything He gives us in this life, including money.  It’s also vital in that saving allows us to be better prepared for the future, which is obviously a good thing.  Even in nature, this principle is expressed in Proverbs 6:6-8, “Go to the ant, you sluggard! Consider her ways and be wise, which, having no captain, overseer or ruler, provides her supplies in the summer, and gathers her food in the harvest.”

Brian Gale stated in his editorial in update 722, “… had these biblical admonitions been implemented with children from a very early age, we would have a very different society today, but the basics have been missing.   It is because man thinks he knows better than God, we have the problems that we have today.”  This is why it is important to be properly trained and educated by also applying biblical principles in our lives.  Properly saving money makes it easier to accomplish goals and become more effective. Applying basic principles set forth in the Bible for our admonition should give us an advantage on how we can utilize the importance of planning ahead – a stark contrast to this nation’s current situation.

We begin with reporting on a “battle” between Pope Francis and Donald Trump, while emphasizing astonishing facts pertaining to the Catholic Church as well as Donald Trump. We are also reporting on the curious and undemocratic institution of American superdelegates.

We continue with articles about Apple’s fight with the FBI; the fragile Syria deal; Turkey’s relationship with Israel; and the fear that Russia might continue its aggressions against countries outside the former Soviet empire.

We also focus on the extremely controversial “deal” between Mr. Cameron and the EU, which was “reached” in Brussels on February 19, and the question as to whether or not the British people will vote for a Brexit in the referendum on June 23, 2016.

We conclude with an article about “fireballs from heaven.”

Catholic Church vs. Trump

The Washington Post wrote on February 19:

“First was the British prime minister, who called Donald Trump ‘divisive, stupid and wrong.’ Then came Britain’s Parliament, which denounced him with colorful language. The French prime minister, the Turkish president and a Saudi prince also weighed in: The Republican presidential front-runner, they agreed, was a demagogue disgracing the United States.

“On Thursday, Pope Francis added the strongest voice yet to a growing chorus of world leaders taking a stand against the celebrity candidate — condemning Trump’s hard-line immigration agenda and suggesting he was not a Christian because of it… Trump, a Presbyterian, strongly rebuked Francis for his comments…

“For generations, the role of the papacy has been shaded by politics — and Francis’s papacy especially, with his efforts on global climate change and general outspokenness. But it was striking for him to comment on U.S. electoral politics during a campaign…”

Does the Pope Speak With Authority on Christian Teachings?

In a related article, The Washington Post published this article by James Martin, a Jesuit priest:

“Like any good Jesuit, who knows that this rule is ingrained in the thinking of Saint Ignatius Loyola, the Jesuit founder, the pope says that he is giving Trump the ‘benefit of the doubt.’… Pope Francis is correct. Any person who consistently speaks of excluding people, who trumpets his desire to (literally) build more walls between communities, and who manifests a desire to increase division, is not walking the Christian way… one of the pope’s traditional titles is ‘Pontifex Maximus,’ the Great Bridge Builder.

“… the billionaire businessman has directed hatred against a great many people — migrants of course, but also Mexicans, women, his fellow presidential candidates and on and on. This, too, is not of God. The kind of hatred that issues from Trump’s mouth —from anyone’s mouth — is not motivated by God. Hatred of this sort is motivated by evil; so is contempt for the poor…

“The pope speaks with authority. If anyone has the right to pronounce on such matters, it is Pope Francis. Learned, prayerful and humble, Francis is someone whom the world has rightly come to trust. As much as we would listen to the Dalai Lama when it comes to Buddhist practice, we would listen to Pope Francis when it comes to Christian teachings…  Trump has responded to Pope Francis with a hateful comment about the Islamic State bombing the Vatican…”

This is a rather odd article by a Jesuit priest, speaking about a Jesuit pope. Since when does the pope speak with authority on Christian teachings? Virtually all non-Catholics would strongly disagree with this assumption, and quite a few Catholics disagree with this premise as well.

Religious Leaders Rush To Trump’s Defense After Pope Francis’ Comments

The Huffington Post wrote on February 19:

“Religious leaders voiced support for Donald Trump after Pope Francis implied that the Republican presidential candidate is ‘not a Christian.’

“Liberty University president Jerry Falwell Jr., who is the son of the late televangelist Jerry Falwell, told CNN that ‘the pope is mistaken … I do believe Trump is a Christian.’ He added that ‘JFK would be rolling over in his grave right now.’ Falwell has endorsed Trump for president…

“Franklin Graham, the son of Evangelist minister Billy Graham, also defended Trump. ‘My advice to the pontiff: Reach out and build a bridge to Donald Trump,’ he said on Facebook. ‘Who knows where he may be this time next year!’

“But it’s not just evangelists who have Trump’s back. Catholic League President Bill Donohue defended the former reality TV star and accused the media of twisting Pope Francis’ words. ‘The pope was set up by the reporter,’ he said. ‘He’s been lied to about what Trump has said.’”

“God Told Israel to Build a Wall”

Newsmax wrote on February 19:

“Pope Francis should know that walls sometimes are commanded by God, former GOP presidential candidate Mike Huckabee said Thursday in response to the Pope saying Christians don’t build walls… ‘It’s just absolutely stunning,’ Huckabee said. I don’t remember in my lifetime that a Pope has ever injected himself into the specifics of an American presidential election and specifically calling out of a candidate.’… Huckabee said that all the Republican candidates have called for a secure border, so Francis should not have singled out Trump.

‘‘I have been to the Vatican,’ he added. ‘There is a big wall that surrounds the Vatican. I’m wondering, when the Pope gets back home, is he going to it take that down and say we don’t build walls anymore?’ Further, the Old Testament figure Nehemiah built a protective wall around Jerusalem at God’s command, said Huckabee, a former Baptist minister. ‘I don’t know what the Pope thinks a country should do if it doesn’t protect its borders and protect its people,’ he said. ‘A country without a border is not even a country anymore.’”

“Huge” Win of Trump Against the Pope, as Vatican Backs Down

The Daily Mail wrote on February 19:

“The Vatican today executed a speedy climb-down in its feud with Donald Trump – handing the Republican White House hopeful a major political victory. Pope Francis’s suggestion that Trump was ‘not Christian’ because of his views on immigration was not a personal attack on the candidate, Vatican spokesman Father Federico Lombardi said on Friday…

“[The Pope’s comments] promoted an immediate and furious denunciation from Trump, as well as a massive backlash on social media, where the Pope was mocked for living in the Vatican, itself a walled city-state…

“By day’s end the conflict drew Trump’s Republican rivals out of the shadows, with former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio – the presidential race’s two Roman Catholics – backing The Donald over The Pontiff…

“Rubio… defended the Republican Party’s line – essentially, Trump’s position – on immigration… Noting that the U.S. takes in a million immigrants a year, he declared that ‘Mexico doesn’t do that. No other country in the world does that… We’re a sovereign country. We have a right to control who comes in, when they come in and how they come in… Vatican City controls who comes in, when they come and how they come in, as a nation-state, or a city-state. And as a result, the United States has a right to do that as well.’

“Bush also rushed to Trump’s defense and insisted that no one should determine the validity of another person’s faith in God…”

The Hill added on February 19:

“Donald Trump is praising Pope Francis a day after he blasted the pontiff for seemingly questioning his faith and criticizing his proposal to build a wall on the nation’s southern border.  ‘I think he’s a terrific person, frankly,’ Trump said of Francis during an interview with Fox News’s Greta Van Susteren… The real estate mogul suggested afterward that he appreciated the Vatican walking back the remarks, telling Fox News, ‘The fact that he said that, I’m very honored by it.’”

The Vatican’s Stone Wall

In a related article, the Daily Mail explained the history, purpose and function of the Vatican’s wall:

“Vatican City is the smallest independent state in the world. An enormous stone wall acts as a boundary between the micro-nation and the rest of Italy. Nowadays, it serves as a way for the Swiss Guard to control the stream of tourists coming in and out of the Pope’s home. But, just over 1,200 years ago, it was an integral form of protection for the Pope, who was a targeted figure after the fall of the Holy Roman Empire .

“The fortification was first built after a raid by Muslim pirates in 846. Arab raiders sacked Rome in a bid to find treasures. Watch towers were put in place to watch for would-be intruders. It also helped to protect Pope Gregory VII around 200 years later when the Holy Roman Emperor besieged Rome.

“In the 1640s, Pope Paul III expanded the fortifications, and additional defenses. In 1870, the Pope’s residency in the Vatican was left in flux when Rome was annexed by the Piedmont-led forces which had united the rest of Italy. They had created the Kingdom of Italy, a change opposed by Pope Pius XIII as it undermined his autonomy in some areas.

“Between 1861 and 1929 the status of the Pope was referred to as the ‘Roman Question’ and the walls served as a way of keeping him isolated from the rest of Italy. Within the walls, Italian politicians did not challenge the Pope’s autonomy. But, in other parts of the country, church items were confiscated.

“In 1871, the Palazzo Quirinale, the Papal palace since 1583, was confiscated by the king of Italy and became the royal palace. Thereafter, Popes resided undisturbed within the Vatican walls. Certain papal prerogatives were recognized by the Law of Guarantees, including the right to send and receive ambassadors. But the Popes did not recognise the Italian king’s right to rule in Rome, and they refused to leave the Vatican compound until the dispute was resolved in 1929. Ever since the autonomy of the Vatican within the walls has not been challenged by the Italian government.”

Pope Should Stay Out of Politics…

Newsmax wrote on February 18:

“Pope Francis should not become involved in American politics because ‘he’s probably not up to speed on what we’re arguing about,’ conservative columnist George Will [said] on Thursday. ‘This Pope has shown a proclivity, to put it politely, for speaking about things about which he has no particular expertise: climate change, income redistribution, all the rest… He has a long sort of Latin American, left-wing political agenda — and I think it influenced this.’”

Will also criticized Trump for his initial answer to the Pope, stating it did not help the cause.

More Controversial Comments by the Pope

The Associated Press wrote on February 18:

“Pope Francis has suggested women threatened with the Zika virus could use artificial contraception, saying ‘avoiding pregnancy is not an absolute evil’ in light of the global epidemic. The pope unequivocally rejected abortion…  But he drew a parallel to a decision by Pope Paul VI in the 1960s to approve giving nuns in Belgian Congo artificial contraception to prevent pregnancies because they were being systematically raped…

“Theologians and some Latin American bishops cautioned the pope was not giving a green light for Catholics to use artificial birth control, nor did his remarks amount to a change in church teaching…

“U.N. officials have called on Latin American countries to loosen their abortion laws to allow women to terminate pregnancies if they fear the fetus may be at risk for microcephaly, a rare birth defect that causes brain damage and may be linked to the virus. But Francis told reporters, ‘Taking one life to save another, that’s what the Mafia does. It’s a crime. It’s an absolute evil.’…”

Trump Did NOT Oppose the Iraq War?

Newsmax reported on February 18:

“Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said in 2002 that he supported the Iraq War — despite his insistence that he opposed the conflict during the George W. Bush administration. ‘Yeah, I guess so,’ Trump said in response to a question about whether he supported the war from radio host Howard Stern on Sept. 11, 2002. ‘I wish the first time it was done correctly.’

“When asked Thursday at a CNN town hall in South Carolina whether he made the statement, Trump responded that ‘I probably said that’… ‘By the time the war started, I was against it. Shortly thereafter, I was really against it.’”

However, note the next article.

Newmax reported on February 19:

“On the second day of the Iraq War in 2003, Donald Trump said that the effort begun by President George W. Bush appeared to be ‘a tremendous success from a military standpoint.’ Trump… told Neil Cavuto on Fox Business Channel that the conflict would help Wall Street… BuzzFeed obtained audio of the telephone interview, from March 21, 2003, through Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tenn. Operation Iraqi Freedom began on March 20, 2003, ending that May 1. ‘Wall Street’s just gonna go up like a rocket, even beyond, and it’s gonna continue and, you know, we have a strong and powerful country and let’s hope it all works out,’ Trump said.

“He added that he believed that any international objections to the war would not endanger American’s economy. ‘I guess the French never liked us much, except when we’re bailing them out, you know, to be totally honest with you,’ he told Cavuto. ‘But certainly, we’re going to have to work on our public relations, because there’s no question that there are a lot of countries in the world right now that aren’t too fond of us — but I think that can be solved and probably pretty quickly.’

“The developer added that, ‘the main thing is to get the war over with and just make it a tremendously successful campaign — and it’ll be very interesting to see what kind of weapons they uncover.’”

Cruz Parrots Trump

The Huffington Post wrote on February 22:

“Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) has taken a page from Donald Trump’s presidential campaign playbook, hardening his rhetoric against undocumented immigrants. Cruz told Fox News host Bill O’Reilly on Monday that yes, should he be elected president, his administration would deport all 12 million undocumented people estimated to be in the U.S. and wouldn’t allow them to return… Cruz said America would build a wall along the U.S.-Mexico border, triple the border force and establish biometric entry systems ‘so we will know the day someone overstays their visa.’

“The senator’s comments represent an escalation in rhetoric from a candidate who rejected the notion of a ‘deportation force’ of ‘jackboots’ just last month, and lambasted the idea after it was proposed by GOP front-runner Trump. Cruz in January said such a policy would reflect ‘a police state,’ adding, ‘That’s not how we enforce the law for any crime.’”

The Scam with GOP’s Superdelegates

Bustle wrote on February 20:

“The dominance of Trump’s campaign, as well as the refusal of many to believe that Trump might actually win, is leading to increased speculations that the GOP might be headed toward a contested convention. As Republican officials dust off convention rulebooks in preparation for the possibility, many others are curious: How would superdelegates affect a contested convention?

“The GOP has about 2,472 delegates, and 168 of them are ‘super’ (or unbound). In theory, they can vote for whoever they want, and would thus have a lot of power at a contested convention. However, the Republican National Committee changed its rules in 2016, and so this year, those 168 superdelegates won’t actually be super at all. Instead, they’ll be obligated to vote for the candidate that their state supported, either on a proportional or a winner-take-all basis.

“If the convention is contested, however, this will change. How exactly it will change is complicated…

“In normal circumstances, a candidate wins the majority of delegates during the primary and caucus stage, those delegates vote for that candidate at the convention, and the candidate becomes the nominee. But if no candidate wins more than 50 percent of the party’s total delegates by the time the national convention is held, nobody will win the majority of delegates at the actual convention vote, and as a result, the party will be left without a nominee…

“The delegates have to keep voting until more than 50 percent of them rally behind one candidate, and so multiple rounds of voting are held. In between these rounds (which are officially, and confusingly, called ‘ballots’), the candidates and their supporters will lobby individual delegates, attempting to convince them to change their votes. This keeps going until one candidate secures the support of more than half of the delegates…

“The bottom line is that if the GOP does indeed end up with a contested convention, the nomination would be decided by an elite group of superdelegates. It’ll be way, way messier than that.”

If that wasn’t bad enough, read the next article about the superdelegates within the Democratic Party.

The Scam with Democrats’ Superdelegates

The New York Times’ Editorial Board wrote on February 19:

“Superdelegates are party bigwigs – 712 Democratic leaders, legislators, governors and the like. They can vote for any candidate at the nominating convention, regardless of whether that candidate won the popular vote. These unpledged delegates make up 30 percent of the 2,382 delegates whose votes are needed to win the nomination, and could thus make all the difference.

“The status of Hillary and Bill Clinton as senior figures in the Democratic Party has allowed Mrs. Clinton to secure public endorsements from many more superdelegates than Mr. Sanders. Late last year, The Associated Press surveyed 80 percent of the Democratic superdelegates and found that 359 had endorsed Mrs. Clinton, versus eight for Mr. Sanders. The rest remained uncommitted.

“In the New Hampshire primary…, which Mrs. Clinton lost by 22 percentage points, Mr. Sanders won 15 of the state’s 24 pledged delegates, and Mrs. Clinton won nine. But because she has the support of six of the state’s eight unpledged superdelegates… she is virtually tied with Mr. Sanders in the New Hampshire delegate count…”

So while superdelegates play an important role within the GOP in case of a contested convention, superdelegates may play a decisive vote at the Democratic convention, even if the convention is not contested. One is tempted to ask: Why even vote, if the results may mean nothing?

Boycotting Apple?

Newsmax reported on February 19:

“Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump called on Friday for a boycott of Apple products until the tech company agrees to help the U.S. government unlock the cellphone of one of the killers in the San Bernardino, California, attack… Trump made the off-the-cuff comment at a town hall-style event at a country club in Pawleys Island, (South Carolina)… He also called for the boycott on Twitter.

“The Republican front-runner in the 2016 White House race has been a frequent critic of Apple and called on the company to make more products in the United States…

“The filing [of a lawsuit by the US government against Apple] escalated a showdown between the Obama administration and Silicon Valley over security and privacy that ignited earlier this week.”

Please view our StandingWatch program, titled, “Why Would Apple Resist the FBI?” which shows why Donald Trump is wrong on this issue. Apple responded that they are in good company, given the many unsuccessful attempts of Trump to boycott companies and individuals in the past…

Apple vs. FBI: “FBI Screwed It Up”

Business Insider wrote on February 21:

“The FBI has shed more light on its involvement in what is shaping up to be the most controversial piece of evidence in the investigation of San Bernardino terror suspect Syed Rizwan Farook: his iCloud account password.

“Hours after Farook’s iPhone was recovered by law enforcement, the password to his iCloud account was reset. The reset was an attempt to gain access to his account. It also likely prevented the iPhone from doing an auto-backup, which could have yielded useful information about Farook’s activity leading up to the shooting that killed 14 people and wounded 22 others.

“That kicked off a round of finger-pointing by Apple executives, the FBI, and San Bernardino County officials over who reset the iCloud password… the FBI confirmed it was working with San Bernardino County officials when the password was reset. Apple executives said…  that if the FBI hadn’t changed the iCloud password, it wouldn’t need to create a backdoor to the iPhone.

“It sounds like the FBI screwed this whole process up…”

Many legal scholars agree that Apple has no choice but to resist the FBI. Please view our StandingWatch program, “Why Would Apple Resist the FBI?”

Apple Prepared to Go All the Way

The Telegraph wrote on February 24:

“Apple is ready to fight the FBI’s demand that it unlocks the phone of Rizwan Farook, one of the San Bernardino killers all the way to the Supreme Court, Tim Cook, the company’s chief executive, has said. Mr Cook said that complying with a court order to help the FBI break into an iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters would… set a legal precedent that would offend many Americans…

“Apple’s chief executive officer also said there should have been more dialogue with the Obama administration before the US Justice Department’s decision to seek relief from a federal magistrate judge in California. ‘We found out about the filing from the press, and I don’t think that’s the way the railroad should be run, and I don’t think that something so important to this country should be handled in this way,’ Mr Cook said in an interview being aired on ‘ABC World News Tonight.’”

Fragile Syria Deal

The Washington Post wrote on February 22:

“The United States and Russia announced Monday that they have agreed to the terms of a partial cease-fire in Syria, a deal that will depend on their ability to cooperate amid deep mutual suspicion and test their willingness and ability to dictate terms to their allies on the ground.

“Under the agreement, Washington and Moscow are to establish a hotline between them to monitor compliance and resolve potential problems, a joint statement said. The two are also ‘prepared to work together to exchange pertinent information’ delineating territory currently held by various Syrian combatants and ensuring that neither country, nor any of their allies, bombs groups or areas covered by the accord.

“Opposition groups, and the government of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, have until noon Friday to inform the United States or Russia that they agree to the terms, or risk coming under renewed attack. The agreement excludes the Islamic State, al-Qaeda’s affiliate Jabhat al-Nusra, and any other ‘terrorist’ group that in the future may be designated by the United Nations.

“While the United States is depending on Russia to bring the Syrian government and Iran to heel, rebel backers including Turkey and Saudi Arabia are under pressure to rein in groups thought to be under their control.”

One has to ask: How could this “deal” possibly work?

Turkey Won’t Be Israel’s Friend

The Times of Israel wrote on February 19:

“There is little chance that Israel will be able to rehabilitate its ties with Turkey, Greece’s defense minister told Israeli journalists on Thursday.  ‘The fact [that] Turkey trades with Daesh [Islamic State], as Israel’s Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon has described, funds Daesh, and allows its fighters to enter and leave Syria raises questions in both Israel and Greece,’ Panos Kammenos told Israel Radio in an interview while on a visit to Israel… ‘Turkey’s… stance toward Israel remains as hostile as in the past.’

“Kammenos noted that Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu last year said he longed to see the Palestinian flag flying over Jerusalem.”

The Bible shows that, ultimately, Turkey will become extremely hostile towards Israel.

“Russia Might Strike Anywhere in the World”

The Guardian wrote on February 19:

“Vladimir Putin’s new geopolitical ambitions have led the US to realise it made a strategic mistake turning away from Europe and making a pivot to Asia, the foreign affairs adviser to the Polish president has said.

“Krzysztof Szczerski urged the west to recognise that the Russian president was no longer simply seeking to restore his country’s dominance in former Soviet states such as Ukraine, but to adopt a more dominant military posture across the globe. He told the Guardian: ‘It is now a strategy of geopolitical confrontation, so the next strikes of Putin are not guaranteed to be in the post-Soviet sphere. It could be anywhere in the world. It is wrong to think that Putin has narrow territorial limits. Syria has shown that is not the case.’

“Szczerski said Putin’s Syrian intervention last year showed Russia had the capacity to move large amounts of equipment at speed across a great distance without their preparations being noticed…”

“Deal” Reached between Brussels and Britain

The Washington Post wrote on February 19:

“Round-the-clock negotiations between British Prime Minister David Cameron and his fellow European Union leaders yielded a deal late Friday night that they hope will keep Britain from becoming the first country to leave the 28-member bloc… A British exit — popularly known as ‘Brexit’ — is strongly opposed by all E.U. leaders, Cameron included…  Cameron said after the deal was announced that the agreed package of E.U. reforms was ‘enough’ for him to recommend that Britain remain in the union… [The British referendum has been subsequently set for June 23, 2016.]

“Cameron received concessions that amounted to far less than the fundamental renegotiation of Britain’s relationship with the E.U. that he had promised. But he was expected to declare victory nonetheless… But already on Friday, British Euroskeptics were lining up to proclaim the long and protracted talks as Exhibit A in their portrayal of the E.U. as a hopelessly dysfunctional institution that is beyond hope for serious reform…”

Deutsche Welle wrote on February 19:

“Cameron noted that migrants would no longer be able to come to Britain and start collecting social benefits before they have even had time to look for work. Indeed, he said they won’t have access to it for four years. Paradoxically, he also voiced support for the free movement of people and labor.”

The Telegraph wrote on February 20:

“David Cameron finally has his deal with the Europe – a deal that, it is claimed, gives Britain a ‘special status’ within the EU… It is astonishing that such humble proposals caused that much difficulty… Is it really a step too far to protect the interests of countries outside the eurozone? And what is so shocking about the proposition that British taxpayers should not [have] to pay such generous child welfare payments to children living overseas?… It will probably astonish British voters that all of this proved so problematic, particularly when Europeans have such terrible problems as the refugee crisis to chew over…

“But, then again, this should not surprise us. The EU leadership has decided that the future lies with greater integration, so even the smallest reform will be regarded as a challenge to this philosophy…”

“Call That a Deal, Dave?”

The Daily Mail wrote on February 19:

“All that lost sleep, and for what?… you have only to read David Cameron’s defiant quotes… to see the chasm between the ‘fundamental changes’ he promised and the pathetic ‘compromise on a compromise’ he has struggled to clinch this week.

“Gone are his commitments to ‘full-on treaty change’, war on bureaucracy, sovereignty for Westminster, ‘a complete opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights’, the return of border controls, limits on the jurisdiction of the European Court and more besides.

“In their place are measures so complex and trifling that they promise only more work for the bureaucrats, who will absurdly have to calculate 27 different rates of child benefit for migrant workers, according to the cost of living in their countries of origin.

“As for his vaunted ‘red card’, which would allow blocks of 15 nations to veto Brussels diktats, you have only to witness this week’s infighting to see the difficulty of getting three nations to agree, let alone 15…

“No, from the moment Mr Cameron made clear that he was determined to remain in the EU, come what may, any fleeting hopes of an agreement that might have made a real difference flew out of the window… As they bickered over the minutiae of child benefit at their banquets, a tide of migration unseen since 1945 was sweeping over the continent they purport to control, with 6,000 arriving on the Greek island of Lesbos in only three days. And that’s in the depths of winter, months before the peak season. Among them will be unknown numbers of jihadis, posing as war refugees to join the 5,000 IS-trained terrorists estimated by the EU’s police chief to be at large in Europe.

“In the fantasy world of the summit, leaders may mouth pious platitudes about the ‘non-negotiable’ principle of free movement. Yet in the real world, razor-wire fences are being erected between member states — while Austria sensibly breaks all the rules by refusing to accept more than 80 asylum-seekers a day…

“One thing is clear. Nothing agreed in Brussels will tempt a single voter to cross from the Out to the In camp (though it may swing some people the other way)… Indeed, the Prime Minister comes out of this sorry saga badly wounded, just eight months after his surprise election triumph made him look all but invincible on the domestic political battleground. But it is not too late for him to redeem himself. He should tell voters, humbly and frankly, that he has tried hard but failed to secure a deal worth having…”

Strong Opposition to Cameron’s “Deal”

Deutsche Welle wrote on February 20:

“65 of the 330 members of Cameron’s Conservative party in the parliament [want] Britain to opt out of the bloc. Many opposition politicians dismissed Friday’s agreement. Shadow Foreign Secretary Hillary Benn of the Labour Party said Cameron had done ‘what he decided he had to do because he was too weak to stand up to his political party.’ Labour Party Chief Jeremy Corbyn, who supports Britain’s membership in the EU, described Cameron’s trip to Brussels as a ‘theatrical sideshow… designed to appease his opponents within the conservative party.’”

The Times of Israel wrote on February 20:

“Many British newspapers reacted sceptically to the Brussels deal, which contained restrictions on welfare payments for EU migrants and an opt-out for Britain from the EU’s goal towards ever closer union. ‘Cameron’s Climbdown,’ read a headline on the Daily Express website… The Daily Telegraph said Cameron had made ‘puny gains’ and The Times called it ‘Thin Gruel.”

Der Stern Online questioned whether the “deal” was enough to convince the British people to stay in the EU. The publication said that the alleged special status for Britain, exempting them from working towards “ever closer” European Union, was meaningless, as they were already exempt from many regulations, such as the Eurozone and the Schengen agreement.

Bild Online quoted Angela Merkel as saying that even though making some of the concessions to Britain were “not easy,” they did not give Britain “too much.” Still, she wished that Britain would have agreed to participating in creating an “ever closer union.”

Cameron vs. Johnson… the Fight for or against Brexit

The Daily Mail wrote on February 23:

“David Cameron today said Boris Johnson [mayor of London, conservative MP and potential successor to David Cameron] was a ‘fantastic friend’ but one who was ‘wrong’ on the EU… Mr Johnson… promised a ‘fantastic new future’ outside the EU where Britain was the ‘hub’ of new trading arrangements around the world… Mr Cameron insisted Britain was ‘better off’ inside the European Union because of the uncertainty a Brexit would bring…

“Mr Johnson…  has become the standard bearer for the campaign to get Britain out of the EU, said those promoting danger had been proved wrong before… Mr Johnson today said he was determined to seize the opportunity to quit a European Union which was ‘wasteful, anti-democratic and I think evolving ever forwards towards a super state I don’t think most British people want to be involved with’…

“The six Cabinet rebels voting for Britain to leave the EU have been banned from using any government material or resources to campaign for Out, under strict new rules published today. Jeremy Heywood, the Cabinet Secretary, sent a letter to all civil servants this morning telling them that government resources must only be used in the referendum campaign if it supports the Government’s official stance in support of Britain’s membership of the EU. It risks causing further anger among Tory Eurosceptics as it will put pro-Brexit ministers at a significant disadvantage to pro-EU members of the Government in the run up to June’s referendum.”

That is how politics are made in a supposedly free and democratic country.

“Deutsche Boerse Plans London Stock Exchange Takeover”

CNN wrote on February 23:

“The London Stock Exchange could soon have a new German owner. A huge merger looks set to reshape Europe’s stock exchanges.

“German market operator Deutsche Boerse… wants to join forces with the London Stock Exchange…, the companies said Tuesday. They described the proposed transaction as a ‘merger of equals,’ but Deutsche Boerse shareholders would end up owning more than 54% in the new company. Shares in the London Stock Exchange soared by as much as 20% after the announcement and Deutsche Boerse shares jumped by about 9%.

“The combined exchanges would have more heft to compete against the New York Stock Exchange operator, Intercontinental Exchange, which also owns markets in Belgium, France, the Netherlands, Portugal and the U.K. through its Euronext business. Shares in Intercontinental Exchange were dipping by about 1.5% Tuesday. Based on U.K. rules, Deutsche Boerse will have to make a formal offer by March 22 or walk away from the deal…”

British Schoolchildren Under Attack

NewsWithViews wrote on February 20:

“British schoolchildren are being heavily targeted and ‘used’ to reform society… This was illustrated in a recent survey carried out by the Office of the Children’s Commissioner for England who recently distributed a questionnaire to schoolchildren in Brighton and Hove.

“The questionnaire asked the children, aged from 13 – 18 to choose from over 20 gender options on how it best described their gender, to include: Tomboy, Trans boy, Gender fluid, Agender, Androgynous, Bi-gender, Non-binery, Gender queer, Gender non-conforming, Tri gender, In the middle of boy and girl, Intersex.

“… you can only imagine the type of identity crisis and confusion you would experience when you are just 13, in relation to the suggestion that you should fall into one of these categories.

“In an article from the Telegraph it read that the head teacher from one of the schools said: ‘We want all our young people to feel comfortable with who they are, to understand that the notion of gender can go beyond the traditional idea of simply being either male and female, and to recognise that people can use a range of terms to describe their gender identity.’…

“It is reported that the survey was later withdrawn for amendments, yet not abolished, after the Children’s Commissioner, Anne Longfield received complaints. The problem with labels, thoughts and feelings, is that they are terribly hard to shake off once you have accepted their distortion of reality…”

The abominations continue. See the next article.

Jesus a Transgender Woman?

The Daily Mail reported on February 14:

“A play that portrays Jesus as a transgender woman who refers to God as ‘Mum’ is to be performed in a Church of England church today. To the fury of critics who say the play is deeply offensive, the Bishop of Manchester, David Walker, will not block the staging of The Gospel According To Jesus, Queen Of Heaven.

“The one-woman play by Jo Clifford, an award-winning Scottish playwright who has herself changed gender, imagines Jesus returning to earth as a ‘trans woman’ and retelling the parables with a transsexual slant.”

God’s patience with this evil generation is amazing!

Fire From Heaven

The Daily Mail wrote on February 22:

“A huge fireball crashed into the Atlantic earlier this month – and went almost unseen. The event took place on February 6 at 14:00 UTC when a meteor exploded in the air 620 miles (1,000km) off the coast of Brazil. It released energy equivalent to 13,000 tons of TNT, which is the same as the energy used in the first atomic weapon that leveled Hiroshima in 1945…

“Nasa tracks around 12,992 near-Earth objects which have been discovered orbiting within our solar system close to our own orbit. It estimates around 1,607 are classified as Potentially Hazardous Asteroids… scientists have long said that these space rocks could threaten life on Earth…

“In fact, the Earth had a ‘near-miss’ only a few months ago… The bus-sized asteroid, named 2014 EC, came within 38,300 (61,637km) miles of Earth in March – around a sixth of the distance between the moon and our planet…

“The threat is so serious that former astronaut Ed Lu has described it as ‘cosmic roulette’ and said that only ‘blind luck’ has so far saved humanity from a serious impact.”

First of all, not all “Christian” churches keep the Passover.   Wikipedia states the following (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Footwashing ): “Washing of the Feet is a religious rite observed by several Christian denominations. John 13:1–17 mentions Jesus performing this act.  As such, many denominations (including Anglicans, Lutherans, Methodists, Presbyterians, and Roman Catholics) observe the washing of the feet on Maundy Thursday of Holy Week. Moreover, for some denominations, foot-washing was an example, a pattern.  Many groups throughout Church history and many modern denominations have practiced foot washing as a church ordinance including the Adventists, Anabaptists, Baptists, and Pentecostals.”

Wikipedia also states that “The Eucharist (also called Holy Communion, the Lord’s Supper, and other names) is a rite considered by most Christian churches to be a sacrament. According to some New Testament books, it was instituted by Jesus Christ during his Last Supper.”

In a Church of God article some years ago, the following was noted: “Jude tells us in verse 4 that certain ungodly men crept into the church, during the second half of the first century A.D. and began teaching that obedience to God’s law was unnecessary.   They forsook observing God’s Holy days.   However, in order to deceive, they used familiar terms such as Passover and Pentecost to refer to new festivals preserving the outward form long after the spiritual substance disappeared.  To this day, the Roman Catholic Church uses the term ‘Paschal season’ to refer to the time of their Easter observance.  Paschal is derived from the Latin word for Passover.   Latin-based languages, such as French and Spanish, still use the word for Passover to refer to the Easter celebration.

“There was this desire to get away from the fact that the symbols introduced by Jesus Christ on the night of His final Passover were to be observed annually by true Christians.   To accomplish this, alternate terms for the observance of the Passover symbols were introduced.   By the beginning of the second century, terms such as ‘communion’ or ‘eucharist’ were being used.

“However, by using names that focus total emphasis on the symbols of bread and wine, the footwashing part of the service was easily and quickly obscured.   Also veiled was the fact that partaking of these symbols was part of an annual observance, a fact made clear by the use of the Biblical term Passover.”

This is yet another example of the confusion that exists in many areas of biblical understanding.   The Passover became Holy Communion in many mainstream Christian churches and is now taken whenever a church desires rather than the annual practice of Passover, and footwashing is generally no longer practiced as part of this service.

It is worth looking briefly at some of the objections that are raised about doing this as Jesus Christ clearly instructed His disciples to do. We can see the conclusions that can be established when not being obedient to living by “every word” of God (compare Matthew 4:4). We hasten to add, however, that the entire Passover service is only for properly baptized true Christians who have received the Holy Spirit. Those who have not been baptized in accordance with Scripture should not participate in the annual Passover service. An upcoming Q&A will discuss this important issue in more detail.

One website source addressed the question of footwashing as part of the Passover service as follows:

“It should be observed first of all that just because Christ gave a command to someone, at some time, during his ministry, does not mean that that same command was required of all people for all time.  One must look at the nature of the command, to whom it was given, the purpose thereof (if stated), and whether or not it initially applied in a limited way, or whether it was for every person throughout history.

“For example, the Lord once commanded a man, ‘take up your bed and walk’ (John. 5:8).  Surely it is not difficult to understand that this particular injunction was not universal in its application.  To another he said, ‘Go, wash in the pool of Siloam’ (John. 9:7).  That requirement applied to no one but the man to whom it was given.  To the apostles Jesus said, ‘Wait in the city [of Jerusalem], until you are clothed with power from on high’ (Luke 24:49).  That command was for the apostles exclusively.”

The man who was healed was told to take up his bed and walk and it was specific to one individual and Christ did not say that everyone had to do this; likewise the one in the pool of Siloam.   The apostles were certainly told to wait for what we know was the day of Pentecost to receive the Holy Spirit, and it was a unique event.   As we will see later, the Passover was to be kept by all of the disciples then and down through the ages.

This same writer then states: “In order to appreciate the situation that occurred during the Passover supper, one has to have some ‘background’ knowledge in a couple of areas – pertaining to the customary act of feet-washing itself, and that of the events that led up to the ‘supper’ incident.  Notice first that Jesus washed the feet of all the disciples.  If one is going to bind precisely this ‘example’ as a church ordinance, as a few small religious groups have done, then the feet of everyone present will have to be cleansed.   Further, everyone who washes the feet of others will need to have his own feet bathed by everyone else.  If there should be a group of several hundred people, this ‘ceremony’ would consume the better part of a day – or even longer.”

This is a ridiculous answer.   All the disciples had their feet washed. The same happens in the Passover services today of the Church of the Eternal God and its affiliates, the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship and the Global Church of God.   The Bible doesn’t say that “the feet of others will need to have his own feet bathed by everyone else” and is a complete misunderstanding of what is written.  A baptised member of the church will have his feet washed and wash another one’s feet and that is sufficient to fulfill the instruction by Christ.

The writer then states: “That Jesus was not washing the disciples’ feet as a literal act to be required henceforth is very clear from what happened in the meantime, and how the Lord responded.  Peter knew that Jesus was about to wash his feet (in a literal sense), but Christ says, ‘You do not know what I’m doing.’ Obviously, it was not the act of washing feet per se that was the point; rather, it was the lesson to be conveyed.  And so, in a mild rebuke, Jesus told his apostle (if we may paraphrase), ‘If you do not learn the lesson I am attempting to demonstrate, you will have “no part” in my ministry’ (v. 8).”

A further assertion by this same writer is that “The Son of God was demonstrating an attitude, not requiring a literal act.  The error, then, on the part of some religious people, is in not discerning the difference between what the Lord was doing literally, and the symbolic significance of the act.”

This is a further ludicrous answer to try and circumnavigate what Jesus was clearly teaching.   The lesson was about humility and not having a self-serving attitude.   Jesus said what they (and we today) have to DO – “you also ought to wash one another’s feet” (John 13:14).   That takes action and is, therefore, a literal act.   Jesus demonstrated a literal act by doing the footwashing – doing means action and it takes effort.   And, in addition to, not in place of this, we demonstrate an attitude of service to others.   It is an instruction that has two facets to it.

Let us review what the Bible instructs on this matter; after all, this is what matters, not some human explanation that can employ mental gymnastics to show that what the Bible teaches is not necessarily so.

When Jesus washed the disciples’ feet, He told them: “I have given you an example, that you should do as I have done to you” (John 13:15). His disciples then and as His followers today, we are to emulate that same example as instructed.   When we wash one another’s feet we serve one another as we should do in humility, lowliness of heart and mind, not seeking our own way but looking to help and encourage each other in humility and love. So many today seek pre-eminence which Christ clearly condemned (as an example, see Matthew 23 for Christ’s condemnation of the scribes and Pharisees and their approach to many matters).

In Mark 9:33-37, Jesus answered the disciples who were disputing about who was the greatest amongst them when he said: “If anyone desires to be first, he shall be last of all and servant of all” (v 35).   In Mark 10:42-44, we read: “But Jesus called them to Himself and said to them, ‘You know that those who are considered rulers over the Gentiles lord it over them, and their great ones exercise authority over them. Yet it shall not be so among you; but whoever desires to become great among you shall be your servant. And whoever of you desires to be first shall be slave of all.’”

We have seen some of the arguments that are propounded to claim that Christ was merely teaching the disciples about humility and that He did not establish a ceremony for the Church to practice in the future, believing that it is only the attitude that counts and the performance of the physical act of footwashing today is unnecessary. However, the correct understanding of what the Bible states is clear; physical action is needed.

Jesus Himself clearly explained the primary lesson of foot-washing: “You call me Teacher and Lord, and you say well, for so I am. If I then, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also ought to wash one another’s feet” (John 13:13-14).  He added in John 13:17: “If you know these things, blessed are you if you do them.” In Matthew 28:20, Jesus described the responsibility of the church as  “‘teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.’ Amen.”

In our Statement of Fundamental Beliefs we state the following about keeping the Passover and the annual Holy Days:

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

By simple deduction and correct biblical understanding, we see that Jesus Christ was willing to humbly and unconditionally serve the disciples in doing such a menial task and baptized members of the Body of Christ are instructed to follow His example in the matter of footwashing and ignore those who, erroneously, deem it unnecessary.

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

StandingWatch programs have now been more closely integrated into the CEG homepage. This provides much easier access to both our new and past programs. You may check this out by going to: www.eternalgod.org

The dates for the annual Holy Days until 2022 have been posted on our English and German websites, under “About” and “Wir Ueber Uns,” respectively.

“New German Leadership Out of Nowhere?” is the title of a new StandingWatch program presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

While it is becoming more and more probable that Donald Trump will become the Republican nominee and even the next American President, we are focusing on Europe and especially Germany where the situation is not all that different. People here and there are upset with the political establishment and looking for “outsiders.” Angela Merkel is no longer the “Queen of Europe,” the “Iron Lady of Europe,” or the “most powerful politician in Europe.” Rather, she has become a lonely figure, and Europeans are wishing for new leadership, which has to “emerge somewhere,” “out of nowhere.” The Bible indicates that this is exactly what will happen. We are offering free booklets on this program for further information.

“Warum Sich Apple dem FBI Widersetzt!” is the title of a new AufPostenStehen program presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. This is similar to the recent StandingWatch program on “Why Would Apple Resist the FBI,” but with special focus on German reactions.

“Gehen Sie zu Weit?” is the title of this week’s Sabbath sermon. It deals with compromise, with heavy emphasis on Easter. Title in English: “Are You Going Too Far?”

“How Far Do You Want to Go?” the sermonette presented last Sabbath by Norbert Link, is now posted. Here is a summary:

This world looks at compromise as a great thing. But how does God view this? How should Christians look at compromise? Are we at times willing to compromise in respect to Church doctrine and practices? Many did compromise in the past, to their own demise. How convinced are we that we must never compromise with God’s Truth?

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

We often read about servants in the Bible. What does it really take to become a true servant of God? Are there requirements? Are there benefits from being a servant? In the sermon we will look at three specific areas: 1) Actions of true servants 2) Knowledge of servants 3) Responsibilities. These should give us a good idea of what it means to be a Servant of the Lord.

On February 20, 2016, Norbert Link will present the sermonette, titled, “How Far Do You Want to Go?,” and the sermon will be presented by Kalon Mitchell, titled, “The Servant of the Lord.”

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.

We recently had the lottery here in the United States. The jackpot got up to 1.5 billion dollars.  While this is a lot of money for most of us, it is hard to imagine that 65% of lottery winners are bankrupt within 15 years.

As one winner declared: “I tried to get too much, too fast.” This attitude of “get” is so prevalent in our current society; and yet, when those who do “get” it, they end up losing most of what they had, even to the point of going backwards, losing family, friends and in some cases wanting to commit suicide. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that this attitude has permeated the very depths of our society. Take a look at the US National Debt Clock and you can watch the depressing amount of numbers continually streaming away. This is our nation crumbling before us. Will Durant’s quote stands in stark contrast: “A nation is born stoic and dies epicurean.”  No longer are people willing to stand up for conscience and truth, but they rather look for the easy way out.

How many times have we in some way wished to win something? How many times have we wished that things would go more easily for us? Maybe our faith has been tested in areas of money, time and patience. Do we immediately lose hope? Do we wish it was instantly better? Or do we look to God and the Bible to start finding the answers that we need? James 1:2-4 plainly states that this is the right attitude that we need to be engaged in.

This time in our lives is our testing and proving ground. We are supposed to learn to be stoic, reliant, steadfast and unmovable with the Word of God as our rock. Look at Luke 21:19; Hebrews 6:12 ; and 1 Peter 1:7. How many times do we read biblical passages like these, think that they are great Scriptures and then walk away and forget what we just read?

As this nation and the rest of the world continue their crumbling decline, away from God and any and all morals, where does that leave us? Christ’s stark words were that the “world hates you” (John 15:18-19). Is this true for us? Do we stand out at times as sore thumbs because we hold fast to the truth? Or do we, for the sake of attempting to fit in, try and become a part of the world?

Our choices are daily. They are in the small things that we choose to do or not do–in the way in which we spend our precious hours. Now is the time to stop kidding ourselves, thinking that we have still much time to overcome, to become more acceptable to God. No, now is the time for deep self-examination, based on the Word of God. Truly, we have been given a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to be the first in line for God’s soon-coming Kingdom.

How are we treating this? Hopefully not as those who go bankrupt after winning the lottery because they do not know how to use wisely what they have been given. It just came too fast for them. God is testing us NOW to see how we handle our responsibility, learning to make right choices, so that we can make good decisions when we become God beings.

We begin with reports on the national and international downfall of Angela Merkel, once called the “Queen of Europe” and “Europe’s Iron Lady,” and the questions regarding a possible successor who might come “out of nowhere,” as Merkel once did; speak on the blatantly obvious lack of European trust and confidence in the USA; and address the ongoing debate regarding a possible Brexit.

Turning to a critical legal battle between Apple and the FBI [please view our new StandingWatch program on the issue, titled, “Why Would Apple Resist the FBI?”] and the heated and brutal run for the American Presidency, we report on the fight between the Republican “establishment” and “outsiders”; speak on the less than fair methods by the GOP to support “their” candidates against the will of the people; point out a new fight between Pope Francis and Donald Trump; and address the sudden and unexpected death of conservative U.S. Supreme Court Judge and Ronald Reagan appointee, Antonin Scalia.

We conclude with reporting on an agreement between Russia and Iran, violating a UN ban, Muslim opposition to Valentine ’s Day (even though they are right in objecting to it, they are wrong in their motives), and a revealing article of a medical doctor, showing the UNDENIABLE health risks of vaccinations in babies and young children.  

Is Angela Merkel Still the Right One?

The Telegraph wrote on February 12:

“Six months ago Angela Merkel was being hailed as the saviour of Europe, living up to the continent’s founding ideals of openness and tolerance by throwing open the gates of Germany to millions of refugees fleeing the horrors of Syria’s civil war… That was September – but how quickly the mood seems to have soured, as Germany comes to terms with the realities involved in absorbing more than a million migrants who were promised a better life.

“Is Europe’s Iron Lady really finished?… Is the most powerful politician in Europe about to be swept away by events in Syria, Turkey and North Africa that are increasingly beyond her control?…

“Germany hasn’t quite fallen out of love with her. Better to say the romance is on the rocks…It is worth noting that if there was an election tomorrow her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party would still be the biggest in Germany, and its current coalition would still command a majority… How can that be? A number of reasons. Perhaps chief among these is that Mrs Merkel doesn’t have a serious rival at the moment, either among the parties or political personalities…

“The crucial test for Mrs Merkel will be elections in three German states next month. It was defeat in a state election that triggered the downfall of her predecessor Gerhard Schröder in 2005. Mrs Merkel’s CDU does not have to win the state votes on March 13, but if it does not make a respectable showing the party could panic and look to appoint a new leader in time for next year’s national elections.

“She is also facing a legal challenge from the indefatigable Mr Seehofer [Premier of Bavaria], who has vowed to challenge her refugee policy in the courts as unconstitutional… If Mr Seehofer’s legal challenge to the country’s asylum policy is upheld in the courts, it could plunge Germany into a constitutional crisis and leave Mrs Merkel facing calls to resign…

“There is no obvious candidate now — but Mrs Merkel was far from an obvious candidate when she came out of nowhere to seize the party crown from Helmut Kohl, the man who had presided over the reunification of Germany. If Mrs Merkel falls, the repercussions will be felt far beyond Germany’s borders. In recent years she has been the dominant political force within the EU… It was largely Mrs Merkel who steered the EU though the Eurozone crisis. If she falls with the continent divided over refugees, new leadership will have to emerge somewhere…”

Merkel All Alone

The Local wrote on February 14:

“Abandoned by France, defied by eastern Europe, German Chancellor Angela Merkel cuts a lonely figure in her struggle for EU ‘solidarity’ on the refugee crisis ahead of a Brussels summit… Merkel, long dubbed the ‘Queen of Europe’, has seen poll numbers drop at home, coalition members rebel and EU allies duck away as the refugee crisis has sparked deep discord and threatened the bloc’s system of open borders…

“She suggested its members could help Turkey’s refugee effort beyond the three billion euros ($3.3 billion) already committed by the EU. Turkey, which is hosting over 2.7 million mostly Syrian refugees, has voiced deep frustration with the EU as a fresh wave of Syrian refugees mass on its border. Angry over calls that Turkey should do more, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said last week that his nation could throw out its existing refugees, threatening to fly and bus them to Europe. ‘We do not have the word “idiot” written on our foreheads,’ he said. ‘We will be patient, but we will do what we have to. Don’t think that the planes and the buses are there for nothing.’”

Merkel Blasted by Russia and France

The Local wrote on February 12:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s liberal refugee policy, which brought 1.1 million asylum seekers to Germany in 2015, is not sustainable in the long run, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls warned Friday… The French prime minister’s criticisms… came after his Russian counterpart Dmitry Medvedev lambasted Merkel’s asylum policy. ‘It’s quite simply stupid to open Europe’s doors wide and invite in everyone who wants to come to your country,’ Medvedev said… ‘European migration policy is a total failure, all that is absolutely frightening,’ Medvedev added…

“But there was no sign of backing down from Merkel’s government on Friday…

“Opposition has been growing within Germany against Merkel’s decision to open the doors to those fleeing war and persecution. An opinion poll published late January showed that nearly 40 percent of German voters want Merkel to quit over her asylum policy…”

Merkel Responsible for War in Europe?

Breitbart wrote on February 17:

“One of Poland’s most popular weekly magazines (wSieci–The Network) has splashed a graphic depiction of the rape of Europe’s women by migrants on its front cover. The image may be one of the most politically incorrect illustrations of the migrant crisis to date… Featuring a personification of Europa being pawed at by dark hands — what the German media would perhaps euphemistically term ‘southern’ or ‘Mediterranean’ — the headline decries the ‘Islamic Rape of Europe’.

“Making perfectly clear the intention of the edition, the edition features articles titled ‘Does Europe Want to Commit Suicide?’ and ‘The Hell of Europe’. The news-stand blurb declares: ‘In the new issue of the weekly Network, a report about what the media and Brussels elite are hiding from the citizens of the European Union’…

“Outlining the fundamental differences between eastern Islam and western Christianity — ‘culture, architecture, music, gastronomy, dress’ — the editorial explains these two worlds have been at war ‘over the last 14 centuries’ and the world is now witnessing a colossal ‘clash of two civilisations in the countries of old Europe’. This clash is brought by Muslims who come to Europe and ‘carry conflict with the Western world…’

“The magazine also had strong words for German Chancellor Angela Merkel… ‘the arrival of “millions” of cultural Muslims will ‘shock and undermine Europe’. The blame for this, the article lays firmly at the feet of Mrs. Merkel.”

Polish Magazine Causes Outrage

The Independent wrote on February 17:

“The right-wing Polish weekly magazine wSieci (The Network) has caused outrage with its latest front cover. The publication features the image of a white woman, draped with the European Union flag, screaming as she is being groped and assaulted by dark skinned male arms. Twitter users have compared the images with fascist propaganda in Nazi Germany and Mussolini’s Italy, which used images of women being attacked by Jewish and North African men.

“The image is a reference to the sexual assaults that have been claimed to have been perpetrated by migrant and refugee men against European women. The 1,000 reports of theft, sexual assault and rape of women at Cologne’s central train station on New Year’s Eve led to calls for stronger immigration controls…

“[The author] believes that whilst Muslims are actively promoting this [cultural] war, Europeans are engineering their own downfall by ignoring the negative impacts of multiculturalism.  Quoting historian Arnold Toynbee, he writes: ‘Civilisations die from suicide, not by murder’…

“The news comes after Poland’s government – alongside Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia – stated that they will support Balkan countries to seal their borders with Greece in order to stem the flow of migrants and refugees.”

Muslim Violence in Germany, While Extraordinary Amounts of Money Are Given Away

Daily Mail wrote on February 11:

“Christians, women and gay men are among the groups of asylum seekers needing their own accommodation in Germany after facing attacks by fellow [Muslim] migrants…There are also growing numbers of reports citing violence between the mostly Muslim groups that remain, with frequent police callouts to tackle the violence…

“Germany needs 450 million euros to integrate just ten per cent of the migrants and refugees who have arrived in the country in the past year, the Minister of Labour and Social Affairs said… Bundesagentur fur Arbeit (BA)… boss Detlef Scheele said… that if things went really well, in the first year of arrival maybe ten per cent of the refugees might end up with a job, and in five years it might be half.  He estimated that after 15 years, it could be around 70 per cent…”

Crazy German Governmental Idea Provokes Furious Reaction

The Local wrote on February 12:

“The government has announced plans to set a €5,000 limit on payments in cash – provoking a furious reaction from politicians, media and public alike… The outcry came from all quarters, with the populist right-wing Alternative for Germany (AfD) just as vocal as the right-on left-wing Green Party and the liberal Free Democratic Party (FDP). Economic weekly WirtschaftsWoche made the plans the cover story on Friday’s edition, titled ‘Save cash!’.

“And an article in highly regarded broadsheet the Süddeutsche Zeitung suggested the move was nothing less than a step in the direction of totalitarianism. The immediate suspicion was that – far from being aimed at preventing terrorism and organized crime as the government professed – the move was meant to help the state pry into the smallest minutiae of Germans’ lives…

“It is clear that Germans put a high value on individual liberty… This prizing of freedom… meant that imposing a limit on hard currency was like playing with matches around a powder keg for German leaders. Polls consistently show that Germans prefer cash to cards… with people feeling they can keep a better overview of their expenses, and they can keep their shopping list away from the government and companies’ prying eyes…”

To MANDATORILY limit cash payments is an absolutely crazy idea… and it DOES give rise to the question, as posed by the Süddeutsche Zeitung whether the real goal is to create a totalitarian government in Germany.

“Europe’s Convinced U.S. Won’t Solve Its Problems”

Bloomberg wrote on February 13:

“Europe is facing a convergence of the worst crises since World War II, and the overwhelming consensus among officials and experts here is that the U.S. no longer has the will or the ability to play an influential role in solving them.

“At the Munich Security Conference, the prime topics are the refugee crisis, the Syrian conflict, Russian aggression and the potential dissolution of the European Union’s very structure. Top European leaders repeatedly lamented that 2015 saw all of Europe’s problems deepen, and unanimously predicted that in 2016 they would get even worse. ‘The question of war and peace has returned to the continent,’ German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier told the audience, indirectly referring to Russian military interventions. ‘We had thought that peace had returned to Europe for good.’

“What was missing from the conference speeches and even the many private discussions in the hallways, compared to previous years, was the discussion of what Europe wanted or even expected the U.S. to do. Several European officials told me that there was little expectation that President Barack Obama, in his last year in office, would make any significant policy changes to address what European governments see an existential set of crises that can’t wait for a new administration in Washington…

“During the first day of the conference, the U.S. role in Europe was hardly mentioned in the public sessions. In the private sessions, many participants told me that European governments are not only resigned to a lack of American assertiveness, they also are now reluctantly accepting a Russia that is more present than ever in European affairs, and not for the better…”

Europe will become more and more self-reliant, as it understands that it cannot count on the USA.

War Room of Lawyers in Brussels

The EUObserver wrote on February 17:

“EU leaders will gather on Thursday (18  February) afternoon in Brussels to kick off the meeting from which British prime minister David Cameron hopes to produce a deal for the UK that would enable him to put the UK’s EU membership to a referendum by June… However, Donald Tusk in a letter to EU leaders on Wednesday warned that ‘there is still no guarantee that we will reach an agreement’ and urged them to remain constructive… Leaders at the summit will be armed with a ‘war room of lawyers’, as one EU source put it, to tackle the remaining political and legal issues in the draft deal…

“The UK’s request to be left out of what the EU treaty defines as ‘ever closer union’ is [one] issue to be discussed by leaders, where different interpretations of deeper EU integration might clash.”

Merkel Woos Cameron

The Local wrote on February 13:

“German chancellor Angela Merkel has reaffirmed that she wants the UK to remain “an active member of a successful European Union”, as British Prime Minister David Cameron attended a banquet in Hamburg. Speaking at the historic ‘Matthiae-Mahl’ banquet, Merkel insisted, to thunderous applause, that continued UK membership was not only in Germany’s interest, ‘but also in Britain’s and in the interests of the entire EU’.

“The banquet’s host, Hamburg mayor Olaf Scholz, said Britain was ‘irreplaceable’ in European foreign and defence policy. ‘And from an economic point of view, too… we can’t and won’t do without London,’ he added. Scholz, a member of the Social Democrat SPD party which shares power with Merkel’s conservative CDU, said Britain needed to show ‘pragmatism and courage… and their ability to compromise.’…

“Cameron expressed confidence that a deal could be reached which would allow Britain to remain in the European Union and avoid a so-called ‘Brexit’… ‘So when it comes to the question of Britain’s future in Europe, my aim is clear: I want to keep Britain inside a reformed European Union.’”

Scaremongering about EU

Express wrote on February 14:

“It’s a bit rich for the Germans to tell us that we couldn’t survive without them and it will undoubtedly provoke hollow laughter from those who still remember what Churchill in 1940 called ‘our finest hour’. Then Britain stood on its own and triumphed against tremendous odds. But now the various forces of ‘Project Fear’ – ranging from our own Prime Minister to German MP Gunther Krichbaum, who is head of the Bundestag’s EU affairs committee – deliver dire and entirely unfounded warnings about what will happen to Britain outside the EU.

“Mr Krichbaum threatens Britain with unfavourable trading conditions which led to a colourful exchange between him and anti-EU MP Sir Bill Cash, who said: ‘What do you take us for? Do you think we are incapable of running our own affairs?’ It is all perhaps to be expected that German politicians and Brussels apparatchiks are in the business of running Britain down. But even worse is the intervention by Dame Carolyn McCall, the boss of easyJet, who claimed that Brexit would increase the costs of budget airlines and, mysteriously, threaten the safety of British tourists.

“In the coming weeks there will be a lot of this kind of scaremongering from our own politicians, from pro-EU business leaders and from Europe. Nearly 70 years ago Britain had no qualms about going it alone and the threat we faced was a terrible one. We should show the same fortitude now.”

Except, it IS prophesied that Britain will ultimately leave the EU, and that shortly thereafter, a terrible war will break out between continental Europe and the UK, which the UK will lose.

Cameron’s Deal Does Nothing for Britain

Express wrote on February 17:

“Brussels’ top bureaucrat Jean-Claude Juncker sparked fury today after he claimed Britain ‘needs’ the European Union (EU) and would vote to stay in the 28-country bloc when the referendum is held… The president of the European Commission was accused of being ‘arrogant’ after he declared there was no ‘Plan B’ to the EU negotiations as David Cameron fights to salvage his renegotiation deal… Mr Juncker said the Prime Minister would be granted a ‘fair’ deal on his demands to alter the UK’s membership of the EU, but added that Brussels officials are also working to satisfy the 27 other member states…

“The ex-Luxembourg prime minister told German newspaper Bild: ‘… We need Great Britain in our European family and the British need the European Union.’

“But Mr Juncker’s comments caused outrage among British eurosceptics, as they scoffed at his suggestion the UK wouldn’t survive outside the EU. Ukip MEP Jane Collins… told Express.co.uk: ‘Just like Tony Blair, Juncker’s an asset to the Leave campaign… Every time he opens his mouth he lets people know just what the goals of the EU really are and just how pathetic Cameron’s “renegotiation” is… In fact the Prime Minister’s “reforms” are more watered-down than one of Prince Charles’ homeopathic remedies.’

“Tory MP Steve Baker, co-chairman of Conservatives for Britain and a member of the Vote Leave campaign, told Express.co.uk: ‘This is a question for the British people to decide first in their own interests.’… A spokesman for the Leave.EU campaign said: ‘… Cameron’s “deal” doesn’t do anything to bring powers back to Britain… Britain survived for thousands of years before the European Union, we can do so again after we vote to leave.'”

Apple RIGHTLY Resists!

Yahoo!News reported on February 17:

“The debate over encryption has reached new heights in a legal battle between Apple and the FBI. In response to a federal magistrate’s order requiring Apple to assist the agency in accessing data from a phone belonging to one of the San Bernardino shooters, the company is pushing back, pledging to challenge the request in the name of its customers’ privacy.

“CEO Tim Cook published a public response early Wednesday morning… “‘We have great respect for the professionals at the FBI, and we believe their intentions are good,’ Cook wrote in a letter to his customers. ‘Up to this point, we have done everything that is both within our power and within the law to help them. But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.’

“The 3-page court order requires Apple’s engineers to create a new iPhone operating system designed to bypass the company’s security features and install it on the iPhone 5C that belonged to Farook’s employer, the San Bernardino Department of Public Health… Despite a warrant, prosecutors argued… that, ‘The government has been unable to complete the search because it cannot access the iPhone’s encrypted content. Apple has the exclusive technical means which would assist the government in completing its search but has declined to provide that assistance voluntarily.’

“While the order applies only to Farook’s device, Cook argued that creating this new software would ultimately compromise the privacy of the ‘tens of millions of American citizens’ who use Apple devices. ‘In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession,’ he wrote. ‘The FBI may use different words to describe this tool, but make no mistake: Building a version of iOS that bypasses security in this way would undeniably create a backdoor. And while the government may argue that its use would be limited to this case, there is no way to guarantee such control.’”

The New York Times added on February 17:

“In his statement, Mr. Cook called the court order an ‘unprecedented step’ by the federal government. ‘We oppose this order, which has implications far beyond the legal case at hand,’ he wrote…

“The legal issues are complicated. They involve statutory interpretation, rather than constitutional rights, and they could end up before the Supreme Court. As Apple noted, the F.B.I., instead of asking Congress to pass legislation resolving the encryption fight, has proposed what appears to be a novel reading of the All Writs Act of 1789… In 2005, a federal magistrate judge rejected the argument that the law could be used to compel a telecommunications provider to allow real-time tracking of a cellphone without a search warrant…

“The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that defends digital rights, said it was siding with Apple. ‘The government is asking Apple to create a master key so that it can open a single phone,’ it said Tuesday evening. ‘And once that master key is created, we’re certain that our government will ask for it again and again, for other phones, and turn this power against any software or device that has the audacity to offer strong security.’…”

Also, Tim Cook wrote this in his letter to APPLE’s customers:

“When the FBI has requested data that’s in our possession, we have provided it. Apple complies with valid subpoenas and search warrants, as we have in the San Bernardino case. We have also made Apple engineers available to advise the FBI, and we’ve offered our best ideas on a number of investigative options at their disposal… But now the U.S. government has asked us for something we simply do not have, and something we consider too dangerous to create. They have asked us to build a backdoor to the iPhone.

“Specifically, the FBI wants us to make a new version of the iPhone operating system, circumventing several important security features, and install it on an iPhone recovered during the investigation. In the wrong hands, this software — which does not exist today — would have the potential to unlock any iPhone in someone’s physical possession…

“Rather than asking for legislative action through Congress, the FBI is proposing an unprecedented use of the All Writs Act of 1789 to justify an expansion of its authority… The implications of the government’s demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone’s device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone’s microphone or camera without your knowledge…”

The Washington Post wrongly opinionated on February 17 that “Apple faces an uphill fight over the Farook case in the courtroom, where law enforcement’s right to demand access to the phone data is fairly clear-cut.” But this is not addressing the case at issue. Rather, the magistrate’s order seems to be illegal on its face. It is absurd to compel a company to CREATE a new iPhone operating system designed to bypass the company’s security features. The repercussions and the security risks are grave and enormous, and those who advocate that APPLE should comply don’t seem to understand what they are saying. This does not negate the sad fact that APPLE may still lose in America’s court system, but as the New York Times suggested, it might have to be decided by the US Supreme Court. Also note the next articles.

Conservatives Attack Apple

Newsmax wrote on February 17:

“MSNBC host Joe Scarborough and other conservative voices railed Wednesday morning over Apple’s opposition to a court ruling that would help the FBI crack the San Bernardino terrorists’ iPhone passcode voluntarily, saying the company is jeopardizing the nation’s security to protect the rights of two dead killers…

“GOP front-runner Donald Trump, on Fox News’ ‘Fox & Friends’ program, also agreed that Apple needs to unlock the phone. ‘… to think that Apple won’t allow us to get into her cell phone, who do they think they are?’

“Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, also appearing on the same show, commented that national security trumps Apple’s worries about privacy. ‘I blame this to some extent on [Sens.] Rand Paul and Ted Cruz and the ridiculous hysteria they created about privacy and the government trying to take the information for improper purposes,’ said Giuliani.”

Sadly, Scarborough, Trump, Guiliani and others just don’t get it. Their expressed opinions in this matter are very dangerous.

Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter and WhatsApp Support Apple

Bloomberg wrote on February 18:

“From Google Inc. to Facebook Inc., the industry’s biggest names have rallied around Apple Inc.’s chief executive officer after he vowed to resist a court order demanding it help unlock the iPhone of a shooter in a terrorist attack… The escalation with the FBI… galvanized the company’s U.S. peers and forced them to choose between helping the government fight crime and protecting their customers’ privacy…

“Reform Government Surveillance, a group representing companies including Google, Facebook, Microsoft Corp. and Twitter Inc., issued a statement on Wednesday reiterating that, while it’s ‘extremely important’ to deter crime and terrorism, no company should be required to build backdoors to their own technology…

“Google CEO Sundar Pichai came to Cook’s defense, saying the government’s request could spur ‘a troubling precedent’ in comments echoed by WhatsApp co-founder Jan Koum…

“Google provides law enforcement access to data ‘based on valid legal orders, but that’s wholly different than requiring companies to enable hacking of customer devices and data,’ Pichai wrote in a series of tweets…

“Ultimately, the matter needs to be decided by Congress, said Robert Cattanach, a lawyer at Dorsey & Whitney who practices in areas of regulatory litigation including cybersecurity…

“Cuban, owner of the Dallas Mavericks basketball team, said there was a risk this one order against Apple could lead to many more in the future. ‘While the FBI is attempting to be very clear that this is a one off request, there is no chance that it is,’ Cuban wrote on his blog. ‘There will be many government agencies that many times in the future, point to Apple’s compliance as a precedent. Once this happens, we all roll down that slippery slope of lost privacy together.’…

“‘Silicon Valley stands with Apple,’ Bret Taylor, co-founder of Quip and former chief technology officer of Facebook and co- creator of Google Maps, posted on Twitter. Steven Sinofsky, a former senior executive at Microsoft, on Twitter called for ‘broad support from full stack of technology companies.’”

Worldwide Implications

The Guardian wrote on February 17:

“Analysts and lawmakers warn FBI that ramifications over its demand that Apple unlock San Bernardino killer’s iPhone ‘could snowball around the world’… Authoritarian governments including Russia and China will demand greater access to mobile data should Apple lose a watershed encryption case brought by the FBI, leading technology analysts, privacy experts and legislators have warned.

“Apple’s decision to resist a court order to unlock a password-protected iPhone belonging to one of the San Bernardino killers has created a worldwide privacy shockwave, with campaigners around the world expecting the struggle to carry major implications for the future of mobile and internet security. They warned that Barack Obama’s criticism of a similar Chinese measure last year now risked ringing hollow.

“Senator Ron Wyden of Oregon, a leading legislator on privacy and tech issues, warned the FBI to step back from the brink or risk setting a precedent for authoritarian countries. ‘This move by the FBI could snowball around the world. Why in the world would our government want to give repressive regimes in Russia and China a blueprint for forcing American companies to create a backdoor?’ Wyden told the Guardian. ‘Companies should comply with warrants to the extent they are able to do so, but no company should be forced to deliberately weaken its products. In the long run, the real losers will be Americans’ online safety and security.’

“Wyden, an Oregon Democrat on the Senate intelligence committee, said the FBI was using an ‘unprecedented reading of a nearly 230-year old law’ that put ‘at risk the foundations of strong security for our people and privacy in the digital age. If upheld, this decision could force US technology companies to actually build hacking tools for government against their will, while weakening cybersecurity for millions of Americans in the process,’ Wyden said.

“Should the FBI prevail, and Apple create what is functionally a custom-built version of its mobile operating system, governments around the world ‘will see this as a blank check of legitimacy’, said human rights lawyer Carly Nyst, who called the Apple showdown ‘groundbreaking’….

“US-based tech firms have long dealt with efforts by countries worldwide to undermine user security in the name of law enforcement and national security – terms that vary widely with government prerogative. China in particular has fought with Apple over the iPhone, in a struggle that echoes the FBI’s latest move. Chinese state media in 2014 labeled the iPhone a national security threat for collecting location data from users and compromising ‘state secrets’. The accusation, coming after leaks from whistleblower Edward Snowden revealed the National Security Agency had hacked Chinese tech giant Huawei, prompted Cook to defend the devices’ security features.

“‘Apple has never worked with any government agency from any country to create a backdoor in any of our products or services. We have also never allowed access to our servers. And we never will,’ Cook said at the time…”

Hitler Sent by God?

On February 14, The Times of Israel wrote the following:

“Republican presidential hopeful Ted Cruz repudiated evangelical Christian leader Mike Bickle’s statements that Adolf Hitler was a ‘hunter’ sent by God to target the Jewish people… while at the same time praising Bickle’s service and the work of his ministry…

“Bickle, the founder and director of the International House of Prayer, a Kansas City-based ministry, works actively to convert Jews to Christianity… In public sermons over the years, Bickle has focused intensely on end-times prophesies, and has predicted that Jesus will not return until Jews embrace him as their Lord and savior. He has predicted a new era of Holocaust-like conditions for Jews before the Second Coming, insisting that Jews who do not embrace Jesus will either die or be sent to prison or concentration camps.

“In a 2011 sermon, Bickle cited a passage from Jeremiah 16:16 to elucidate the attempted extermination of European Jewry. ‘The Lord says, “I’m going to give all 20 million of them the chance to respond to the fishermen. And I give them grace.’ And he says, “And if they don’t respond to grace, I’m going to raise up the hunters.” And the most famous hunter in recent history is a man named Adolf Hitler,’ he told an audience…”

Hitler was not sent by God, but by Satan. Our free booklets, “Europe in Prophecy,” and “The Ten European Revivals of the Ancient Roman Empire,” explain this fact in much detail.

Why the Republican Debate Was So Brutal

Time wrote on February 14:

“Saturday night’s gathering of the remaining GOP presidential candidates was not a debate. It was a savage roar on the road to the White House as hopefuls shouted over each other, questioned each other’s character and, in one case, even went after a candidate’s mother. The ruckus was, in many ways, overdue… But was it too late to throw up a roadblock between Donald Trump and his party’s nomination?…

“It was a furious night that found, for the first time, Trump squarely being piled on from all sides. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush excoriated his business record and foreign policy judgement, Texas Sen. Ted Cruz suggested he would appoint liberals to the Supreme Court and Florida Sen. Marco Rubio lambasted him for questioning the legacy of George W. Bush.

“Trump alternated between condescending smirks and prickly interruptions, but it was clear he was getting his first real all-against-him attack. He did not enjoy it… But Trump was hardly the only candidate who left the stage in Greenville, S.C., bloodied. The candidates are increasingly desperate to find a break-out moment—often at their peers’ expenses… Trump and Rubio ganged up to call Cruz a liar and Rubio was once again hit on his work on comprehensive immigration reform. Bush was called to defend his family’s legacy time and again…

“South Carolina has an appetite for such intra-party sparring—in fact, the state rewards it. Voters here, in the first Southern state to have a nominating contest, want a fighter for a nominee. Spurious attacks are the norm, and harsh rhetoric helps candidates fare well. Just ask Newt Gingrich, who four years ago used a fiery tone to best Mitt Romney…

“At different points, it was as if Trump were trying to lose support and goad the crowd into rowdiness. He mocked South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham, who has deep supporters in some corners. He praised Planned Parenthood [but condemned them for their abortion practices], a bogeyman among conservatives. He defended eminent domain, called George W. Bush a liar and blamed him for the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks [Actually, he said that 9/11 happened on his watch, and that he did not keep the country safe.]. He called the war in Iraq a folly [stating that there were no weapons of mass destruction, which is an undeniable fact; even George W. Bush admitted this]—while standing on a stage in a state with the heaviest concentration of veterans in America.

“It might not matter. Trump has a lead in the polls here… His crowds respond to his brazen style and in-your-face personality. Trump’s brand of personality-driven politics might be what Republicans decide they want in a nominee…

“The debate marked the realization by more of his rivals that to win the nomination, they’ll have to get past Trump…”

And that will be quite a challenge!

The Real Weakness of the Republican Party

Salon wrote on February 14:

“I’ve written before about [the] influence of Matt Drudge [editor of the “Drudge Report”] and his online poll, and it continues to help paint a picture of the political reality inside the GOP. Drudge has carefully curated the news content on his site to build a massive anti-establishment army that is much bigger than the loyal GOP establishment…

“The problem for… the Republican establishment is that there just aren’t that many of them left anymore. Their numbers have dwindled over the years as more and more longtime Republicans… have left the party…

“The all-out war inside the GOP between the establishment loyalists and Drudge’s army was on display during the debate last night, and it was loud and raucous. The loudest loyalist boos at Trump came when he stood on that stage in the traditionally pro-Bush state of South Carolina and essentially blamed the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2011 on former President George W. Bush. Bush is still very popular among GOP elites, especially there. In fact, his brother, presidential candidate Jeb Bush, will be campaigning with the former president in South Carolina this week.

“The real weakness of the GOP establishment will be measured on Saturday in the [primary in South Carolina] because it will show, in real hard numbers, just how many traditional Republicans are left. If Trump can blame 9-11 on establishment icon George W. Bush and then win the South Carolina primary, then we’ll know that the old Republican Party just doesn’t exist anymore. If that doesn’t sink his campaign, then nothing will, and he will be the GOP nominee. We’ll know for sure on Saturday, but the Drudge Poll today has given us a hint.”

GOP Stacks Debate Audience with Anti-Trump and Anti-Cruz Donors and Interest Groups

The GOP is becoming desperate in trying to do whatever they can in order to prevent Trump from becoming the Republican nominee. But their actions might backfire.

Breitbart reported on February 14:

“The chairman of the local Republican Party here confirmed to local television that 2016 frontrunner billionaire Donald Trump’s concerns—and those of his closest competitor Ted Cruz—with the Republican National Committee (RNC) allocation of debate audience tickets are well-placed.

“… more than 1000 tickets… went not to voters in the upcoming election and not to campaigns for equal distribution to their supporters but to special interest distribution of those connected to the party, mostly high dollar donors…

“Trump’s and Cruz’s concerns are even being confirmed by many across the political spectrum. In fact, even the left-of-center Huffington Post confirms that the RNC’s ticket allocation system seems to have been ‘behind’ the excessive and unwarranted booing of Trump and Cruz—and cheering of the donor class supported Rubio and Bush…

“Vox, another left-of-center outlet, ran a headline that made it even clearer: ‘The Republican establishment packed the debate audience with Donald Trump haters.’… Vox… admits that Trump’s claim on stage that the odd—and unrepresentative of the party’s voting base—audience was made up of ‘Jeb’s special interests and lobbyists’ was really not ‘that far-fetched.’”

With these questionable tactics (which are vehemently denied by the GOP), the Republican establishment is harming itself.

The Pope vs. Trump

Newsmax reported on February 18:

“Pope Francis assailed Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump’s views on U.S. immigration as ‘not Christian’ on Thursday, prompting the billionaire businessman to reprimand the religious leader as ‘disgraceful’ for questioning his faith…

“In a freewheeling conversation on his flight home from a visit to Mexico, Francis told reporters, ‘A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian.’…

“Asked if American Catholics should vote for someone with Trump’s views, Francis said, ‘I am not going to get involved in that. I say only that this man is not Christian if he has said things like that. We must see if he said things in that way and in this I give the benefit of the doubt,’ he said.

“Trump… said, ‘If and when the Vatican is attacked by ISIS, which as everyone knows is ISIS’s ultimate trophy, I can promise you that the pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been president [He added, quite inconsistently and contradictorily, that under his presidency, such an attack would not have happened.]… For a religious leader to question a person’s faith is disgraceful…  I’m a very good Christian [Trump is a Presbyterian] … I’m proud of it.’…

“Trump’s social media director… tweeted, ‘Amazing comments from the Pope – considering Vatican City is 100 percent surrounded by massive walls.’

“Trump accused the Mexican government of making disparaging remarks about him to the pope ‘because they want to continue to rip off the United States, both on trade and at the border…’  He said the pope only heard one side of the story and did not see what Trump called the crime, drug trafficking and negative economic impact Mexico’s policies had on the United States.

“Evangelical Christian leader Jerry Falwell Jr, who has endorsed Trump and spent time with the candidate on his private plane, described him as generous to his employees and family, adding, ‘I’m convinced he’s a Christian. I believe he has faith in Jesus Christ.’”

The Bible prophesies that the relationship between the Church of Rome and the USA will deteriorate dramatically.

German Minister Blasts Jeb Bush’s America

The Local wrote on February 17:

“After US presidential candidate Jeb Bush tweeted an image that seemed to equate the American Dream with gun ownership, Germany’s Justice Minister struck back with his own image of the USA. Jeb Bush’s tweet simply read ‘America’ and included a photo of the former Florida governor’s personal sidearm, engraved with his name and his office.

“Supporters showered the tweet with likes – reaching almost 19,000 by late morning on Wednesday. But the tweet also turned into a snowballing Twitter row, provoking mass outrage and an outpouring of parody.

“German Justice Minister Heiko Maas apparently couldn’t resist getting involved in the mess, copying Jeb’s tweet but replacing the pistol with the Bill of Rights. It looks like an attempt to show that Germans value America’s long history of constitutional democracy more than the nation’s – to Europeans – puzzling attachment to machines that put small pieces of metal into other people very fast.”

Indeed, most Europeans have a hard time understanding America’s insane fascination with guns. More importantly, God does not approve of it, either.

Jeb Bush Comes Under More Fire 

JTA wrote on February 17:

“Republican presidential candidate Jeb Bush tweeted an image of a gun manufactured by a U.S. company with a parent European firm that made firearms for Nazi troops… The image was retweeted over 22,400 times and prompted widespread commentary, mostly negative, across the Internet.

“FN America is owned by FN Herstal, a Belgium-based corporation… During the German occupation of Belgium in World War II, the Nazi military requisitioned the company…  to produce thousands of its weapons, including the pistols carried by Nazi officers and pilots.

“In addition… FN Herstal’s Five-Seven model gun is a popular weapon used by Mexican drug cartel leaders.”

Conservative Justice Antonin Scalia Dies… and Leaves Behind Another Fight…

Thomson/Reuters wrote on February 14:

“Republican lawmakers and presidential candidates hardened their positions on Sunday on blocking a move by President Barack Obama to replace the late conservative Justice Antonin Scalia on the Supreme Court, a lifetime appointment that would help decide some of the most divisive issues facing Americans. The next justice would tilt the balance of the nation’s highest court, which now consists of four conservatives and four liberals. The vacancy left by the death of Scalia, 79, quickly became an issue in the 2016 presidential race.

“The nine-justice court is set to decide its first major abortion case in nearly 10 years, as well as cases on voting rights, affirmative action and immigration. Cruz said the vacancy makes November’s election even more critical, warning that a justice chosen by Democratic candidates Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders would mean the Second Amendment right to bear arms would be ‘written out’ of the Constitution and abortion on demand would become the law of the land…

“Democrat Obama said on Saturday that he would nominate someone to fill the now-empty seat, setting up a battle with the Republican-controlled Senate, which must approve any nominee. Senate Republican leader Mitch McConnell said hours after Scalia’s death was announced that the high court vacancy should not be filled until Obama’s successor takes office next January so that voters can have a say in the selection. His Democratic counterpart, Harry Reid, said failure by the Senate to act would be a ‘shameful abdication’ of the chamber’s constitutional responsibilities…

“Trump, appearing on NBC, was [very] direct when asked what he would want in a nominee: ‘Someone just like Justice Scalia.’”

Conspiracy theories abound that Scalia’s death was not natural. What is puzzling is that no autopsy was ordered, even though state law seemed to have required one in this case, according to an article by Infowars, dated February 17, claiming that “By not performing an autopsy on late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, Presidio Co. Judge Cinderela Guevara likely violated state law,” adding, “The question now is, will Texas Gov. Greg Abbott call for an investigation into what’s likely illegal behavior by a county judge?”

Russia To Send Iran Fighter Jets in Violation of UN Resolution

Fox News reported on February 17:

“Russia announced Wednesday it will sign a contract to supply a batch of fighter jets to Iran in violation of a U.N. ban… A U.N. resolution passed on July 20, just days after the landmark nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers, including the U.S., forbids Iran from making conventional arms sales for the next five years.

“The resolution specifically bans the sale of ‘battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, large-caliber artillery systems, combat aircraft, attack helicopters, [and] warships…’ from being purchased by Iran without prior approval from the U.N.

“The deal, if carried out, would represent Iran’s latest violation of a U.N. Security Council resolution…  Iran carried out a medium range ballistic missile test on Nov. 21 from a known missile test site along the Gulf of Oman. The test led to strong condemnation from members of the U.N. Security Council.

“The controversial agreement to supply the Islamic Republic with Sukhoi Su-30SM multi-role fighter jets comes one day after the Iranian Defense Minister Hossein Dehqan met in Moscow with Russian President Vladimir Putin… Dehqan is accused of orchestrating the 1983 terror bombing that killed 220 U.S. Marines and 21 other service members in Beirut, Lebanon.”

Iran and Saudi Arabia Opposed to Valentine’s Day

The Associated Press wrote on February 12:

“Iranian news outlets reported the police directive Friday warning retailers against promoting ‘decadent Western culture through Valentine’s Day rituals.’ Police informed Tehran’s coffee and ice cream shops trade union to avoid any gatherings in which boys and girls exchange Valentine’s Day gifts.

“The annual Feb. 14 homage to romance… has become popular in recent years in Iran and other Middle East countries. The backlash in the Islamic Republic is part of a drive against the spread of Western culture. Saudi Arabia has also sought to stamp out Valentine’s Day but it’s celebrated widely in nearby places like Dubai.”

Iran, Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries oppose Valentine’s Day, which is in fact a pagan celebration. However, Muslim opposition is not based on biblical and godly concerns.

The CURSE of California’s Mandatory Vaccination Law

On February 11, the website of ptreyeslight.com published the following article by Dr. Michelle Veneziano, a family practice physician:

“The medical community acknowledges that vaccines are not 100 percent safe for everyone. A public dialogue that shares relevant, unbiased research is critical. When I began to look into vaccine safety, I discovered many studies that questioned their safety; I also found that these studies are not easily located in the medical literature. I discovered evidence that industry’s reach has run deep into trusted public health agencies, such as the Centers for Disease Control.

“As I looked further, I discovered that tragic accounts of severe vaccine injury, usually thought to be rare, are in fact all too common. I discovered a host of peer-reviewed, non-industry-funded studies that illustrate that vaccines and the way we administer them pose very serious short and long-term health impacts, and not just to a marginal number of children…

“My work on this issue is not funded. The pharmaceutical industry, on the other hand, has many billions of dollars at stake. And its influence on the medical community is evident. The New York Times published a story that Harvard earned the grade of ‘F’ for rampant conflict of interest within its own medical school. Even Richard Horton, editor of the prestigious medical journal The Lancet wrote last year that ‘much of the scientific literature may simply be untrue.’…

“Skepticism among all physicians is rising more quickly, perhaps in part due to the mandating of the hepatitis B vaccine. The Hep-B virus is transmitted through blood, most commonly through the use of needles or through sexual contact. This vaccine contains aluminum, a known neurotoxin, and formaldehyde, a known carcinogen. Yet it is recommended on the first day of life and is now required for children to attend preschool. Common sense and science cannot support this practice…

“The United States ranks 49th in the developed world in health. According to non-industry-funded research, the chemical accumulation in our bodies from vaccines and other sources could be said to be claiming more lives than infectious diseases ever have or ever will. Vaccine preservatives and adjuvants are associated with cancers and other immuno-compromised states.

“Data connects aluminum in vaccines to Alzheimer’s and sudden infant death syndrome. We have the highest vaccination rate and the highest infant mortality rate in the developed world.  And the state with the highest vaccination rate also has the highest infant mortality rate.

“There are thousands of reports of a single vaccine causing devastating injury… Yet the C.D.C. still says it is permissible for babies to receive up to 13 vaccines at either their 12-month or 15-month checkups.

“If children were to receive all the recommended vaccines, they would be dosed 70 times before high school, compared to 22 times in 1983. All the while, rates of chronic illness are rising dramatically… Efforts are underway to author a new bill that could delay the implementation of Senate Bill 277 until a much-needed review and public discussion can take place…”

Let us pray that this ridiculous and DANGEROUS mandatory California vaccination law will be rescinded.

In the last installment, we discussed the meaning of Paul’s statement in Romans 6:14-15 that we are “not under law.” In this installment, we will discuss the remainder of his statement, that we are now “under grace,” and we will also show why that this fact may abolish sin’s “dominion” over our lives.

1 Corinthians 15:54-57 tells us that death will be swallowed up in victory when we become immortal spirit beings (unable to die anymore), exclaiming: “O Death, where is your sting?… The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law.” When we sin (by transgressing the law), then we bring the death penalty upon us. But Paul continues: “But thanks to God, who gives us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Notice: God GIVES us the victory. The Bible tells us that we can find mercy, forgiveness, protection and help from God. We can be placed under God’s grace, rather than living “under the penalty of the law.”

God, through Jesus Christ, is offering us His grace, so that we can be freed from the law’s death penalty. When we accept God’s grace, then we are UNDER His grace. We can be under God’s protection.

Jesus uses a similar analogy when He states in Matthew 23:37: “O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, the one who kills the prophets and stones those who are sent to her! How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under (Greek: “hupo”) her wings, but you were not willing.”

We must be willing to come under Christ’s wings. You must be willing to “humble yourselves under (Greek: “hupo”) the mighty hand of God, that He may exalt you in due time, casting all your care upon him, for He cares for you” (1 Peter 5:6-7).

The use of the Greek word “hupo”, in English “under,” is important. We are no longer “under” the law—it’s death penalty—but “under” grace. Since God is willing to give us protection by, symbolically speaking, gathering us “under” His wings, and as we are to humble ourselves “under” the mighty hand of God, we can come “under” God’s grace; that is, under God’s protection and authority. In Matthew 8:9, a Roman centurion states that he is “a man under (Greek, “hupo”) authority, having soldiers under (Greek, “hupo”)” him (compare also Luke 7:8). In the same way, we are “under” God’s grace, coming “under” and putting our trust “under” the shadow of His wings (compare Psalm 17:8; 36:7).

We are still using similar terminology today when we want to express the thought that someone is under authority of someone or something else. We speak of someone who is “under the influence” of alcohol; or that someone is placed “under observation.”

What, then, is meant in detail that we are to live “under grace”?

Simply put, God’s grace is God’s unmerited favor. It is the gift of God. It includes manifold facets of God’s undeserved pardon and forgiveness, His mercy and His compassion, and more.

The Greek word for “grace,” “charis,” can mean benefit, favor and gift. The Greek word “charisma” is derived from the word, “charis.”

God’s grace is a gift, and it includes forgiveness of our sins and thereby the removal of the death penalty. We were freely justified by God’s grace—in that God forgave us our sins, following our repentance and belief in Christ’s Sacrifice (Romans 3:23-24).

Paul makes clear that we cannot justify ourselves. When we sin, we incur the death penalty, which needs to be forgiven. The law–any law, whether ritual or spiritual–

cannot forgive our sins or justify us. We read in Galatians 5:4: “You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.”

Titus 3:7 confirms that we are justified by grace, adding this: “… having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life.”

When and as long as we are under grace, and not under the law’s death penalty, then we have the promise of eternal life (Romans 6:23: “the GIFT of God is eternal life”)—something which is promised to us by grace. (1 Peter 3:7 speaks of the “grace of life.”)

We need to realize what all is included in the concept that we are under grace. First of all, grace is a GIFT which is FREELY given to us. We cannot earn it—nothing that we do “entitles” us to receive God’s gift of His grace (Romans 5:15; 1 Corinthians 1:4; Ephesians 3:7).

We read that God calls us to salvation through His grace (Galatians 1:15). It is a gift from God that we even CAN come to Him. We read in John 6:44 that we cannot come to God unless God draws us to Him (and John 6:65 says that this must be “granted” to us). And Romans 2:4 adds that repentance is a gift from God as well.

We read that we believe through grace (Acts 18:27). It is a gift from God that we even CAN believe.

We read that it is through the grace of God that we have been and can be saved (Acts 15:11; compare Ephesians 2:8).

None of this does away with the need to keep God’s law.

Paul asks the question in Romans 6:1, whether we should continue in sin after we have obtained God’s grace of forgiveness. His conclusion is: Absolutely not. He says that we were once slaves of sin, but that we now have become slaves of righteousness. If we were to continue in the practice of sinful conduct, we would have received God’s grace in vain.

Paul warns in Hebrews 12:15 that we must be diligent not to miss out on God’s grace. In Jude 4, we read of evil ungodly persons who turn the grace of God into lasciviousness, thereby denying Christ.

In Ephesians 6:24 we read that God’s grace will be given to all those who love Jesus Christ in sincerity, and Christ told us that we love Him if we keep His words and commandments (John 14:15, 23).

Grace is not limited to the past. Rather, it is through grace that we can serve God now. Hebrews 12:28 says: “Therefore, since we are receiving a kingdom which cannot be shaken, let us have grace, BY WHICH we may serve God acceptably with reverence and godly fear.” We are to be “strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus” (2 Timothy 2:1).

It is through grace that God gives us His Holy Spirit, and that is why we are warned not to insult “the Spirit of grace” (Hebrews 10:29).

Grace includes more than forgiveness of past sins. Otherwise, sin would again rule over us the minute we fall for its evil devices. And we oftentimes do. When we do, we can again obtain forgiveness after true repentance and belief in Christ’s Sacrifice, and God cleanses us from all unrighteousness (1 John 1:8-9). But grace is no license to sin. God expects of us to become more and more perfect… to live more and more without sin.

However, as we saw, we cannot keep God’s law or be obedient to God, just on our own strength. We need God’s grace to be able to accomplish this.

And so, grace is not only the favor of forgiveness of past sins, but it also includes the strength and power to overcome sin now and in the future and to live more and more righteously. And this is an all-important reason WHY sin will have no more dominion over us, as we read in Romans 6:14-15.

In Titus 2:11-12, we read that God’s grace that brings salvation has appeared to all men, teaching us that we are to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and that we must instead live soberly, righteously and godly in this present evil world. The German Luther Bible is even clearer, emphasizing that it is the grace of God, which helps and motivates us to forsake ungodliness and to embrace a righteous and godly life.

The Life Application Bible has the following annotation: “If we’re no longer under the law but under grace, are we now free to sin and disregard the Ten Commandments? Paul says, ‘By no means.’ … the law does not justify us or help us to overcome sin. But now that we are bound to Christ, he is our Master, and he gives us power to do good rather than evil.”

Romans 5:8-10 adds that we were justified and reconciled to God through Christ’s death, but that we will be saved by His life. It is Christ’s life in us that continues to justify us and that saves us.

When we are under grace, we receive justification for our sins when we repent of them and believe in Christ’s Sacrifice. We become justified through faith. We must believe in Christ, but we must also have the faith OF Christ in us (Galatians 2:16, Authorized Version), which is given to us through the Holy Spirit. Christ must be living in us. It is HIS faith which continually justifies us.

In addition, we receive power and strength to become more and more righteous. God’s righteousness, which we are to seek (Matthew 6:33), is also God’s gift, as is God’s grace (Romans 5:17). In other words, God gives us His righteousness through His grace. He offers it to us, but we must accept it. When we let God live in us and guide us through the power of the Holy Spirit in us, then we will become more and more righteous.

We can only keep the righteous requirements of the law, IF Christ lives in us through the Holy Spirit, and IF we follow Christ’s lead. Christ must keep the law in and through us (Romans 8:3-4). He condemned sin in His flesh—and we must allow Him to condemn sin today in our flesh.

Rather than abolishing law through grace, it is God’s grace which cleanses us from sin and which enables us to become more and more righteous by obeying the law. We are under grace—including its power to overcome sin—thereby abolishing sin’s dominion over us.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

A new Member Letter (February 16, 2016) has been written and mailed to our subscribers. In this letter, Norbert Link addresses the looming trouble the world faces as events grow more difficult in the year ahead. Mr. Link also warns of the danger of compromises and that the Church of God must continue to powerfully preach the gospel message—as a witness and warning to the entire world!

Rundschreiben vom 16. February 2016, is our new German “Rundschreiben,” (Member Letter), which was sent out via email to about 130 recipients. The first part contains much information about services and activities during Passover and Days of Unleavened Bread, as well as comments for potential baptisms, and the second part is a German translation of the English February member letter.

“Why Would Apple Resist the FBI?” is the title of the newest StandingWatch program presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

Is Apple hundred percent wrong, as Donald Trump said, for not cooperating with the FBI in the fight against terrorism and for not obeying a court order compelling Apple to turn over electronic data?  But does this narrative reflect the issue at hand? We need to understand what Apple’s concerns are; what the federal magistrate actually ordered Apple to do; why the industry’s biggest names, including Google, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter, WhatsApp and others, are supporting Apple; and why there are worldwide security concerns if Apple were to lose this fight.

“Wir sind unter der Gnade,” is the title of this week’s German sermon. Title in English: “We Are Under Grace.”

“SW Talking Points: Baptism — A Requirement for Salvation?” is a new video presented by Pastor Rene Messier. Here is a summary:

Is baptism necessary for salvation? Should you be baptized?  What is acceptable to God: immersion, watering ,sprinkling?  Some think it’s not necessary for salvation. Our booklet on Baptism covers all these details about what truly is acceptable to God.

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

Our relationship to the Father and Jesus Christ depends on staying close to them—otherwise, we fail!

“Inside Out,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Dave Harris, is now posted. Here is a summary:

Christians are challenged to examine themselves as to whether or not their Christianity is true! This testing will not succeed if it is only superficial. The vital key for us is to have God’s help in the process.