On July 28, 2018, Robb Harris will present the sermonette, titled, “Caught in the Truth?” and Dave Harris will present the sermon, titled, “Fight Deception!”

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.

Christ talked about two types of servants in the New Testament. We are familiar with His words which we would all like to hear at His return: “Well done, good and faithful servant; you have been faithful over a few things, I will make you ruler over many things. Enter into the joy of your lord” (Matthew 25:23).

This is an awesome statement, pointing to our future reward for being faithful, ruling in the Kingdom on the earth in the Millennium (Revelation 5:10).

“Well done” is music to our ears if we were told this by our manager or supervisor at work since it would signify that we not only did a good job but that the boss is very pleased with the work we performed. Hearing a compliment like this inspires us to continue to do good and even make attempts to excel in the tasks we have been given to do.

Notice the word “good.” If something is good then it is not bad. The fact that Christ said the servant was good is a very positive thing. It is much more than a manager or supervisor telling us, “good job,” which implies a job well done, bringing a swelling of joy to the hearers of such a nice compliment. Here, Christ is calling the servant “good”—not just the work which he did.

Notice the word “faithful.” If that isn’t also music to our ears, I don’t know what would be. Being called faithful means we did what was required of us. We towed the line, we endured, we did not throw in the towel even in the face of trials and adversity. We kept the faith. We were engaged in the commission of warning the world of impending doom in the near future; of preaching hope at the end of the trials coming on mankind; of proclaiming the future for those faithful servants and the promise of the resurrection and potential for all as God’s plan is rolled out; of getting the gospel—the good news—out to the world. All these aspects are encompassed in the word “faithful,” as applied to the servants of God.

Notice the word “servant.” We are not slaves or servants of Satan but rather slaves or servants of the living God, with the potential of becoming God.

This statement of how Christ is pleased with our performance should inspire us to complete the task we have been given.

Here is the other side of the coin.

Matthew 25:26-30 says:  “But his lord answered and said to him, ‘You wicked and lazy servant, you knew that I reap where I have not sown, and gather where I have not scattered seed.  So you ought to have deposited my money with the bankers, and at my coming I would have received back my own with interest. Therefore take the talent from him, and give it to him who has ten talents. For to everyone who has, more will be given, and he will have abundance; but from him who does not have, even what he has will be taken away. And cast the unprofitable servant into the outer darkness. There will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’”

Notice the word “wicked.” This is not exactly what we would like to hear from someone above us. Wicked also means malicious and derelict, implying we failed to do the will and desires of what Christ expected of us.

Notice the word “lazy.” This is hardly a recommendation if we are looking for a job. Lazy implies neglect to do what was required of us; in other words, a miserable failure.

The unprofitable servant did nothing with his talent, not even putting it in a bank to draw interest, but he buried it. What was his reward? He lost the talent that he had been given. And he was cast into outer darkness. This is probably not what he expected, but he was a total let-down to what Christ expected of him.

So the question is this: what type of servant are you and do you want to be?

by Norbert Link

We begin with addressing the ongoing Brexit negotiations; the growing influence of China and the EU on the political and technological world scene; the fear of an escalating trade war and its devastating effect for the entire world economy, including the USA; and Steve Bannon’s planned attack on the EU.

We also report on the revelation that Messrs. Trump and Putin discussed Ukraine during their private meeting in Helsinki; and that due to the resignation of a German national soccer player with Turkish roots, an explosive “discussion” on racism and immigrant integration in Germany has evolved.

We focus on Turkey’s economic troubles and the war of words between Turkey and the USA and Israel; and address Israel’s military actions against Syria and the return of radical Islamic State.

We speak on the previous destructions of the Jewish Temples in Jerusalem (in this regard, please view our new StandingWatch program, “Ancient and Modern Beliefs in the Third Temple,” ); the Catholic Church’s attacks on American TV Evangelists; and another vaccine scandal in China.

We conclude with the unprecedented heat wave and the destruction through wildfires in many countries and an article wondering whether dinosaurs could have lived together with modern man.

Throughout this section, we have underlined pertinent statements in the quoted articles, for the convenience and quick overview of the reader.

Brits Oppose May’s Plan as to HOW to Leave the EU

Reuters wrote on July 22:

“Prime Minister Theresa May’s plans to leave the European Union are overwhelmingly opposed by the British public… May’s political vulnerability was exposed by the survey which found voters would prefer Boris Johnson, who quit as her foreign minister two weeks ago, to negotiate with the EU and lead the Conservative Party into the next election.

“Only 16 percent of voters say May is handling the Brexit negotiations well, compared with 34 percent who say that Johnson would do a better job… With a little more than eight months to go before Britain is due to leave the EU on March 29, 2019, May’s government, parliament, the public and businesses remain deeply divided over what form Brexit should take. May’s plans to keep a close trading relationship with the EU on goods thrust her government into crisis this month… Only one in 10 voters would pick the government’s proposed Brexit plans if there were a second referendum… Almost half think it would be bad for Britain.

“The new Brexit minister Dominic Raab… refused to deny reports the government is planning to stockpile food or use a section of motorway in England as a lorry park to deal with increased border checks if Britain leaves the EU without a deal…

“Thirty-eight percent of people would vote for a new right-wing party that is committed to Brexit, while almost a quarter would support an explicitly far-right anti-immigrant, anti-Islam party… Brexit campaigner Nigel Farage and U.S. President Donald Trump’s former adviser Steve Bannon are in discussions about forming a new right-wing movement…”

Regarding Steve Bannon’s controversial plans, notice articles below.

The Blame Game Has Begun…

EUObserver wrote on July 23:

“Britain’s new foreign secretary Jeremy Hunt warned on Monday in Berlin that there is a clear risk of the UK leaving the EU next March without a deal and that the bloc will be blamed for it by stalling the talks – as the blame-game starts for a possible ‘no-deal’ scenario.

“Speaking on his first trip after being appointed following the resignation of Boris Johnson earlier in July, Hunt told his German counterpart, Heiko Maas, that ‘there is now a very [real] threat of a Brexit no deal accident, and this is because many in the EU are thinking that they just have to wait long enough and Britain will blink.’”

EU and China Take Control of Internet

Politico wrote on July 19:

“The United States is losing ground as the internet’s standard-bearer in the face of aggressive European privacy standards and China’s draconian vision for a tightly controlled web. The weakening of the American position comes after years of U.S. lawmakers and presidents, including both Donald Trump and Barack Obama, backing the tech industry’s aversion to new regulations. The EU has stepped in to fill part of that gap, setting privacy standards that companies like Facebook and Google must follow.

“At the same time, China is dictating companies’ security practices and demanding to see their products’ source code — developments that experts say will undermine global cybersecurity. And while the global tech industry is adapting to these new realities, no one in the Trump administration has devised a clear plan to rebut either of these agendas.

“The result: Beijing and Brussels are effectively writing the rules that may determine the future of the global internet…

“The implications extend beyond pure cybersecurity issues. China’s law raises concerns about internet freedom, censorship and surveillance…”

What a U.S.-China/EU Trade War Could Do to the Global Economy 

Market Watch wrote on July 23:

“… neither Washington nor Beijing are set to back down, opening the door to a tit-for-tat spiral. On the U.S. side, the Trump administration appears to be abiding by the president’s assertion that trade wars are ‘easy’ to win… China… sees its technology and industrial policies as non-negotiable and doesn’t want to be seen as being bullied by the U.S…

“… signs of momentum for the U.S. economy are encouraging Trump to push hard on trade… the U.S. economy isn’t geared to produce the types of goods currently imported from China… For China, the tensions come as trade is already slowing… The U.S.-China trade war could escalate quickly, ultimately affecting over $600 billion in trade…”

Handelsblatt Global wrote on July 24:

“Last week brought a foretaste of the stock market turmoil that could be looming… Shares in aluminum giant Alcoa [in Pittsburgh] tumbled by 16 percent on Wall Street on Thursday and Friday after the increased price of metal imports forced it to issue a profit warning… many analysts are warning that many more companies could follow suit. ‘A trade war would be a worst-case scenario, especially for stock markets on both sides of the Atlantic,’ said the chief economist of German bank IKB, Klaus Bauknecht.

“Right now, that is where Mr. Trump is heading. He told CNBC last Friday he was prepared to impose tariffs on up to half a trillion dollars-worth of Chinese goods. He’s repeatedly threatened to impose duties on car imports from Europe, on top of tariffs on steel and aluminum. The EU, which has already taken steps to curb steel imports, said it would retaliate further if necessary… Michael Cembalest, the chief strategist at JP Morgan, said that if Mr. Trump carries out his threats, the US would be imposing the biggest tariff hikes since the 1930s…

“Analysts at UBS said US and European stock markets stand to lose at least 20 percent in a trade war… US consumers are currently buying foreign goods by the bucket loads: America’s gigantic trade deficit reached an all-time high of $566 billion in 2017… The price of washing machines has jumped by 20 percent since March because of new US tariffs…”

Trump Offers $12 Billion in Aid to Farmers Hurt by Tariffs

The Week wrote on July 24:

“The Department of Agriculture on Tuesday announced $12 billion in emergency aid to farmers who have been negatively impacted by President Trump’s escalating trade war. The plan comes as retaliatory tariffs from China and other countries have slashed profits for farmers who grow soybeans, rice, beef, pork, and other products. Farm groups have criticized Trump for implementing tariffs, saying the fallout could cost them billions of dollars.

“The Agriculture Department plans to fund the bailout with direct assistance, trade promotion, and a food purchase and distribution program… Trump on Tuesday said that his tariffs are the ‘greatest.’”

He also said that American citizens ought to be “patient,” as the great positive effect for the USA regarding his tariffs on foreign countries would materialize in time.

Newsmax added on July 24:

“Some farm-state Republicans… quickly dismissed the Trump farm plan, declaring that farmers want markets for their crops, not payoffs for lost sales and lower prices… With congressional elections coming soon, the government action underscored administration concern about damage to U.S. farmers from Trump’s trade tariffs and the potential for losing House and Senate seats in the Midwest and elsewhere.

“The administration said the program was just temporary. ‘This is a short-term solution that will give President Trump and his administration the time to work on long-term trade deals,’ said Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue as administration officials argued that the plan was not a ‘bailout’ of the nation’s farmers. But that provided little solace to rank-and-file Republicans, who said the tariffs are simply taxes and warned the action would open a Pandora’s box for other sectors of the economy.”

EU vs. USA

Express wrote on July 24:

“European Commission President Mr Juncker travels to Washington in the hope he can put an end to a feud with the US President, a meeting that has been in the making since the pair exchanged views at the G7 summit in Quebec, Canada. During their last encounter, Mr Trump branded the EU’s most senior official a ‘brutal killer’ and has since branded the EU a ‘foe’, citing their trading strategy as the reason for his wariness of the Brussels bloc.

“Despite hoping for Mr Juncker to end the US-EU trade dispute, [Dieter Kempf, president of the Federation of German industry] believes Brussels should use its position in the world and ‘not allow itself to be blackmailed’. The German business chief is keen to stress the importance of his country’s automotive industry for US jobs… Berlin’s automotive industry employs more than 118,000 people in the US with 60 percent of its production in the States being exported to other countries…”

President Trump stated in a speech to veterans on July 24 that the Europeans (represented by President Juncker) were coming to the White House to beg him to change his mind on imposing further tariffs, including on German cars like Mercedes and BMW, but that he won’t do so. If this will be the end result of the discussions for now, then the EU has already announced that they will retaliate with heavy tariffs worth 20 billion dollars on US products, which, if enacted, would result in terrible economic consequences for all countries and citizens involved.

The Washington Post wrote on July 25:

“Several of President Trump’s senior economic advisers believe he plans to push forward with 25 percent tariffs on close to $200 billion in foreign-made automobiles later this year… despite numerous warnings from GOP leaders and business executives who have argued that such a move could damage the economy and lead to political mutiny. But Trump has become increasingly defiant in his trade strategy, following his own instincts and intuition and eschewing advice from his inner circle. He has told advisers and Republicans to simply trust his business acumen, a point he tried to reinforce Wednesday morning in a Twitter post: ‘Every time I see a weak politician asking to stop Trade talks or the use of Tariffs to counter unfair Tariffs, I wonder, what can they be thinking… Are we just going to continue and let our farmers and country get ripped off?’”

Subsequently, as the following articles point out, Junker and Trump agreed that they would work on reducing the trade tensions between the two power blocs. Many concluded that the concerns raised in the articles above are therefore no longer valid. But is this a correct assessment of the situation?

“Deal” Reached Between Trump and Juncker… How Good Is It?

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 25:

“US President Donald Trump and European Commission President Jean-Claude Junker met at the White House on Wednesday, where they announced that the US and the European Union would work to reduce trade tensions that have arisen over the past few months out of Trump’s confrontational trade policy. The meeting comes after weeks of acrimony between the US and EU — which account for 50 percent of global trade — as both sides slapped tariffs on one another.

“In an unexpected press announcement in the Rose Garden, Trump and Juncker laid out the major goals that they had agreed upon in their meeting:

“The US and the EU would work towards ‘zero tariffs, zero non-tariff barriers, and zero subsidies on non-auto industrial goods,’ Trump said. The EU would buy significant amounts of liquid natural gas from the US to help diversify the bloc’s energy sources, as well as increase its imports of US-grown soybeans. Both sides will hold off from imposing any further tariffs, and the EU will reassess existing tariffs on US steel and aluminum as long as trade talks remain ongoing…

“Trump said that the US and the EU had launched ‘a new phase of close friendship and strong trade relations in which both of us will win.’… If trade barriers between the US and the EU are eventually reduced following future talks, the result would be a significant U-turn from the US president’s protectionist policies towards Europe…

“While both he and Juncker said no new tariffs would be imposed as long as trade talks remained ongoing, it was unclear whether or not Trump had backed away from eventually slapping import fees on foreign cars, given the ‘non-auto industrial goods’ exception he pointed out…

“Juncker’s willingness to reform the WTO with Trump lines up the EU with the US against China…”

Much of the conservative US press hailed the “deal” as a victory for Donald Trump. The article in Deutsche Welle, quoted above, hailed it as a success for the EU. However, reviewing the “terms” of the deal, there were very few substantive provisions which were “agreed” upon. The new era of “close friendship” might be short-lived. Note the next article.

“Deal” Could Fall Apart on a Moment’s Notice

The Washington Post wrote on July 25:

“Trump did not definitively agree to suspend steel and aluminum tariffs against E.U. countries… There was not a specific agreement on existing tariffs on automobiles, which had been Trump’s primary source of frustration with European leaders since at least last year. And while Juncker is an important figure in European politics, any final deal must be seen as acceptable to a range of leaders of E.U. nations, any one of whom could issue a statement that offends Trump and upends the entire process…

“The White House has touted half-step trade agreements before, only to see them crumble and lead to increased acrimony. In May, Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin returned from a trip to Beijing and said that the trade war with China had been put on hold and that both sides had agreed to halt new tariffs. The detente lasted only days before talks broke down, leading to an escalation of protectionist trade measures by the world’s two largest economies…

“Before Trump could impose tariffs on auto imports, the Commerce Department would have to issue a finding that they pose a national security threat. Several Republican lawmakers have said such a finding would be laughable, but the Commerce Department has flexibility to make a determination on its own… Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said Wednesday evening that his investigation into auto imports remained ongoing despite the White House agreement, a sign that tensions between Trump and European leaders could reignite on a moment’s notice…”

In addition, as recent events have shown, nobody seems to be able to recall exactly after a while as to what actually was “agreed” upon.

“Germany Reacts to Juncker-Trump Trade Deal with Cautious Relief”

Deutsche Welle reported on July 26:

“German politicians and business leaders reacted with relief, surprise, and some skepticism…

“German Economy Minister Peter Altmaier was among the first to express his approval, tweeting that the new deal would ‘avoid trade war & save millions of jobs!’ Foreign Minister Heiko Maas also took to Twitter to declare Juncker’s negotiations a triumph for European solidarity… The optimism was echoed through Angela Merkel’s official channel’s, with the chancellor’s deputy spokeswoman Ulrike Demmer saying that the government welcomed the agreement, and that the ‘EU Commission could continue to rely on our support.’…

“But Germany’s business chiefs were a little more cautious. ‘The solutions that have been presented are moving in the right direction, but a proper portion of skepticism remains,’ said Eric Schweitzer, president of the Association of German Chambers of Commerce and Industry (DIHK). ‘We’re still some distance away from equal negotiations. The unjustified car tariffs are not completely off the table.’

“Dieter Kempf, the president of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), made similar noises, telling the DPA news agency: ‘The spiral of tariffs in transatlantic trade has been stopped for now. Now these words have to be followed with actions.’

“Holger Schmieding, chief economist at the Berenberg Bank, offered perhaps the pithiest comment: ‘It’s not a proper deal, but it’s a step away from the abyss.’

“Meanwhile, opposition political parties pointed out that Trump had developed a reputation for reversing his decisions, or even denying his own statements. Alexander Graf Lambsdorff, deputy leader of the business-friendly Free Democratic Party (FDP), would only say that ‘it remains to be seen,’ whether the agreement would be work out. The US president ‘has often shown himself to be unpredictable,’ he told DW…

“Katharina Dröge, trade policy spokeswoman for the Green party, also argued that the deal included unpleasant concessions to the US, which, she said, contains ‘the most problematic parts’ of the old free trade agreement TTIP. ‘So the EU has entered into a game on Trump’s terms. Juncker hasn’t produced a solution, just medium-term conflicts within the EU,’ she told DW.

“Other politicians were more scathing. The Social Democratic Party (SPD) EU trade specialist Bernd Lange said bluntly, ‘That wasn’t a success, what Mr Juncker negotiated over there.’ Speaking to public radio station Deutschlandfunk, Lange said Juncker had barely won any gains from Trump, and criticized the fact that US steel and aluminum tariffs were still in place.”

Steve Bannon Plans to Attack the EU

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 23:

“Steve Bannon plans to build a right-wing populist think tank in Europe. German lawmakers called the plans by the former adviser to the US president to influence the 2019 European elections ‘a frontal attack on the EU’…

“Bannon has become a controversial figure, known for his ties to the campaigns for the UK to leave the European Union and the election of US President Donald Trump…

“Bannon has worked with many of Europe’s far-right parties, including the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the only party in the country to express optimism over Bannon’s project. Although the AfD has declined help from Bannon’s foundation for its electoral campaigns, party co-chair Alice Weidel recently sought his advice when both were in Switzerland in March for a conference. Weidel described Bannon’s strategy as ‘exciting and ambitious.’”

Politico added on July 25:

“Out of favor at the White House and out of a job at Breitbart, U.S. President Donald Trump’s former chief strategist Steve Bannon is looking for new paying clients by making waves in Europe… at its root, this Bannon bombshell is a threat to European democracy… It should come as no surprise that he was invited to the fray by the French far-right leader Marine Le Pen, whose National Rally party has been bankrolled by Russian loans…

“Bannon believes he can bring U.S. dollars to Brussels, exploit issues like migration and manipulate social media algorithms to determine the election outcome. His goal is to create a far-right super-bloc that would bring together parties with a xenophobic, anti-EU and authoritarian bent, from Italy to Poland. He’s declared that they should wear accusations of racism ‘like a medal.’…

“We can’t know if Bannon’s latest desperate gasp for relevancy poses a real threat, or if this is another grand delusion. Breitbart failed to make inroads into Europe… But we do know that the EU can’t afford to sleep-walk into another political crisis and that the European Parliament has a key role to play…”

Most Germans Feel They Don’t Need the USA

Handelsblatt Global reported on July 23:

“Fifty-six percent of Germans said Europe can guarantee its own safety without US support, according to a survey [by RTL].”

Putin and Trump Discussed Ukraine in Secret

Bild Online wrote on July 20:

“Putin proposed a referendum in Eastern Ukraine – currently occupied by pro-Russian forces – to Trump. Two NATO sources who are familiar with the issue have confirmed this on Friday. Previously, only ‘Bloomberg,’ referring to Russian diplomats, had reported that Putin had proposed such a deal… US Ambassador to Moscow, Jon Huntsman, has informed several NATO ambassadors about the Russian President’s suggestion. This allegedly occurred in the middle of the week, after Huntsman flew directly from Helsinki to Brussels. He allegedly said that the US ‘is looking into the suggestions’.

“Germany’s and France’s NATO ambassadors allegedly declared that such a referendum would only be possible if a United Nations peace mission were to gain access to all occupied areas of Eastern Ukraine first… The character of such a referendum is still unclear. Are the eastern Ukrainians supposed to decide on their independence, or on whether to become part of Russia? The referendum in Crimea in 2014… could be the model for the suggested referendum. The 2014 referendum served as Russia’s justification for the annexation of Crimea…

“Kiev has harshly criticized a possible referendum against Ukraine’s will. The political director of the Ukrainian Foreign Office, Oleksii Makeiev, tweeted: ‘We reject this crazy idea of a referendum at Russian gunpoint in the occupied areas’. The referendum is ‘absolutely unacceptable’ to Ukraine and its partners. Jakub Janda, Director of the Czech think tank ‘European Values’, is also outraged: ‘The fact that Putin has proposed a referendum on occupied Ukrainian territory is outrageous and merely shows that Russia is not interested in leaving the Ukrainian territory that it has forcefully occupied’.

“A referendum under foreign occupation would not legitimize the occupation, Janda told BILD: ‘That’s why the Russian referendum on Crimea was viewed as invalid by the entire civilized world’. According to Janda, Trump should have rejected Putin’s suggestion immediately.

“Approximately 30 minutes after the German version of this article was published on Friday evening (German time), the US State Department’s spokeswoman Heather Nauert declared that ‘the Administration is not considering supporting a referendum in E Ukraine. A “referendum” would have no legitimacy. We continue to support Minsk agreements for solving the conflict in Donbas.’ This comes after four days of the US administration neither admitting that Mr. Putin offered such a deal nor telling the public that the US was elaborating the circumstances of a possible implementation.”

In spite of the White House’s belated “denials,” Bible prophecy shows that ultimately, Ukraine and Russia will be collaborating forces against Europe.

Racism or Failed Integration in Germany?

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 23:

“After weeks of silence, [German National Soccer Player Mesut] Özil announced in a series of three extended tweets that he would no longer suit up for the German national team because he didn’t feel welcome. He specifically blamed DFB [German Soccer Configuration] President Reinhard Grindel, a former conservative politician, for encouraging a xenophobic atmosphere in the team. Grindel and DFB team manager Oliver Bierhoff had linked Özil’s Erdogan meeting with Germany’s disastrous performance at the 2018 World Cup… In a statement on its website, the DFB rejected the charge of racism…

“No one in political Germany is happy about Özil’s cordial meet-and-greet with [President] Erdogan [when Özil and another German-Turkish national soccer player posed for a photograph with Turkey’s dictator], who has been accused of trying to undermine Turkish democracy and of ignoring the human rights of his political opponents. At the same time, leaders from nearly all Germany’s major parties said that Grindel and Bierhoff’s attacks on Özil encouraged a split in public attitudes toward national team players with or without foreign roots…

“The Özil case is deeply unsettling to German society because the country’s national team has been previously held up as a model of successful integration of people with foreign roots into mainstream society. That image has now been shaken… Representatives of Germany’s large Muslim community agreed that the affair had damaged the cause of integration and said latent racism inspired some of the criticism of Özil… That view was confirmed, if indirectly, by the far-right populist, anti-migrant Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, which interpreted the affair as evidence that multiculturalism had failed in Germany…

“But [German Foreign Minister Heiko] Maas cautioned against drawing too many conclusions based on the story of a highly atypical individual. ‘I don’t think the case of a multimillionaire living and working in England tells you much about Germany’s capacity for integration,’ Maas said.

“Turkish MPs, including one senior minister, commended Özil’s move. ‘I congratulate Mesut Özil who by leaving the national team has scored the most beautiful goal against the virus of fascism,’ Justice Minister Abdulhamit Gul posted on Twitter…”

These questionable reactions by Turkish and Arab officials won’t make most Germans very happy. In all fairness, it must be said that Özil’s performance at the latest World Cup was substandard… as this is true for just about EVERY German player and their coach. And it must be allowed to say that Özil’s refusal to sing during the national anthem and his habit to publicly pray on his knees to Allah on the soccer field in front of the cameras prior to the start of an international soccer game did not look too good in the eyes of many Germans. Many, but by far not all Germans, do accept when Catholic national soccer players make the sign of the cross when they score a goal or fail to do so, but for a German national soccer player to pray publicly to Allah might have been, rightly or wrongly, “a bridge too far.”

Turkey Before the Crash?

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 23:

“The Turkish lira is falling, prices are rising. Experts warn that the Turkish economy is close to collapse…

“The Turkish economy has recently grown by 7.4 percent… But at the same time… inflation is at a record level of 15 percent. The economic situation has not been this bad in years…

“President Recep Tayyip Erdogan… is promising his country a glorious future… Investors are worried about the independence of the Turkish central bank… Erdogan’s tendency to seize all decision-making power has deeply unsettled markets.

“Now it is up to 40-year-old Berat Albayrak to regain the business world’s confidence… He studied business administration in Istanbul and the US, and was energy minister in the last cabinet. Nevertheless, he is considered a relatively inexperienced politician who has simply been given a key position by his father-in-law. Up to this point the chief economic advisor had been former Deputy Prime Minister Mehmet Simsek, an ex-Merrill Lynch economist who was considered investor-friendly and someone who even dared to contradict Erdogan. Now since the office of prime minister has been abolished, he will no longer be in the cabinet…

“Albayrak must now deliver… otherwise Turkey will face a financial crash… This scenario would not only impact Turkey itself but also have consequences for Europe, because many Turkish companies are highly indebted to European financial institutions.”

Turkey Opposes the USA

The Washington Examiner wrote on July 24:

“Turkey plans to keep purchasing Iranian oil in defiance of American sanctions on the rogue regime… ‘We buy oil from Iran and we purchase it in proper conditions,’ Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said Tuesday. ‘What is the other option?’

“Cavusoglu’s comments raise the specter of yet another clash between the U.S. and Turkey, which is also in the final stages of an arms deal with Russia that could trigger American sanctions. Turkish officials, in both cases, have dismissed the U.S.’ threat of sanctions to constrain the choices of other countries…”

War of Words between Turkey and Israel

The Daily Star wrote on July 24:

“President Erdogan of Turkey has launched an astonishing attack on Israel – saying the ‘spirit of Hitler has re-emerged’ among administrators. The Ankara chief’s words were in response to Israel’s new ‘nation-state’ law, with Erdogan branding Israel the ‘most Zionist, racist and fascist country’… The ‘nation-state’ law has been criticised for effectively ruling out a two-state solution to the long-running Israel-Palestine conflict…

“Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu has hit back, saying Turkey has become a ‘dark dictatorship’ under Erdogan. In a war of words, he accused the Turkish president of ‘massacring Syrians and Kurds’.”

Erdogan is someone to talk about the spirit of Hitler!

The Fight for the Golan Heights

Reuters wrote on July 24:

“Israel said it shot down a Syrian warplane that crossed into the occupied Golan Heights on Tuesday, but Damascus said the jet was fired on as it took part in sorties against rebels within Syria. The incident added new fuel to weeks of tensions over the Golan, a strategic plateau between the two old enemies and where Israel has been on high alert as Syrian government forces, supported by Russia, close in to regain rebel-held ground.

“For the second time in as many days, Israeli sirens sounded on the Golan and witnesses saw the contrails of two missiles flying skyward… On Monday, Reuters witnesses on the southern edge of the Israeli-occupied Golan spotted numerous warplanes and helicopters in the skies over Syrian territory, some of them dropping bombs. Anti-aircraft return fire could also be seen.”

Did 15^th Century Christians Expect Building of a Third Temple?

The National Library of Israel wrote on July 19, 2018:

“In commemoration of the Ninth of Av, the day of mourning and fasting marking the destruction of [the] Temple, the National Library of Israel presents [an] ancient map printed in Hartmann Schedel’s large world chronical. The chronical…, published in 1493 in the German city of Nuremberg, was an ambitious undertaking. It contained an overview of world history from the creation of the world until that time. The book boasts a mass of illustrations drawn by the leading artists of the time…

“The map illustrated the destruction of Jerusalem and depicts the Temple going up in flames. However, this is not an illustration of Jerusalem during the Second Temple period and a description of the Jews who lived there. It is rather the printing of an engraving depicting Jerusalem’s Christian sites alongside the Temple, typical to the 14th-15th centuries.

“It is fascinating though, that the text accompanying the map describes the history of the destructions of Jerusalem – first, the destruction of the First Temple by Nebuchadnezzar, the destruction of the Second Temple by Titus, the Temple vessels being looted, the execution of Shimon bar Giora in Rome, and finally, Jerusalem being turned into Aelia Capitolina, the Roman colony built upon the ruins of the holy city. The author of the text relates that the city was later held for short periods of time by other Western and Crusader kings (Charlemagne of France, Conrad III of Germany and Louis XI, also of France) – but they did not manage to hold it for long against armies of Islam. According to the author, in [1493] the city was under the control of Mohammed’s battalions, which Schedel refers to as ‘a nation of sin.’”

Since the illustration does not depict the destruction of the First and the Second Temple, it is clear that the belief existed already in 1493 that a Third Temple would be built and subsequently occupied by “Christianity.”

Mourning for the Destruction of Two Temples

The Allgemeiner wrote on July 24:

“Some 2,000 people took part in the Women in Green organization’s 24th annual ‘Walk Around the Old City’ in honor of the Tisha B’Av holiday on Sunday… Tisha B’Av is an annual holiday mourning the destruction of two Holy Temples inside the Old City and is marked with fasting, reading from the book of Lamentations and restrictions on activities that might evoke joy or pleasure.

“Despite the fact that Tisha B’Av is a 25-hour fast day, Jews gathered for a march circumnavigating the walls of the Old City of Jerusalem, which included speeches from Minister for Jerusalem Affairs and Heritage Ze’ev Elkin, Deputy Minister of Defense MK Rav Eli Ben Dahan, Deputy Mayor of the City of Jerusalem Dov Kalmanovich, chairman of the Republican Party in Israel Marc Zell and popular Jerusalem Post columnist Caroline Glick.

“The Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs condemned the march, calling it ‘provocative.’ ‘The Ministry confirmed that this march is an extension of the state of extremism that dominates the political arena in Israel and the settlers since Trump’s ominous declaration on Jerusalem, and the transfer of the embassy and the continuous Judaization of the Holy City and its separation from its Palestinian surroundings,’ they said in a press release issued prior to the march. The Palestinian ministry called upon foreign countries to intervene against Women in Green… The march went off without a hitch, however…”

Of course, foreign countries would not intervene to prevent a march like this. But it is interesting that foreign countries are being asked to take a stance against Israel. The Bible shows that in the future, that is exactly what will happen, and that European powers will invade the Holy Land and occupy Jerusalem.

This will in turn provoke a military response from Far Eastern nations, including Russia and China.

Return of Islamic State?

Reuters wrote on July 24:

“Months after Iraq declared victory over Islamic State, its fighters are making a comeback with a scatter-gun campaign of kidnap and killing. With its dream of a Caliphate in the Middle East now dead, Islamic State has switched to hit-and-run attacks aimed at undermining the government in Baghdad…

“Islamic State was reinventing itself months before Baghdad announced in December that it had defeated the group… Iraq has now seen an increase in kidnappings and killings, mainly in the provinces of Kirkuk, Diyala, and Salahuddin, since it held an election in May, indicating the government will come under renewed pressure from a group that once occupied a third of the country during a three-year reign of terror.

“Last month saw at least 83 cases of kidnap, murder or both in the three provinces. Most occurred on a highway connecting Baghdad to Kirkuk province… In one incident on June 17, three Shi’ite men were kidnapped by Islamic State militants disguised as policemen at a checkpoint on the highway. Ten days later their mutilated corpses were discovered, rigged with explosives to kill anyone who found them… a relative of the men… said security forces were uncooperative. He had implored the soldiers who found the men’s bullet-ridden car to pursue the kidnappers but was refused…

“Numerous attempts to track down and kill Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi have failed, and his fighters are still active in other Arab states. In Syria, Islamic State still holds some territory but has suffered militarily. In Egypt, it is concentrated in the sparsely populated northern Sinai desert. It holds no territory but conducts hit-and-run attacks. Islamic State has tried to rebuild in Libya through mobile units in the desert and sleeper cells in northern cities.

“The group has exploited the ethnic and sectarian divide in Iraq. Iraqi and Kurdish forces fought together against Islamic State. Now ties are strained over a Kurdish bid for independence last year which Baghdad stifled. Lack of coordination has caused a security vacuum in disputed territories, from which Iraqi forces dislodged the Kurds, creating opportunities for Islamic State…”

Vatican Attacks America’s TV Evangelists and Biblical Teaching

Christian Today wrote on July 19:

“A Vatican approved journal has launched a stinging attack on ‘prosperity gospel’ evangelicals with a broadside against the theology that teaches God wants Christians to be rich. The article in La Civilta Cattolica… was written by Antonio Spadaro, a Jesuit priest, and Marcelo Figueroa, a Protestant pastor from Argentina. It is the second time the two authors have collaborated. Last year they criticised the ‘ecumenism of conflict’ that saw US Protestant and Catholic fundamentalists join forces to promote ‘division and hatred’…

“While born in the US, [the so-called ‘prosperity gospel’] has spread around the world through Africa, Asia, China and Latin America, the authors say. They trace its origins to the Word of Faith movement of Kenneth Hagin (1917-2003), and reference modern-day exponents such as Kenneth Copeland, Norman Vincent Peale, Oral Roberts, Pat Robertson, Benny Hinn, Robert Tilton, Joel Osteen and Joyce Meyer.

“They criticise prosperity preaching for elevating the ‘word of faith’ above the Bible… The result, they say, is that: ‘There can be no compassion for those who are not prosperous, for clearly they have not followed the rules and thus live in failure and are not loved by God.’

“Furthermore, they say, the dominance of this teaching has political consequences: ‘It leads to the conclusion that the United States has grown as a nation under the blessing of the providential God of the Evangelical movement’…”

The above-quoted article in the Vatican-approved Journal displays shocking biblical ignorance in that it denies the FACT that God WILL bless us, including financially, when we obey Him. It is also extremely dangerous and a direct attack, which was perhaps prompted by willful ignorance, on the biblical teaching that America WAS blessed by God because of the unconditional obedience of Abraham—but that due to America’s ongoing disobedience, God has begun to withdraw those blessings in many different ways. 

Vaccine Scandal in China—May the West Wake Up!

Reuters wrote on July 23:

“A vaccine scandal in China, which has prompted angry reactions from citizens fed up with safety scares, is sending ripples across the local drug market and threatening Chinese ambitions to play a larger role in the global pharmaceutical space…

“Changsheng has been found to have faked production documents related to a rabies vaccine that is given to babies as young as three months…

“The Changsheng case is the latest in a slew of scandals that has plagued China’s pharmaceutical industry in recent years. A regulator in the northeastern province of Jilin, where Changsheng is based, revealed on Friday that the company had last year sold 252,600 substandard DPT vaccines to inoculate children against diphtheria, whooping cough and tetanus…”

Planet Ablaze

The Sun wrote on July 25:

“Deadly wildfires and killer heatwaves are ripping through the planet from Athens and Sweden to Los Angeles and Japan…

“The planet is ablaze as it was gripped by a mammoth killer heatwave which has left hundreds dead. Across Europe, North America and Japan, searing heat and devastating wildfires have also left tens of thousands in hospital(s)…

“The worldwide trail of extreme heat, death and destruction has seen at least 79 dead around the Greek capital Athens in the country’s worst wildfire in a decade. Temperatures of 41C (106F) in Japan [were] killing 65, with more than 22,000 in hospital(s) with heat stroke(s)… Forest fires [broke out] in Sweden and Norway which have left one dead and dozens injured. The heatwave hit cities across Canada and led to at least 70 deaths in Quebec province alone. Record-breaking temperatures [are measured] in parts of southern California, including 49C (120F) in Chino, outside of Los Angeles.

“Reports from Algeria say the hottest temperatures ever recorded in Africa was in the northern city of Ouargla on July 5 which suffered a scorching 51.3C (124.3F) heatwave…

“A wildfire which erupted near the Teide volcano in central Tenerife yesterday was brought under control by emergency workers. The Spanish island has been blighted by sporadic infernos since last month… The Greek prime minister, Alexis Tsipras, said a state of emergency had been declared in the Attica region, which includes Athens, and ordered three days of national mourning. Greece’s interior minister Panos Skourletis described the fires as a ‘national tragedy’ and a ‘biblical disaster with human losses.’”

It was also reported that during a UK heatwave, Britain “soars towards [the] hottest day ever” (The Telegraph, dated July 25). In Germany, “The heat wave has shut down [the] Hanover airport, damaged roads and devastated crops, with higher temperatures still to come” (Deutsche Welle, dated July 25).

These are unfortunate, but in comparison very minor forerunners of a biblically-prophesied unparalleled worldwide destruction through hot temperatures and fire.

Dinosaurs together with Humans?

The Daily Star wrote on July 8:

“From Australia to Peru, ancient etchings on the walls of caves show humans alongside great beasts resembling dinosaurs. A painting from the Amazon rainforest basin shows dinosaurs surrounded by human beings. Sculptures found in the El Toro Mountain depict dinosaurs seemingly reaching up to eat foliage from the upper branches of trees.

“But scientists are skeptical over claims humans painted dinosaurs seen first hand.

“The Protoceratops – one of the most heavily replicated dinosaurs – has been incorporated into sculptures in hundreds of countries. Hongshan carvings dating back 4,000 years were also unearthed recently in China…

“Herodotus, a historian from the 5th century BC,… wrote: ‘There is a place in Arabia, situated very near the city of Buto, to which I went, on hearing of some winged serpents; and when I arrived there, I saw bones and spines of serpents, in such quantities as it would be impossible to describe. The form of the serpent is like that of the water-snake; but he has wings without feathers…’

“… scientists are looking into the possibility of potentially bringing back ancient creatures using DNA. The wooly mammoth is the most heavily-discussed candidate – with pristine DNA have been preserved in ice.”

What are the answers to the questions raised above? Please read our free booklet, “Heavens and Earth… before and after the First Man.”

Acknowledgement and Disclaimer

These Current Events are compiled and commented on by Norbert Link. We gratefully acknowledge the many contributions of news articles from our readership. The publication of articles in this section is not to be viewed as an endorsement or approval as to contents or accuracy of the selected articles, but they are published for the purpose of pointing at worldwide developments in the light of biblical end-time prophecy and godly instruction. Our own comments are provided in italics.

This is clearly not our understanding. The erroneous concept that we do not have to repent of any sins that we may commit after conversion is part of the “once saved, always saved” (or eternal security) doctrine espoused by some, in mainstream Christianity. One such proponent gave the following five Scriptures and explanations and said that “they prove the glorious truth of scripture—‘once in Christ, in Christ forever.’” Let us review these:

• John 5:24:

“Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life.”

The proponents of eternal security say that “this passage is a one-way street and carries no threat of reversal.” However, many other Scriptures state otherwise. Nothing can stop us from attaining this, except we ourselves!

This verse talks about the time when someone puts his trust in God and makes the decision to follow and obey Him and if he remains faithful to his calling for the rest of his life, he will make it, with the help of God, into the Kingdom of God.

There is the understanding by some that believers do not have to keep asking for forgiveness or repenting in order to have their sins forgiven. How wrong can they be? Of course, Jesus died for all of our sins, past, present and future, but the Bible is clear that repentance is necessary and that we must ask for forgiveness as we acknowledge our sins to God.

One writer stated that “the word ‘believes’ in John 5:24 is a present active participle in the Greek. Therefore, the Lord is saying here that we must continually be believing the Father, that is His testimony about Jesus.”

From the website “alphadictionary.com” they state the following: “The present active participle, like all present participles, is derived only from imperfect verbs, since it refers to an action that is currently taking place or which takes place repeatedly.”

• John 10:27-28:

“My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.”

The Pulpit Commentary observes the following in John 10:27 in respect of the sheep:

“‘My sheep hear my voice’ (their receptivity).

“‘And I know them’ (the Lord’s response to their faith).

“‘And they follow me’ (their active obedience).”

Following God obviously requires active and ongoing obedience. It would be ridiculous to think that a true Christian could wilfully be disobedient to God, and, without repentance and genuinely asking for forgiveness, have his sins forgiven before he even committed such acts. That erroneous thinking and “belief” will encourage a lack of care in necessary behaviour and lead to a person doing what he wants to do, thinking that it doesn’t matter as he has already been forgiven. It beggars or is beyond belief that there are those who read the Word of God and who come to such a conclusion.

One writer stated the following:

“Some people see salvation with ‘no strings attached’ that is, regarding how far one may stray doctrinally or sinfully, he will always be of the group that shall never perish. But the context of John 10:27-29 destroys this deadly interpretation of the most commonly cited proof for eternal security. Verse 27 describes the sheep and states that they follow Jesus. The Greek word is a continuous tense and describes the only people who will never perish and won’t get plucked out of God’s hand (see verses 28-29).”

The fact that following Jesus is a continuous action and doesn’t allow for wilful disobedience and turning one’s back on the Way of Life that He commands us to live is clearly shown in Matthew 10:22, which reads: “And you shall be hated by all for My name’s sake. But he who endures to the end will be saved.” This same principle of enduring to the end is a theme within the Word of God.

Another writer, an on-line commentator, observed as follows:

“Notice first of all who His sheep are: They are those who hear His voice and follow Him. The idea that obedience is essential to salvation of the Lord Jesus Christ is claimed through God’s revelation. Jesus identifies those who belong to Him, having His blessing, protection, they are people who listen to His directions and carry them out! That is the only way one is really acting ‘by faith.’ One can look at the eleventh chapter of the book of Hebrews, where so many were successful ‘by faith,’ and if you are honest with yourself, you’ll see each one carefully followed the Lord’s directions.

“That is the way one can be SURE of his/her salvation. Truly, no one is wise or strong enough to overpower God and take you or me away IF we are loyal to Him. Yet, one can walk away, as we have seen many do in the centuries past, as they are recorded in the Bible for us to see. We are often referred to them as they did receive the wrath of God, because they failed to listen and perform as directed.

“Remember how the serpent beguiled Eve, in persuading her that she would not experience the consequences that God said she would when and if she failed to follow His teachings. Think about this: why would the Lord give so many warnings about being led astray and falling, IF IT WERE IMPOSSIBLE? Why are we told to make our calling and election sure, if there is no way it can be made unsure?”

The passage in 2 Peter 1:5-11 is very instructive:

“But also for this very reason, giving all diligence, add to your faith virtue, to virtue knowledge, to knowledge self-control, to self-control perseverance, to perseverance godliness, to godliness brotherly kindness, and to brotherly kindness love. For if these things are yours and abound, you will be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ. For he who lacks these things is shortsighted, even to blindness, and has forgotten that he was cleansed from his old sins. Therefore, brethren, be even more diligent to make your call and election sure, for if you do these things you will never stumble; for so an entrance will be supplied to you abundantly into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”

It is clear from this passage of Scripture that the continuance of obedience to God’s instructions is essential.

• Ephesians 4:30:

“And do not grieve the Holy Spirit of God, by whom [which] you were sealed for the day of redemption.”

We read earlier in the book of Ephesians (chapter 1:13-14) about being “sealed”: “In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise, who [which] is the guarantee of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, to the praise of His glory.”

In verse 14, the guarantee is a down payment or earnest (an old-fashioned description meaning a deposit), but has not yet come to full maturity and this will only occur at the resurrection to life at Christ’s return for all those who have died in the faith; and at the time of change to eternal life for those who are still alive in Christ when He returns and have endured unto the end.

In Strong’s Concordance #4972, we read that the Greek word for seal is sphragizo. One of the definitions is that which “signifies ownership and the full security carried by the backing (full authority) of the owner. ‘Sealing’ in the ancient world served as a ‘legal signature’ which guaranteed the promise (contents) of what was sealed.” However, in Matthew 27:66, the same word is used: “So they went and made the tomb secure sealing the stone and setting the guard.” Just two verses later in Matthew 28:2, we read: “And behold, there was a great earthquake; for an angel of the Lord descended from heaven, and came and rolled back the stone from the door and sat on it.”

This shows that the seal could be broken in some circumstances. An instance of this is shown in 1 Timothy 1:18-20: “This charge I commit to you, son Timothy, according to the prophecies previously made concerning you, that by them you may wage the good warfare, having faith and a good conscience, which some having rejected, concerning the faith have suffered shipwreck, of whom are Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom I delivered to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme.”

The verses quoted show that the understanding that the seal of the Holy Spirit is an unconditional guarantee of “once saved, always saved” is a flawed and erroneous concept.

• Philippians 1:6:

“… being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ…”

We read in many other Scriptures that a believer has to endure to the end to be saved and, therefore, this verse must be interpreted with that understanding. God will complete the good work that He has begun in us, subject to us playing our full part, and nothing less will do.

• 2 Timothy 1:12:

“For this reason I also suffer these things; nevertheless I am not ashamed, for I know whom I have believed and am persuaded that He is able to keep what I have committed to Him until that Day.”

God does not call and choose us unless He is fully convinced that we will be able to live His Way of Life. He is not in the business of failure and He calls us, knowing that we have what it takes to stay close to Him until the end. However, we must make that concerted effort and not wander off the path to eternal life which some have done and more will do in the future.

(To Be Continued)

Lead Writer: Brian Gale (United Kingdom)

compiled by Dave Harris

Here are the dates for the 2018 Fall Holy Days:

Feast of Trumpets—September 10
Day of Atonement—September 19
Feast of Tabernacles—September 24-30
Last Great Day—October 1

“Ancient and Modern Beliefs in the Third Temple,” is the title of a new StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

A German Christian map from the 15th century was recently presented to the public by the National Library of Israel, picturing what appears to be the building of the Third Temple in Jerusalem with Christian involvement. This year’s celebration of the Jewish festival of Tisha B’Av, commemorating the destruction of the two Holy Temples, prompted a strong reaction of the Palestinian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, asking for foreign powers to intervene. This program will show you how all of this is related and points at events prophesied in the Bible, and why they indicate the soon-coming return of Christ to establish God’s Government on earth.

“Kann man die Wiederkunft Christi anhand der Zahlen in Offenbarung und Daniel berechnen?” is the title of this Sabbath’s German sermon, presented by Norbert Link. Title in English: “Can One Calculate the Return of Christ in Light of the Numbers in Revelation and Daniel?”

“Preparation and Consistency,” the sermonette presented last Sabbath by Kalon Mitchell, is now posted. Here is a summary:

We have to continually prepare in our lives, both in the physical and in the spiritual realms. Our preparation will determine our outcome in both. But it is not enough to just decide to prepare, we must have an outcome, a desire or a goal that we are fixated on and consistently driving towards. It is not enough to just casually want it. Rather it must become our purpose, our driving goal and desire, anything less does us and others around us a disservice.

“The Two Witnesses and Christ’s Return,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Norbert Link, is now posted. Here is a summary:

Who are the two witnesses? When will they begin and when will they end their work of preaching the gospel and proclaiming the last warning message? What will happen during their activity? When will Christ return? Could our life have any influence on the time of His Second Coming, by either delaying or accelerating it?

Preparation and Consistency; The Two Witnesses and Christ’s Return

On July 21, 2018, Kalon Mitchell will present the sermonette, titled, “Preparation and Consistency,” and Norbert Link will present the sermon, titled, “The Two Witnesses and Christ’s Return.”

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

I was talking with my son the other day about how each of our lives are different. We don’t do the same things for work and for fun; we do not have the same friends and there are many other examples which could be stated. Occasionally, things overlap and that is where friendships and shared interests come into play. But everyone’s paths are unique.

For the most part, we are each on our own paths. As a Church, we work together towards the same goals, but as Proverbs 14:10 points out, we are responsible for ourselves: “The heart knows its own bitterness, And a stranger does not share its joy.”

Growing up, I remember hearing about the end coming and all the ins and outs. I remember feeling scared and nervous about the things that were to happen. And then we add the knowledge that we don’t know the exact time of Christ’s return. This has made it tough at times to live with the right perspective. But indeed, it takes the right perspective to live, not swaying to the right hand or to the left (compare Proverbs 4:27; Deuteronomy 5:32; Joshua 1:7; Isaiah 30:21). The choice is ours. That should be the scariest part for us as Christians. God has already decided before time began that He would call us in this day and age. Science has shown us that the odds of you and me being born is 1 in 400 trillion. Think about that for a moment, let it sink in. Is it odd that we were born, in the time and place that we have been? I think not! 2 Peter 1:10 asks us how we are doing in our calling, in our diligence, in our effort to make sure that we don’t fall, that we don’t stumble.

As I stated before, our paths are all unique. We go through the issues in life to learn. Oftentimes, we don’t learn from others’ mistakes, even though we could and should if we were wise enough (1 Corinthians 10:11; Proverbs 1:1-9). Rather, we have to trudge through the trials and learn the hard way (Proverbs 11:2; James 1:2-4; Romans 8:28; Proverbs 24:16). The key is to pick up the pieces, learn, repent and move forward. In Philippians 3:13 Paul had every reason to be regretful and discouraged about his past, but he didn’t dwell on those things. He worked diligently to move forward.

How are we dealing with the fact that we are starting to see how end-time prophecy is being fulfilled? Are we scared? Are we happy? Are we joyful? Are we blasé and indifferent?  What is our perspective as we watch the world unraveling?

Do we understand that prophecy in and of itself is very sensational, but yet we should not be seeking prophecy for prophecy’s sake alone? Prophecy should help us to discern the times that we are living in and help us to temper our mindsets and attitudes and to give us additional motivation and zeal to do the Work and the Will of God. Paul was keen to tell this to Timothy, a young minister, in 2 Timothy 3:10-17. Wisdom and salvation are mentioned in verse 15. They are vitally important in keeping us going each day. If we are doing these things, then they help us to decide what we should be doing.

We need to acquire and keep the right and proper perspective at all times.  1 Corinthians 10:12-13 warns us to take careful note, think deeply, study hard, and lean in more and more fervently on God. God doesn’t want us to fail. Our own failings take us away.  2 Timothy 2:15 asks us to be diligent in presenting ourselves to God as worthy of the calling given to us.

So what is our perspective in regard to our calling? What are we doing about it? Where do we stand? These types of questions can only be answered truthfully by each Church member. If we find that the answers are not good and promising, then it is high time that we make the necessary corrections while we still can.

by Norbert Link

We begin this special report with the events as they transpired at the Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki and the extraordinary backlash Mr. Trump experienced by fellow Republicans and other conservative commentators (and of course from liberal newscasts and Democrats); Mr. Trump’s attempt of damage control and an interesting perspective by Pat Buchanan; and we continue to focus on events in Great Britain pertaining to Mr. Trump’s visit and the ongoing Brexit negotiations.

We address the war of words between America and Europe (especially Germany); the perception of a dying or already dead NATO; and Europe’s concern for their own interest (please note in this regard another thought-provoking article by Pat Buchanan).

We ask the question as to how trustworthy the FBI is in light of FBI agent Peter Strzok’s startling admissions; address China’s desire for world domination; speak on ongoing violence at the Gaza strip in spite of an agreed-upon “ceasefire”; report on Canada’s descent into ungodliness; and conclude with new evidence proving that the “Shroud of Turin” was not the burial cloth of Jesus. 

Throughout this section, we have underlined pertinent statements in the quoted articles, for the convenience and quick overview of the reader.

The Controversial Putin-Trump “Summit”

Daily Mail wrote on July 16:

“[Putin] denied meddling in the 2016 presidential election but admitted he had hoped Trump would defeat Democratic rival Hillary Clinton… Trump backed up Putin’s denials, saying he thought Russia had no reason to interfere in the election and contradicting his country’s own FBI which believes Moscow was responsible for hacking during the campaign.

“He said that ‘we’ve all been foolish… we’ve both made mistakes’…

“Putin said Moscow and Washington could jointly conduct criminal investigations into Russian intelligence officials accused of hacking during the campaign. In what Trump described as an ‘incredible offer’ Putin said Washington could use a 1999 agreement to request that Russian authorities interrogate the 12 suspects, adding that U.S. officials could ask to be present in such interrogations.

[As Newsmax reported on July 15, “A U.S. grand jury issued an indictment against the agents on Friday, charging them with hacking into email accounts controlled by the Democratic National Committee and Hillary Clinton’s campaign. The charges stem from Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into Russian meddling in the election and any involvement by Trump’s campaign, a probe the president has repeatedly derided as a ‘witch hunt.’…”]

“Trump had said in a CBS interview that he had given no thought to asking Putin to extradite the dozen Russian military intelligence officers… Extradition is unlikely as the U.S. does not have an extradition treaty with Moscow and can’t force the Russians to hand over citizens. Russia’s constitution also prohibits turning over citizens to foreign governments…

“… at least in his public remarks at the outset, [Trump] mentioned none of the issues that have lately brought US-Russian relations to the lowest point since the Cold War: Moscow’s annexation of territory from Ukraine, its support for Syria’s Bashar al-Assad, as well as Western accusations that it poisoned a spy in England…”

Many additional important issues were not addressed during the news conference, including Russia’s abominable persecution of the Jehovah’s Witnesses.

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 16:

“… Putin spoke frankly on the topic of Crimea, saying that the US delegation had expressed its view that the invasion was illegal. The Russian president disagreed with Trump on the issue and concluded that ‘the Crimea question is closed for Russia…’”

Trump in League with Putin?

The Week wrote on July 16:

“… it is simply beyond question that Trump is really deferential to the Russian president… This is a terrible development for many reasons. First and most importantly is that it’s bad for the hugely powerful American executive branch to be even partially in league with a man like Putin…”

Trump Strongly Criticized by Republicans

The Huffington Post wrote on July 16:

“President Donald Trump’s performance during a press conference after a summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Helsinki on Monday left critics of all stripes howling… Trump’s comments drew fierce criticism from Republicans and Democrats alike…

“On Fox News Business, several guests reacted by saying that Putin outmaneuvered Trump during the summit. On the channel, the network’s Neil Cavuto termed Trump’s performance ‘disgusting.’ George W. Bush’s press secretary Ari Fleischer… said he can understand why some Democrats believe Putin must have compromising information on Trump… Former Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel, a Republican, said Trump ‘failed America today’…

“Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell… said succinctly: ‘The Russians are not our friends. I’ve said that repeatedly, I say it again today. And I have complete confidence in our intelligence community and the findings that they have announced.’…”

The Guardian wrote on July 16:

“House speaker Paul Ryan, a Republican, said: ‘… There is no question that Russia interfered in our election and continues attempts to undermine democracy here and around the world. That is not just the finding of the American intelligence community but also the House Committee on Intelligence. The president must appreciate that Russia is not our ally. There is no moral equivalence between the United States and Russia, which remains hostile to our most basic values and ideals. The United States must be focused on holding Russia accountable and putting an end to its vile attacks on democracy.’

Deutsche Welle added on July 16:

“Top Republican Senator John McCain called Trump’s summit in Helsinki a ‘tragic mistake,’ lamenting that the US president was ‘unable’ to stand up to Putin. ‘Coming close on the heels of President Trump’s bombastic and erratic conduct towards our closest friends and allies in Brussels and Britain, today’s press conference marks a recent low point in the history of the American Presidency,’ McCain’s statement read. ‘No prior president has ever abased himself more abjectly before a tyrant,’ McCain said…”

Newt Gingrich and Bret Baier Strongly Criticize Trump

Newsmax wrote on July 16:

“President Donald Trump choosing not to endorse the U.S. intelligence community’s assessment Russia interfered in the 2016 presidential election is ‘the most serious mistake of his presidency,’ former House Speaker Newt Gingrich tweeted Monday: ‘President Trump must clarify his statements in Helsinki on our intelligence system and Putin… [It] must be corrected—-immediately.’”

Fox News (Bret Baier) wrote on July 16:

“President Trump left many deeply disappointed in his approach to his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin… For a sitting U.S. president to say publicly that he believes a foreign leader over his own intelligence team is shocking and admonishable. At a time when our democracy faces grave threats, it is deeply troubling that the president would side with the very country who attacked us… Crucially, there were no concessions from Russia on any of the issues that needed to be addressed…

“Despite each nation backing different sides in the Syrian conflict, Trump suggested he and Putin would begin working in conjunction to bring humanitarian aid to the people of Syria, regardless of the fact that the need for humanitarian aid largely stems from Putin’s unabashed support for Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad. Additionally, Trump also failed to address the concerns of our NATO allies Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania in the Baltics regarding the territorial threats they persistently face. Trump, throughout the entire press conference, failed to condemn or even acknowledge the illegality of Putin’s actions in Crimea and Ukraine…”

When Trump supporter Newt Gingrich and moderators on Fox News disapprove of Mr. Trump’s conduct, then this is worthwhile contemplating.

BBC News wrote on July 16:

“Washington’s Nato allies and many seasoned observers on Capitol Hill must have been watching in horror…”

While many Russian papers approved the summit, most German papers overwhelmingly condemned Mr. Trump’s behavior.

Trump’s Attempted “Damage Control”

Huffington Post wrote on July 17:

“President Donald Trump on Tuesday responded to the widespread condemnation of his summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin, claiming that he believes the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. His words came a day after he sided with Putin in an extraordinary press conference. ‘I accept our intelligence community’s conclusion that Russia’s meddling in the 2016 election took place,’ he said Tuesday, appearing to read from prepared remarks, before suggesting that it ‘could be other people also. A lot of people out there.’

“During Monday’s press conference with Putin, he refused to condemn Russia’s interference, saying that he accepted the Russian president’s denial and took Putin’s word over the conclusion of U.S. intelligence agencies, which he has continually attacked during his presidency. ‘President Putin just said it’s not Russia,’ Trump said. ‘I don’t see any reason why it would be.’

“But on Tuesday, Trump claimed that he misspoke, explaining that he meant to say that he saw no reason why it would not be Russia. ‘I would like to clarify, in a key sentence in my remarks, I said the word “would” instead of “wouldn’t.” The sentence should have been: “I don’t see any reason why it wouldn’t be Russia,”’ he said.”

Fox News added: 

“It’s unclear whether the clarification will calm the backlash in Washington, as Trump also said following his meeting with Putin that the Russian leader gave a ‘strong and powerful’ denial.”

Whether this “clarification” will satisfy most of the Republican critics will indeed have to be seen. After all, here is the exact quote:  “They (the US intelligent agencies) said they think it’s Russia. President Putin just said it’s not Russia. I will say this: I don’t see any reason why it would be. I have great confidence in my intelligence people but I will tell you that President Putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today.” (Compare The Daily Mail, July 17.)

No One Is Buying

nzherald.co.nz wrote on July 18:

“In a shocking revelation, no one is buying Donald Trump’s latest backflip… Trump said it was ‘sort of a double negative,’ adding, ‘I think that probably clarifies things pretty good by itself.’ That didn’t go down too well online.”

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 18:

“Maas criticized the US president once again on Wednesday…  Asked to assess Trump’s reversal of remarks, Maas was quoted as saying: ‘This is apparently an attempt at damage limitation. It doesn’t appear particularly convincing.’

“Germany’s foreign minister went on to say he regretted that Trump didn’t backtrack on his most recent criticisms of the European Union — which he described as a foe — shortly before setting off for Helsinki…”

Another Viewpoint by Pat Buchanan

On July 17, Newsmax published the following commentary by Pat Buchanan who has been an adviser to three presidents and a two-time candidate for the Republican presidential nomination:

“Beginning his joint press conference with Vladimir Putin, President Trump declared that U.S. relations with Russia have ‘never been worse.’ He then added pointedly, that just changed ‘about four hours ago.’ It certainly did. With his remarks in Helsinki and at the NATO summit in Brussels, Trump has signaled a historic shift in U.S. foreign policy that may determine the future of this nation…

“He has rejected the fundamental premises of American foreign policy since the end of the Cold War and blamed our wretched relations with Russia, not on Vladimir Putin, but squarely on the U.S. establishment. Looking back over the week, from Brussels to Britain to Helsinki, Trump’s message has been clear, consistent and startling.

“NATO is obsolete. European allies have freeloaded off U.S. defense while rolling up huge trade surpluses at our expense. Those days are over. Europeans are going to stop stealing our markets and start paying for their own defense… We are not going to let Putin’s annexation of Crimea or aid to pro-Russian rebels in Ukraine prevent us from working on a rapprochement and a partnership with him, Trump is saying…

“America is coming home from foreign wars and will be shedding foreign commitments…

“When Trump spoke of the ‘foolishness and stupidity’ of the U.S. foreign policy establishment that contributed to this era of animosity in U.S.-Russia relations, what might he have had in mind?

“Was it the U.S. provocatively moving NATO into Russia’s front yard after the collapse of the USSR? Was it the U.S. invasion of Iraq to strip Saddam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction he did not have that plunged us into endless wars of the Middle East? Was it U.S. support of Syrian rebels determined to oust Bashar Assad, leading to ISIS intervention and a seven-year civil war with half a million dead, a war which Putin eventually entered to save his Syrian ally?

“Was it George W. Bush’s abrogation of Richard Nixon’s ABM treaty and drive for a missile defense that caused Putin to break out of the Reagan INF treaty and start deploying cruise missiles to counter it? Was it U.S. complicity in the Kiev coup that ousted the elected pro-Russian regime that caused Putin to seize Crimea to hold onto Russia’s Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol?… Russia annexed Crimea bloodlessly. But did not the U.S. bomb Serbia for 78 days to force Belgrade to surrender her cradle province of Kosovo? How was that more moral than what Putin did in Crimea?”

May: “My Deal [Soft Brexit] Is the Only Brexit Deal”

Theresa May Prime wrote the following on July 14 for The Mail On Sunday:

“Our Brexit deal for Britain seizes the moment to deliver the democratic decision of the British people and secure a bright new future for our country outside the European Union… If we don’t [accept it], we risk ending up with no Brexit at all. This is a time to be practical and pragmatic – backing our plan to get Britain out of the European Union on March 29 next year and delivering for the British people…

“… we can get a good deal and that is what is best for Britain. But we should also prepare for no deal… Our Brexit deal is… a complete plan with a set of outcomes that are non-negotiable.

“People voted to end free movement. So free movement will end. People voted to end the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in our country; and we are going to deliver that too. We will leave the Single Market and customs union, and get out of the Common Agricultural Policy and the Common Fisheries Policy. We will have that independent trade policy and a new UK-EU free trade area with a common rulebook for industrial goods and agricultural products. And we will maintain close co-operation with the EU on security to keep our people safe while ensuring we have our own independent foreign and trade policy. None of these things is up for debate…”

May Compromises on Brexit Deal

Deutsche Welle reported on July 16:

“British Prime Minister Theresa May gave in to demands from her party’s hardliners on Monday, accepting four amendments that would limit the government’s ability to set up customs arrangements with the European Union after Britain leaves the bloc in March 2019… Monday’s vote once again exposed deep divisions within the Conservative Party over Brexit…”

May’s Soft Brexit Gives Germany What It Wants

Handelsblatt Global wrote on July 13:

“Theresa May’s long-awaited White Paper aims to keep manufacturing in Britain, and is willing to surrender London’s financial access to the EU in return… Berlin would surely prefer that Britain simply stay in the European Union. But as alternatives go, London’s latest proposal for the post-Brexit relationship suits Germany just fine…

“The paper aims to jump start the process of reaching an ‘association agreement’ with the European Union to govern relations after Brexit. With Britain formally leaving the European Union in March 2019, time for a deal between London and Brussels is quickly running out…

“That deal would effectively keep Britain’s rules and regulations aligned with those of the European Union, allowing trade in goods to flow freely and the Irish border with Northern Ireland to remain open. It’s almost like still being in the EU’s single market and customs union, which is what has Brexit supporters so outraged…”

It does not appear that this will be the deal to which all sides agree.

“EU Urges No-Deal Brexit Preparation”

The EUObserver wrote on July 19:

“Four million UK and EU citizens stuck in a legal limbo, border checks re-installed, transportation severely disrupted, trade and supply chains breaking down… This gloomy scenario would kick in the day after Brexit, if no divorce deal is agreed by the EU and the UK, the EU Commission warned on Thursday…

“The commission urged citizens, businesses and member states to take action on preparing for 30 March 2019 now, highlighting the rising concerns of a no-deal exit in European capitals…”

Trump Wants to Run Again; Reveals Details of Conversation with the Queen on Brexit

Newsmax republished the following article by Reuters on July 14:

“President Donald Trump said in an interview that he intends to run for re-election in the 2020 election, the Mail on Sunday newspaper reported. When asked by Piers Morgan in an interview given on Friday in Britain whether he was going to run, Trump said: ‘Well I fully intend to. It seems like everybody wants me to,’ the newspaper said. Trump said he did not see any Democrat who could beat him…

“In the interview with Morgan, Trump took the unusual step of disclosing details about his conversation with British Queen Elizabeth. When asked if he had discussed Brexit with the monarch, Trump said: ‘I did. She said it’s a very – and she’s right – it’s a very complex problem, I think nobody had any idea how complex that was going to be… Everyone thought it was going to be “Oh it’s simple, we join or don’t join, or let’s see what happens.”’…

“When asked about North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, Trump said: ‘… Sure he is, he’s ruthless, but so are others.’”

As we have announced for a long time, in case of elections in 2020, Donald Trump will be re-elected.

Charles and William Refused to Meet with Trump

The Hill wrote on July 15:

“Prince Charles and Prince William refused to meet with President Trump during his visit to the United Kingdom, according to London newspaper The Sunday Times… It’s a very, very unusual thing for the queen to be there on her own. Usually she is accompanied by somebody. Prince Charles has been substituting for Philip a lot recently.’ Prince Philip, who, at 97, has officially retired from royal duties, ‘goes to what he wants to go to,’ the source said, adding that ‘if he had wanted to be there he could have been.’…

“Charles reportedly attended a board meeting for his company and an event with Gloucestershire police, while William participated in a charity polo match and Prince Harry attended other private engagements, according to the Times.”

NATO Dying or Dead?

Euractiv wrote on July 13:

“‘There is no longer confidence in NATO,’ a diplomat told EURACTIV. Fewer and fewer European countries trust that the US would defend them if they were invaded by Russia. Under Trump, NATO will soon be as dead as the proverbial dodo. The EU needs to overcome its internal divisions fast and make sure NATO is replaced by a real European defence alliance.”

And that is exactly what will happen.

The Washington Post wrote on July 12:

“Trump has been calling NATO a waste of money for decades. ‘America has no vital interest’ in Europe, he wrote in 2000: ‘Their conflicts are not worth American lives. Pulling back from Europe would save this country millions of dollars annually. The cost of stationing NATO troops in Europe is enormous. And these are clearly funds that can be put to better use.’ During his election campaign, he refused to reaffirm any commitment to NATO’s Article 5 security guarantee. During his first NATO summit last year, he again refused to reaffirm Article 5, though an administration official had promised he would…” 

NATO–Defending Others?

The Huffington Post wrote on July 18:

“President Donald Trump on Tuesday once again threw cold water on NATO… Trump expressed skepticism over the decades-old defense pact, which obligates member countries to defend any other member country that comes under attack, during an interview with Fox News’ Tucker Carlson.

“When Carlson asked why the U.S. should protect a country like Montenegro, which joined NATO last year, Trump said he has asked himself the same question. ‘Montenegro is a tiny country with very strong people,’ Trump said. ‘They’re very aggressive people, and they may get aggressive, and congratulations, you’re in World War III. But that’s the way it was set up.’”

NATO Hits Back at Trump’s Montenegro World War III Remarks

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 18:

“NATO officials on Wednesday scrambled to reassert the alliance’s collective defense clause— commonly referred to as Article 5 — after US President Donald Trump appeared to suggest NATO’s newest member Montenegro could instigate World War III. A NATO official told Germany’s DPA news agency that Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty was ‘unconditional and iron-clad,’ reaffirming that ‘an attack on one is an attack on all.’…

“According to reports in Montenegro, Russia… attempted to organize a coup in a bid to derail Montenegrin accession. Fourteen people are on trial for attempting to assassinate then-Prime Minister Milo Djukanovicduring the 2016 election…”

Buchanan Coming to Trump’s Defense

On July 13, Newsmax published the following commentary by Patrick Buchanan:

“Of President Donald Trump’s explosion at Angela Merkel’s Germany during the NATO summit, it needs to be said: It is long past time we raised our voices. America pays more for NATO, an alliance created 69 years ago to defend Europe, than do the Europeans. And as Europe free-rides off our defense effort, the EU runs trade surpluses at our expense that exceed $100 billion a year. To Trump, and not only to him, we are being used, gouged, by rich nations we defend, while they skimp on their own defense.

“At Brussels, Trump had a new beef with the Germans, though similar problems date back to the Reagan era. Now we see the Germans, Trump raged, whom we are protecting from Russia, collaborating with Russia and deepening their dependence on Russian natural gas by jointly building the Nord Stream 2 pipeline under the Baltic Sea. When completed, this pipeline will leave Germany and Europe even more deeply reliant on Russia for their energy needs…

“Germany spends 1.2 percent of its gross domestic product on defense, while the U.S. spends 3.5 percent. Why? Why — nearly three decades after the end of the Cold War, the collapse of the Warsaw Pact, the crackup of the Soviet Union and the overthrow of the Communist dictatorship in Moscow — are we still defending European nations that collectively have 10 times the GDP of Vladimir Putin’s Russia?… Trump is not bluffing. He is visibly losing patience.

“… it could be the beginning of the end for NATO. And not only NATO. South Korea, with an economy 40 times that of North Korea, spends 2.6 percent of its GDP on defense, while, by one estimate, North Korea spends 22 percent, the highest share on earth. Japan, with the world’s third-largest economy, spends an even smaller share of its GDP on defense than Germany, 0.9 percent. Thus, though Seoul and Tokyo are far more menaced by a nuclear-armed North Korea and a rising China, like the Europeans, both continue to rely upon us as they continue to run large trade surpluses with us.

“… We are giving the world a lesson in how great powers decline. America’s situation is unsustainable economically and politically, and it’s transparently intolerable to Trump…”

And so, the final break between America and Europe will occur very soon.

EU Bad for USA and America’s Foe?

The Sun wrote on July 15:

“Theresa May has finally revealed the explosive Brexit advice Donald Trump gave to her… The Prime Minister said the US President told her not to even enter into a negotiation with Brussels at all, and just to start a legal war instead. She made the startling revelation while speaking to the BBC this morning, but said she did not take Mr Trump’s ‘brutal’ suggestion on board.”

The Sun wrote on July 13:

“[Mr. Trump] suggested Mrs May’s plans for a soft Brexit was a hostile move towards the US because ‘the European Union is very bad to the United States on trade’…”

CBS News reported on July 15:

“In an interview with ‘CBS Evening News’ anchor Jeff Glor in Scotland on Saturday, President Trump named the European Union… when asked to identify his ‘biggest foe globally right now.’ ‘Well, I think we have a lot of foes. I think the European Union is a foe, what they do to us in trade. Now, you wouldn’t think of the European Union, but they’re a foe. Russia is [a] foe in certain respects. China is a foe economically, certainly they are a foe…

“I respect the leaders of those countries. But, in a trade sense, they’ve really taken advantage of us and many of those countries are in NATO and they weren’t paying their bills… EU is very difficult… Maybe the thing that is most difficult — don’t forget both my parents were born in EU sectors okay? I mean my mother was Scotland, my father was Germany. And — you know I love those countries. I respect the leaders of those countries. But — in a trade sense, they’ve really taken advantage of us and many of those countries are in NATO and they weren’t paying their bills and, you know, as an example a big problem with Germany…”

The EUObserver wrote on July 16:

“Trump… designated the EU as an enemy while talking about a trade war with Europe… To add insult to injury, the state department said that it would impose sanctions on EU firms doing business with Iran, the NBC network also reported… The refusal to exempt EU firms comes despite the fact Russia is to invest $50bn in Iran’s energy sector. Russia also sold Iran high-tech anti-aircraft systems, with no Trump objections. That US messaging turned the world upside down for the European Union.”

Wars begin with words. To call an ally one’s foe is a further step. So are Germany’s responses. Note the next article.

Germany on the Attack Against Trump

The Local wrote on July 13:

“Berlin was still reeling on Friday from US President Donald Trump’s attacks on the NATO military alliance, with German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas warning that the US President was willfully damaging western security. ‘Europe can’t accept that which has been built up over many decades being damaged willfully out of a desire to provoke,’ Minister Maas wrote in a Tweet on Friday…

“Meanwhile, Minister Maas’ predecessor had stronger words for the US President. Former German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said Europe should stand up to Trump, warning that the US President is pushing for ‘regime change’ in Germany… ‘We must no longer have any illusions,’ added the Social Democrat (SPD) politician. ‘Donald Trump only understands strength. So we have to show him that we are strong. If he demands billions back from us for the USA’s military spending, then we should demand billions back from him for the refugees produced by failed US military interventions, for example, in Iraq.’”

Bloomberg wrote on July 16:

“Germany’s foreign minister urged the European Union to ‘readjust’ its relationship with the U.S. and said the bloc can no longer fully rely on the White House after President Donald Trump identified America’s long-term ally as a ‘foe.’… ‘If the American president identifies the European Union as a “foe,” this unfortunately shows once more how wide the Atlantic has become in political terms since Donald Trump has been in office,’ German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas told the Funke newspaper group in an interview.

“The comments reflect those of Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has reinforced her statement from May 2017 that Europe’s full reliance on relations with the U.S. since World War II is ‘to some extent over’ — and that the bloc must take its destiny more into its own hands…

“Maas, a member of Germany’s Social Democrats, the junior partner in Merkel’s ruling coalition, said that nations must stand together ‘in a self-confident and sovereign Europe.’ EU member states mustn’t allow themselves to be divided, ‘no matter how harsh the verbal attacks and how absurd the tweets may be.’”

Due to current developments, Europe feels that it must unite militarily… and it will.

Europeans Seeking Their Own Interest

Handelsblatt Global wrote on July 17:

“We saw a new world order loom like an iceberg at the meeting of Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump. The Russian leader emerged victorious at a press conference which was historic for all the wrong reasons…

“Trump also ignored Europe… Mystifyingly, Trump elevated Russia, an enemy, to an equal, despite the major disparity in their economies and powers. That insistent support will have done lasting damage to trans-Atlantic relations… eastern European countries close to Russia… have to wonder whether they [can] count on support from Washington in the future…

“Meanwhile European leaders are busy defending their countries’ interests. Today they sign JEFTA, the trade pact between the EU and Japan… It’s the biggest deal negotiated by the bloc so far and creates the world’s largest open area for trade.

“And in Beijing, Jean-Claude Juncker and Donald Tusk found a new rapport as both blocs fend off US tariff disputes. The two sides said they are seeking to uphold a ‘free trade and multilateral order.’ That embrace is all the more surprising given that, at last year’s summit, the EU and China had so little in common they didn’t even issue a joint statement. How much has changed in a year.”

Soon, America will become totally irrelevant on the world scene in just about every respect.

Trump Defends Google Against EU

The Telegraph reported on July 19:

“Donald Trump hinted that he may block trade routes with Europe after its lawmakers hit Google with a record £3.9bn fine over its smartphone business.

“The US president took to Twitter to lash out at the European Union, which handed the penalty to the search giant over its Android operating system. ‘I told you so! The European Union just slapped a Five Billion Dollar fine on one of our great companies, Google. They truly have taken advantage of the US, but not for long!,’ he wrote on the social network.”

The Week published an article on July 19, with the headline: “Europe’s Idiotic War on Google.”

Most Germans Fear Trump More than Putin, but Don’t Trust Either…

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 15:

“… two-thirds of Germans think that the US president is more dangerous than his Russian counterpart… When asked which world leader was the greater threat to world security, 64 percent of respondents chose US President Donald Trump over his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin… And the German antipathy for Trump doesn’t end there: 56 percent of respondents thought that Putin was more competent than Trump, with only 5 percent preferring the latter on that score. Thirty-six percent of Germans find Putin more likable than Trump, while 6 percent say the opposite — although most respondents refused to indicate a preference on that question.

“And, perhaps most surprisingly, 44 percent said Putin was more powerful than Trump, compared with only 29 percent who thought the US president has more power… German… conservative voters were slightly more likely (66 percent) to class Trump as the bigger threat than people overall in the poll…

“‘The world’s two most powerful men have one thing in common,’ Bild’s lead story on Sunday reads. ‘They want to weaken Europe.’ That’s a widespread view around Germany, where many people fear that Trump’s occasional hostility to NATO, for instance, plays into Putin’s strategic aim of dividing the West and increasing Russia’s influence in the world…

“The distrust of Trump’s motivations and leadership capabilities is apparent in how Germans see the United States as a whole. In a YouGov poll published earlier in July, Germans were asked whether they had a generally positive or negative view of the United States. Fifty-nine percent of respondents said they viewed the US negatively, compared with only 29 percent who chose positively…”

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 13:

“Germans are under no doubts that Putin, for his part, is pursuing… a long-term aggressive, anti-European policy… and is trying to drive a wedge between the US and its European allies… [Moscow] has an interest in America withdrawing from Europe…”

The Bible indicates that this is exactly what America will do.

FBI Trustworthy?

CBN wrote on July 12:

“Thursday’s House Judiciary Committee hearing featuring testimony from embattled FBI agent Peter Strzok erupted into absolute chaos shortly after opening statements. Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-SC) was the first to question the agent, asking Strzok how many people had been interviewed in the Russia probe from July 31-Aug. 8. Strzok declined to answer, saying that FBI counsel instructed him not to answer questions about an ongoing investigation. This set off pandemonium, as lawmakers exchanged heated barbs and bickered over hearing rules…

“Strzok’s anti-Trump text messages took center stage and caused congressional leaders to question Strzok on his partisan bias over the course of the investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and Hillary Clinton’s use of her email server. Strzok exchanged troubling text messages with FBI attorney, Lisa Page. Page and Strzok both worked on the FBI investigation into Clinton’s emails and, later, on special counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia investigation…

“Strzok said that while the texts reflected his personal beliefs at the time, they did not ‘ever enter into the realm of any action I took.’ Strzok noted that there are numerous procedures and guidelines in place at the FBI to stop such instances of agents who are acting in any way other than an official capacity…

“Strzok says a text message suggesting that he would stop then-candidate Trump from being president was written late at night, and ‘in no way suggested that I or the FBI would take any action’ to intervene in Trump’s election…”

However, there can be no doubt that such bias may very well influence decisions being made in the course of official business.

China’s Challenge to US Naval Supremacy

The Sydney Morning Herald wrote on July 14:

“China’s biggest challenge to the supremacy of the US Navy will come within the year, a well regarded Australian strategic analyst predicted in Washington this week. It will come in the form of the announcement that China’s armed forces will hold exercises in the international waters of the South China Sea and that, to protect public safety, it will close the air and sea space in the area, he said. Even though this would be presented as a temporary measure – a few days, perhaps a week – it would be the end of freedom of navigation and overflight if it went unchallenged.

“Seventy years of American dominance would be over. The US Navy effectively would have been pushed back from China’s coastline by more than 1000 kilometres, right out to the limit of China’s nine-dash line marking its disputed claim to the South China Sea. Beijing would have asserted de facto control of the world’s most valuable commercial artery and 3.6 million square kilometres of ocean. The other six countries with claims to parts of the South China Sea would have been sidelined. Other countries would be permitted to use it only with China’s consent. ‘The question is, what are we going to do about it?’ posed the director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, Peter Jennings, a former head of strategy for the Defence Department…

“The question was an uncomfortable one for many in the audience, which included senior officials, politicians and others from both countries… Australian and American representatives… agreed that the Jennings scenario was plausible; some said it was likely. None thought it implausible.

“What would Donald Trump do? Would Trump’s America be steadfast in a crisis? Or would the administration be too distracted, too confused, or too compromised by its other negotiations with China to stand its ground?… While the US has dithered, China’s President Xi Jinping has been clear and purposeful. ‘Like clockwork,’ says Jennings, ‘every three to four months they take another step to consolidate their gains in the South China Sea’, where Beijing has constructed man-made islands in contested waters and equipped them with runways, reinforced hangars, and batteries of anti-ship and anti-air missiles. A Chinese heavy bomber recently touched down on one of the islands for the first time…

“If China presses its case and the US fails to act, does the Royal Australian Navy have the option of trying to crash through any new Chinese exclusion zone? Australian and American experts were unanimous on this, best summed up by a former US official: ‘Try that without us, you’re screwed.’… Australia needs to be more active, more robust and more assertive than it has ever been. It has the advantage that its main political parties are so far united in confronting the dawning reality of frontline responsibility. If Jennings is right, there’s no time to waste.”

Watch China’s Desire of World Dominion

Project-Syndicate wrote on July 13:

“The contrast between the disarray in the West, on open display at the NATO summit and at last month’s G7 meeting in Canada, and China’s mounting international self-confidence is growing clearer by the day…

“Since 2014, China has expanded and consolidated its military position in the South China Sea. It took the idea of the New Silk Road and turned it into a multi-trillion-dollar trade, investment, infrastructure, and wider geopolitical/geo-economic initiative, engaging 73 different countries across much of Eurasia, Africa and beyond. And China signed up most of the developed world to the first large-scale non-Bretton Woods multilateral development bank, the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

“China has also launched diplomatic initiatives beyond its immediate sphere of strategic interest in East Asia, as well as actively participating in initiatives such as the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. It has developed naval bases in Sri Lanka, Pakistan, and Djibouti, and participates in naval exercises with Russia as far away as the Mediterranean and the Baltic…”

Israel Strikes Hamas During Gaza Ceasefire

The Times of Israel, July 15:

“The strike came hours after a fragile ceasefire between Israel and Hamas went into effect, following the most severe exchange of fire between Israel and Hamas since the 2014 war. Over the weekend, Palestinian terrorists fired some 200 rockets and missiles at Israeli communities near the Gaza border…

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Sunday reiterated that Israel would not tolerate the continued kite and balloon arson attacks that have burned thousands of dunams of forests and agricultural land adjacent to the Gaza border in recent months, including fresh fires started on Sunday… Netanyahu denied reports that said the ceasefire brokered by Egypt did not include the cessation of the arson attacks… Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman also warned Hamas they would ‘pay a heavy price’ if it did not cease hostilities…

“Domestic pressure on the military to halt the burning flying objects has intensified, leading to Israel carrying out warning airstrikes and increasing the possibility that violence could escalate.”

JTA wrote on July 16:

“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu visited Sderot, where at least two rockets from Gaza caused serious damage and injured a family of four… [He said:] ‘There is an exchange of blows here. It is not over in one go… and I cannot comfort those who have taken the most difficult losses. This is very hard to take, but we know that we are in a prolonged Zionist struggle.’

“In a warning to the terrorist organization that runs Gaza, Netanyahu said: ‘It is important that Hamas understand that it faces an iron wall and this wall is comprised, first of all, of a determined government, of strong local leadership and Zionist settlement, and that we will continue to strengthen it… I do not want to tell anybody that it is over.’”

New Legislation: Israel the Nation-State of the Jewish People

JTA wrote on July 19:

“The Knesset passed controversial legislation making Israel the ‘nation-state of the Jewish people’ … It passed early Thursday morning after hours of contentious debate by a vote of 62-55, with two abstentions.

“Much of the bill, sponsored by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, deals with obvious signs that Israel is a Jewish state, such as affirming the symbols on the flag and shield, setting the Hebrew calendar as the country’s official calendar, recognizing Jewish holidays and days of remembrance, the national anthem and naming Jerusalem as the capital.

“Other parts of the law, however, have raised the hackles of segments of Israeli society and the Jewish Diaspora. These include clauses relegating Arabic to a ‘special’ status instead of an official language [declaring Hebrew as Israel’s only official language], promoting the establishment of Jewish communities throughout Israel and addressing the state’s relationship with Diaspora Jewry.

“Netanyahu called the passing of the law ‘a defining moment… This is our state — the Jewish state’…

“The chairman of the Arab Joint List party, Ayman Odeh, said in a statement that Israel has ‘declared it does not want us here,’ meaning its Arab citizens, and that ‘we will always be second-class citizens.’”

Canada’s Troubling Journey Towards Ungodliness

LifeSitenews.com wrote on July 13:

“Last month the Supreme Court of Canada decided in the Trinity Western University case that the right to freedom of religion, entrenched in Section 2 of the Charter, can be infringed by the rights of the LGBTQ community… This was the most recent example of a troubling situation that has developed since the Charter came into effect in 1982.

“The Court in the Trinity case concluded that the Law Societies of British Columbia and Ontario had the right to decide on the admission policies of a private religious university in British Columbia that wanted to obtain accreditation for a law school. The law societies objected because of the university’s Covenant that, among other matters, upheld that sexual relationships be only within marriage between a man and woman. The Court concluded that the law societies were permitted to raise objections based on vague and undefined concepts of ‘public interest’ and Charter ‘values’.

“This decision confirms that judges are making decisions… based on their own policy preferences. Examples of other such decisions include the legalizing of prostitution; the striking down of the abortion law; the prohibitions against physician-assisted suicide; the right to strike granted to essential services such as firemen, policemen, ambulance workers (which puts public safety at risk); legalization of drug injection sites; the redefinition, and narrowing of the interpretation of pornography; and that sex clubs for couples and single individuals meeting each other for group sex are not illegal nor indecent. There have been many other decisions as well that have profoundly changed Canadian society.

“Whether one agrees with any or all of these decisions is not the point. There is a much deeper and more profound aspect to these decisions. It is whether nine appointed, unaccountable judges should be making such decisions isolated from the public – the latter having no input into the formation of such public policy decisions… There is no longer any doubt that the Supreme Court of Canada decisions are not impartial and objective, but are based not on law or precedent, but rather on the personal policy preferences of the judges.”

Shroud of Turin NOT Burial Cloth of Jesus

Express wrote on July 16:

“For centuries, Christians had believed the Shroud of Turin was used to wrap Jesus Christ’s deceased body in after he had died. Many even thought you could still see the imprint of his face. However, new evidence has emerged which would suggest the Shroud of Turin is fraudulent.

“Forensic evidence revealed the blood stains on the cloth came from a vertical position as if someone were standing over it. This would mean the stains are not consistent with someone who had just been crucified.

“John Moores University, Liverpool, forensic expert Matteo Borrini and his team had been hoping to see if the blood stains were consistent with someone who had been executed on a T-shaped or Y-shaped cross. Instead, the research found the blood splatter came from neither.

“The study says: ‘The two short rivulets on the back of the left hand of the Shroud are only consistent with a standing subject with arms at a ca 45 degree angle… The BPA of blood visible on the frontal side of the chest (the lance wound) shows that the Shroud represents the bleeding in a realistic manner for a standing position while the stains at the back — of a supposed post-mortem bleeding from the same wound for a supine corpse — are totally unrealistic.’

“… Previous research also suggests the Turin Shroud is a fake. If it were the real burial cloth of Jesus, it would date back to around 2,000 years ago. However, carbon dating shows that the Turin Shroud also only goes back to the Middle Ages…”

Please read chapter 8 of our free booklet, “Do you know the Jesus of the Bible?”

Acknowledgement and Disclaimer

These Current Events are compiled and commented on by Norbert Link. We gratefully acknowledge the many contributions of news articles from our readership. The publication of articles in this section is not to be viewed as an endorsement or approval as to contents or accuracy of the selected articles, but they are published for the purpose of pointing at worldwide developments in the light of biblical end-time prophecy and godly instruction. Our own comments are provided in italics.

The question relates to two passages in the book of Genesis. When Joseph met his brothers in Egypt who had sold him into slavery, he did not make himself known and tried them instead to see whether they were willing to leave one of their brothers, Benjamin, behind in jail, while enjoying their own freedom and escape from the Egyptian court. Joseph ordered that money and his special cup be placed in the sacks of his brothers upon their departure, but then to pursue them.

In this very context, we read in Genesis 44:4-6: “When they had gone out of the city, and were not yet far off, Joseph said to his servant, ‘Get up, follow the men; and when you overtake them, say to them, ‘Why have you repaid evil for good? Is not this the one from which my lord drinks, and with which he indeed practices divination? You have done evil in so doing.’ So he overtook them, and he spoke to them these same words.” The Authorized Version (AV) reads: “Is not this it in which my lord drinketh, and whereby indeed he divineth?”

Also, in Genesis 44:15, we read that Joseph told his brothers, after the cup was “discovered” in Benjamin’s sack: “Did you not know that such a man as I can certainly practice divination?”

In Genesis 44:6 and 15, the Hebrew word for the English expression “practice divination” or “divine” is nachash. Young’s defines it as, “use enchantment.”

It is clear that the word can describe demonic divination or enchantment.

We read in Deuteronomy 18:10: “There shall not be found among you anyone who makes his son or his daughter pass through the fire, or one who practices witchcraft [AV: that useth divination], or a soothsayer [AV: observer of times], or one who interprets omens [AV: enchanter, Hebr. nachash], or a sorcerer [witch], or one who conjures spells [charmer], or a medium [consulter with familiar spirits], or a spiritist [wizard], or one who calls up the dead [necromancer].”

Also, note the following passages in the Authorized Version:

Numbers 23:23: “… [There is] no enchantment [nachash] against Jacob, no divination [Hebrew: qesem] against Israel.”

Numbers 24:1: “… to seek for enchantment [nachash; New KJB: sorcery].”

2 Kings 17:17: “[The evil Israelites] used divination [qesem] and enchantments [nachash].”

2 Kings 21:6: “[The evil king Manasseh] used enchantments [nachash].”

2 Chronicles 33:6: “[Manasseh] used enchantments [nachash].”

Leviticus 19:26: “… neither shall ye use enchantment [nachash] nor observe times.”

From this, some commentaries conclude that Joseph used demonic enchantment or divination.

For instance, the Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges states:

“The word shews that the silver cup was a sacred one, by means of which Joseph sought and obtained oracles. Some have inferred that he must have been admitted into the priests’ guild, in order to be able to practise divination. It appears that water having been poured into a vessel or cup, gold or silver or precious stones were thrown into it, and the oracle or divination was derived from the rings, ripples, or sparkles, which appeared. The name given to this class of magic was ‘hydromancy.’”

Similarly the Broadman Bible Commentary, which expresses the hope, however, that Joseph did not do so:

“The silver cup was used for divining. Small objects were placed in the cup so that veiled references could be seen in their configurations. Von Rad cites a custom in Germany of pouring lead into water on New Year’s Eve as ‘a final vestige of the custom.’ Did Joseph really divine in this manner? Or was he just playing a game with the brothers? The cup was certainly a part of the paraphernalia of his office, and he was probably expected to use it. One could hope that he had not substituted this method of determining the future for the spiritual insight he had formerly known…”

Other commentaries leave the question unanswered as well:

Barnes’ Notes on the Bible writes:

“Divining by cups… was a common custom in Egypt (Herodotus ii. 83). It is here mentioned to enhance the value of the cup. Whether Joseph really practised any sort of divination cannot be determined from this passage.”

The concept that Joseph practiced demonic divination is difficult to accept. Joseph is mentioned as one of the faithful patriarchs who will receive the promise of eternal life (Hebrews 11:21-22, 39-40).

Therefore, many commentaries conclude that in order to test his brothers, Joseph did not practice divination, but that he pretended to do so, or that he did not dispute the superstition attached to his cup.

The idea seems to be that “Joseph may have allowed them to think he practiced divination with this cup to instill more fear in them—as it would look to them like they would be charged with the theft of something of great importance in Egypt.” In other words, as some put it, “Joseph may have claimed he used it to divine matters in order to raise the stakes and incite more fear in his brothers’ hearts.” Some say that “Joseph was representing himself as an administrator of a pagan land. He adapted himself, his actions, and his language to the character of such an administrator, as it would appear in the eyes of his unsuspecting brothers.” It is alleged that he acted in this way, including the possession of a valuable cup from which he could divine, to “keep up the appearance of being thoroughly Egyptian” and a great and powerful Egyptian, as such.

For instance, the Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary writes:

“Divination by cups, to ascertain the course of futurity, was one of the prevalent superstitions of ancient Egypt, as it is of Eastern countries still. It is not likely that Joseph, a pious believer in the true God, would have addicted himself to this superstitious practice. But he might have availed himself of that popular notion to carry out the successful execution of his stratagem for the last decisive trial of his brethren.”

The Geneva Study Bible states:

“Because the people thought he could divine, he attributes to himself that knowledge: or else he pretends that he consults with soothsayers: which deceit is worthy to be reproved.”

The Ryrie Study Bible states:

“It is unlikely that Joseph used divination; rather, this statement (made in order to attach specific significance to the cup) was part of the situation Joseph contrived in order to test his brothers.

The German Schlachter Bibel comments:

“The cup was a holy vessel, which symbolized the authority of his office as the Egyptian vice-king. The reference to superstition does not have to mean that Joseph engaged in such pagan-religious rites. He later allowed his brothers to assume such.”

Torahclass.com states:

“Actually, it was a bowl… a silver bowl. The master of the house in Egypt in those days, if judged a sage, a seer, had a special bowl from which he and he alone drank. But, it was also used for the purpose of divining messages from the gods. One can only imagine how Joseph came by this ‘diviner’s bowl’… likely it was a gift from the Pharaoh, because Joseph was undoubtedly, after accurately interpreting Pharaoh’s dreams, determined the highest and best sage, diviner, in all the land. Typically, the bowl was filled with water, and then gold or silver objects, amulets, sometimes with magic inscriptions written on them, were put into the water, and from the reflections the seer would attempt to see the future.  It is unimaginable that Joseph actually used the bowl for anything except to drink from… but to keep up the appearance of being thoroughly Egyptian, he used the common knowledge of the bowl as an implement of divination to continue to test his brothers.”

However, even the concept that Joseph wrongfully pretended to practice divination to “test” his brothers is difficult to believe. Some argued that “Joseph did not order his steward to tell a direct lie—rather, he simply told him to ask a question. The real answer would have been no. But the brothers didn’t know this.” But this conclusion is not convincing and does not agree with the plain context of the passage.

Another interpretation has been proposed, that “this is one of the few cases in which God permitted the use of objects to discern His will. Other examples include the casting of lots (Leviticus 16:7-10), the priest’s use of the Urim and Thummim (Numbers 27:21), and Gideon’s use of the fleece (Judges 6:36-40). If Joseph did practice divination with the silver cup, it was not divination in the pagan sense but seeking God’s will through a particular method.”

However, the examples, cited above, never use the Hebrew word nachash to describe these godly practices. Even though some, such as the Eastons’s Bible Dictionary, speak of these godly activities as “divination by lot”, “divination by dreams” and “divination by Urim and Thummim,” these are just human descriptions, since the Bible nowhere refers to these acceptable methods as “divination” or “enchantment.”

However, a much more acceptable and compelling understanding evolves when we consider that the Hebrew word nachash can also have a different meaning than “divination” or “enchantment.”

Strong’s defines it as: “to hiss, i.e. whisper a (magic) spell; gen. to prognosticate, certainly, divine, enchanter, (use) enchantment, learn by experience, indeed, diligently observe.”

And so, the Benson Commentary explains:

“Genesis 44:5. Whereby indeed he divineth — The original word may be rendered, For which he would search thoroughly…”

The Commentary on the Bible by Adam Clarke agrees, stating:

“I take the word… nachash here in its general acceptation of to view attentively, to inquire…”

Based on this evaluation, the following commentary in Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible makes interesting reading:

“Joseph never practised any thing of this kind, so neither would he… make as if he did… but the words… may signify to tempt, to try, to make an experiment, and by experience to know a thing… and so the Arabic version, ‘and indeed he hath tried you by it’: so Aben Ezra interprets it of his trying of them by it, whether they were thieves or not… it seems best of all to understand this not of the cup as the instrument by which he tried, searched, and inquired into things, but as the object searched after and inquired of; for the word signifies to inquire, and make a strict observation of things, and thereby make shrewd guesses and conjectures… diligent inquiry would be made after it, and it would be at once conjectured that it was taken away, not by any of the household, but by those strangers that had dined with Joseph…”

We find the use of the Hebrew word nachash in the following two passages which do not refer to divination at all. Genesis 30:27 is translated as: “I have learned by experience that the LORD has blessed me”; and 1 Kings 20:33 states that “the men were watching closely to see whether any sign of mercy would come from him.”

Also, Joseph’s statement in Genesis 44:15 is rendered in the Living Bible as: “Didn’t you know such a man as I would know who stole it?”

Some German translations render Genesis 44:15 in the way that Joseph would be able to “discern” (“durchschauen”; Hoffnung fuer Alle); “certainly find out” (“gewiss erkunden”; Zuercher); or “figure it out” (“erraten koennte”; Luther 1891).

An additional interesting parallel has been proposed regarding Joseph’s cup of great financial value and the partaking of the cup of wine at the time of Passover. A write-up by Aletheia Bible College points out:

“The Hebrew for ‘divineth’ means literally ‘to make trial’; their taking of the cup was their trial / judgment. Thus we drink either blessing or condemnation to ourselves by taking the cup. The word used by the LXX for ‘divineth’ in Gen. 44:5 occurs in the NT account of the breaking of the bread [and drinking of the wine] service: ‘everyone should examine himself, and then eat the bread and drink from the cup’ (1 Cor. 11:28)…”

In conclusion, it does not appear that Joseph practiced demonic divination or that he lied to his brothers by pretending that he was engaged in divination or enchantment; nor, that that type of divination by using his cup would have been acceptable in God’s eyes. Rather, Joseph had his valuable cup of prestige placed in Benjamin’s sack to test the bothers thereby whether they would forsake Benjamin (as they had forsaken and even sold Joseph into slavery) or whether they would stand by him. The cup was not a cup through or by which Joseph “divined” or “searched” the future–but it was the object which was “lost” and for which Joseph was searching, and it was the object by which the brothers were being tested or examined as to whether they would be loyal to Benjamin and their father Jacob.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

compiled by Dave Harris

“Could America Be Attacked Soon?” is the title of a new StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

Preposterous? Unimaginable? Don’t dismiss this possibility out of hand, because the BIBLE tells you that it IS going to happen! Recent events give unmistakable signs for those who understand God’s Holy Word. Will you ignore them or even scoff at them, at your own peril? Will you belong to those who will be caught unawares, when the day of destruction overtakes the USA and other countries like a thief in the night?

“Die zwei Zeugen und Christi Wiederkehr,” is the title of this Sabbath’s German sermon, presented by Norbert Link. Title in English: “The two Witnesses and Christ’s Return.”

“Paul’s Letter to the Ephesians,” is the title of a new Global Trailer, presented by Pastor Brian Gale. Here is a summary:

Paul’s letter to the Ephesians is one of the most comprehensive letters written by Paul to explain to us the nature of God and God’s great plan and purpose for His creation, especially the future of mankind. Sadly, it has been greatly misunderstood by almost everyone who reads it.

“Truth or Legend?” the sermonette presented last Sabbath by Michael Link, is now posted. Here is a summary:

How do we know that the Bible is true and that the many stories within this book are in fact the truth? Is there proof? Do we believe the Bible and how can we truly understand it?

“The Prophet Elijah in the Past, the Present and the Future, Part 2,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Norbert Link, is now posted. Here is a summary:

Why did Elijah ask for fire from heaven to consume the soldiers of King Ahaziah? How are we to understand Elijah’s ascension to heaven? What connection exists between Elijah and John the Baptist? What is the explanation for Christ’s transfiguration on the mount when He spoke to Moses and Elijah who appeared in glory? Finally, what do biblical passages mean to tell us about the coming of Elijah just prior to Christ’s return?

On July 14, 2018, Michael Link will present the sermonette, titled, “Truth or Legend?,” and Norbert Link will present the sermon, titled, “The Prophet Elijah in the Past, the Present and the Future, Part 2.”

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 wouldn’t say we have too much love for God or our neighbor, nor say that we are way too zealous in serving God or that our faith is far too strong. In fact, we would all very likely admit to wanting much more of such good things as these.

Nevertheless, some good things might actually be too much if we aren’t careful!

There is a deeply profound lesson for all of us in the example of the young man who had great wealth and who asked Jesus what good thing he should do to have eternal life (compare Matthew 19:16-22). What Jesus told him required an abrupt reshaping of his life—and he was unwilling to go that far. Riches and the lack of commitment stood in his way to eternal life.

When the children of Israel were about to enter the land which God had promised, they were sternly cautioned to beware when abundant blessings came to them (compare Deuteronomy 8). Here is God’s warning:

“‘Then it shall be, if you by any means forget the LORD your God, and follow other gods, and serve them and worship them, I testify against you this day that you shall surely perish. As the nations which the LORD destroys before you, so you shall perish, because you would not be obedient to the voice of the LORD your God’” (Deuteronomy 8:19-20).

We must be very careful to not suffer the same kind of fate. We live in a time of remarkable and unparalleled abundance—so much so, we might get caught up in pursuing things that will not last. Things which are not eternal! Most of us don’t have great wealth, but we can become self-satisfied with our circumstances and lose our true focus. Jesus left this message for us—for those who understand the gospel of the Kingdom of God:

“‘Now he who received seed among the thorns is he who hears the word, and the cares of this world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word, and he becomes unfruitful’” (Matthew 13:22).

My title is a phrase we have probably all heard. We get its meaning by experience. We know that too much dessert, for example, is just too much of a good thing (compare also Proverbs 25:16; 25:27). It takes understanding to balance the use of things. And so it is when it comes to our daily living as Christians in this world.

There is, however, something which lies ahead which will never be too much of a good thing, and that is eternal life in the Kingdom of God.

by Norbert Link

We begin reporting about events pertaining to President Trump’s attendance at the NATO summit in Brussels which started with a bang; and the increasing controversy and escalation between the USA and especially Germany as well as the concern that the USA might withdraw its troops from Europe (Please view our new StandingWatch program, “How God Views the 2018 NATO Summit”) and we speak about the vulnerability of Germany’s present government, especially of Angela Merkel and Horst Seehofer, and the rising star of Austria, Sebastian Kurz, as well as some concerns of former EU Parliament President Martin Schulz.

We address the current Brexit disaster after the resignations of Boris Johnson and David Davis, evolving around concepts of a “hard Brexit,” a “soft Brexit” and a “disorderly no deal.”

We point out the increasingly dictatorial and autocratic government of Turkey’s President Erdogan; and we report on a new-found friendly relationship between Ethiopia and Eritrea and the escalation of a worldwide trade war with grave consequences for everyone concerned.

We conclude with the nomination of Brett Kavanaugh as Supreme Court Justice; the struggle of the unpopular Jehovah’s Witnesses with the EU’s new data protection law and their persecution in many countries; Jimmy Carter’s strange and unbiblical opinions about Jesus Christ; and the reported odd opposition of a US delegation to breastfeeding.  

Throughout this section, we have underlined pertinent statements in the quoted articles, for the convenience and quick overview of the reader.

“Brace Yourselves—Donald Trump Is Coming”

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 8:

“On Wednesday, the US president will be in Brussels for the NATO summit, where he will likely continue to ruffle feathers… And then, on July 16, Trump will travel to Finland to meet his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin…

“There is great anxiety at NATO about how the meeting will go… At a recent speech in the state of Indiana ahead of the US midterm elections in November, Trump made clear his anger about Germany… He directly attacked Chancellor Angela Merkel, claiming that the United States pays for Germany’s security but receives little in return. And then he accused Germany of prioritizing energy deals with Russia and leaving the United States to foot the bill. Trump… has already indirectly threatened to pull US troops from Germany if the country does not increase its defense spending.

“In the worst-case scenario… the United States could demand that European members directly pay for US troops to be stationed on the continent…”

Die Welt wrote on July 9:

“When more money needs to be spent [by the Europeans] for their own defense, then it must be done as efficiently… as possible… Nothing but a unified European army would fulfil those demands—not as replacement, but as a compliment to NATO which becomes less and less interesting for the USA.“

It may be interesting to note that “Donald” is an Anglicization of the Scottish Gaelic name, Domhanll, which means world-ruler. As the above-quoted articles predicted, President Trump did indeed ruffle feathers after arriving in Europe. Note the next articles.

Trump Attacks Germany—Merkel Counters

The EUObserver wrote on July 11:

“US leader Donald Trump, backed by Poland, has begun the Nato summit with a tirade against Germany’s plan to build a pipeline with Russia [The president appeared to be referring to the Nord Stream 2 pipeline that would bring gas from Russia to Germany’s northeastern Baltic coast, bypassing Eastern European nations like Poland and Ukraine and doubling the amount of gas Russia can send directly to Germany]… ‘Germany is a captive of Russia,’ Trump said after meeting Nato head Jens Stoltenberg in Brussels on Wednesday (11 July). ‘Germany’s totally controlled by Russia because they’ll be getting from 60 to 70% of their energy from Russia, and a new pipeline … and I think it’s a very bad thing for Nato,’ he said. ‘We [the US] are supposed to protect you [Europe] from Russia, but Germany is making pipeline deals with Russia … explain that’, he added. ‘We’re supposed to be guarding against Russia and Germany goes out and pays billions and billions of dollars a year to Russia,’ he said.

“Trump… was loose with the facts, given that Russian oil and gas account for just 20 percent of Germany’s energy mix and that NS2 is being financed by private firms from Austria, France, Germany, the Netherlands and the UK, rather than by German public money. His comment on Berlin being Moscow’s ‘captive’ also overlooked Germany’s leadership on EU economic sanctions against Russia.

“The remarks… met with a swift rebuttal by German chancellor Angela Merkel. ‘I experienced first hand that a part of Germany was occupied by the Soviet Union. It’s good that we can now make our own decisions,’ she said…

“Trump’s assault on NS2 pleased Poland, which sees the pipeline as a strategic threat… ‘NS1 helped Russia to modernise its army, then attack Georgia and Ukraine and violate international law. NS2 would also help Russia to pursue revisionist policy. The question is what we are going to do about that?,’ Polish foreign minister Jacek Czaputowicz said… he also repeated calls for the US to create a permanent military base in Poland, despite German concern that this could mean moving out tens of thousands of US troops from Germany…

“[NATO-chief] Stoltenberg indicated that other allies, as well as Germany, were increasingly confused by US foreign policy.”

The Nord Stream 2 Pipeline–Trump Has a Point!

The Telegraph wrote on July 11:

“Donald Trump was right to criticise Germany for its billion dollar energy deals with Russia at the Nato summit in Brussels on Wednesday morning. He hit the nail on the head – and Angela Merkel where it hurts –  when he took aim at the Nord Stream 2 pipeline project… The lead Russian company is the state-owned Gazprom, which has former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder on its staff roster and a controlling 51 per cent share in the project, which will cost at least $15 billion.”

The Guardian wrote on July 11:

“Trump is not only one to ask questions.

“… the US president’s view that this will make Europe particularly dependent on Russian gas is widely shared by European politicians, thinktanks and energy specialists, including some in Berlin. No country is more angry about the pipeline than Ukraine [which] stands to lose billions of much needed dollars if Russia can transfer its gas transmissions to Europe across the Baltic Sea, away from a pipeline running across Ukrainian territory…

“Sweden, Denmark and Finland have expressed ecological reservations about a second natural gas pipeline at the bottom of the Baltic… The UK has also been objecting, albeit less stridently… The biggest fear is that the pipeline allows Russia a boot on the throat of Europe. It had not been afraid to cut off supplies faced by price disputes with Ukraine.”

The Gloves Are Off

The Guardian wrote on July 11:

“[Merkel] also hit back at Trump’s criticism that Germany contributed too little to European defence. ‘Germany does a lot for Nato,’ she said. ‘Germany is the second largest provider of troops, the largest part of our military capacity is offered to Nato and until today we have a strong engagement towards Afghanistan. In that we also defend the interests of the United States.’…

“This summit is shaping up to be the most divisive in Nato’s 69-year history…

“Trump [seems to be] keen to see Merkel replaced as chancellor. His outburst could be part of a strategy to try to undermine her at a time when she is domestically vulnerable. Merkel has been one of the most outspoken critics of Trump among European leaders… Trump’s antagonism towards Merkel is partly personal, a reaction to a senior European politician standing up to him and her very evident dislike of him, which she makes little attempt to hide…”

Merkel has been known to be very timid in her criticism of Donald Trump. When she is described as “one of the most outspoken critics of Trump,” then imagine what would happen if a leader were to come to power in Germany who would be REALLY outspoken, and whose words would be followed by actions. The Bible prophesies that this is exactly what will happen soon.

Handelsblatt Global commented: “‘Germany is totally controlled by Russia.’ Donald Trump, US President. Quote of the Day. Always the diplomat.”

On July 11, Newsmax re-published the following article by The Associated Press:

“Trump predicted as he departed Washington that the ‘easiest’ leg of his journey would be his scheduled sit-down [with] Putin — a comment that did little to reassure allies fretting over his potential embrace of a Russian leader… European Council President Donald Tusk pushed back against Trump’s constant criticism of European allies and urged him to remember who his friends are when he meets with Putin in Helsinki. ‘Dear America, appreciate your allies, after all you don’t have all that many,’ he said.”

America will soon lose even those few remaining allies…

Now Up to 4%?

The Wall Street Journal wrote on July 11:

“President Donald Trump pressured allies to double their military spending target to 4% of GDP, while questioning NATO’s value… Following the 4% proposal, Mr. Trump and NATO’s 28 other leaders agreed to a joint summit declaration that recommitted them to moving toward the 2% target by 2024… Then, after leaving the summit, Mr. Trump called for allies to raise their military spending to 2% ‘IMMEDIATELY, not by 2025’—misstating the year and avoiding mention of his 4% proposal…”

The Week wrote on July 12:

“President Trump told NATO leaders in person and on Twitter that he wants member nations to spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense spending more quickly than the 2024 deadline agreed to in 2014, and maybe raise it to 4 percent, prompting an emergency session of NATO leaders Thursday morning.

“Trump also reportedly threatened to break with NATO and go it alone if other members don’t raise defense spending quickly. In a news conference afterward, Trump said he believes he can withdraw the U.S. from NATO without Congress but sees no need to after the other countries, he said, made ‘a real commitment’ to raise spending to 2 percent of GDP in a ‘relatively short period of years.’…”

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 12:

“French President Emmanuel Macron told reporters the alliance had not agreed to anything new during the meeting. ‘There is a communique that was published yesterday,’ he said, adding, ‘It confirms the goal of 2 percent by 2024. That’s all.’ A German government spokesman also said the meeting had merely reaffirmed the 2 percent goal by 2024.”

BBC News wrote on July 12:

“… no other country has confirmed any increased commitments as yet… French President Emmanuel Macron meanwhile said that no country had signed up to anything more than what was agreed four years ago.”

Will America Withdraw Its Troops from Europe?

McClatchydc.com wrote on July 6:

“European leaders… fear the United States may… begin to bring American troops home from the continent…  Some worry… Trump, at the U.S.-Russia summit, could agree to take the first steps to embolden Russia, such as halting military exercises or agreeing that Crimea, a region of Ukraine annexed by Russia in 2014, belongs to Russia…

“A third of active-duty U.S. military troops overseas – more than 60,000 – are stationed in Europe, including 35,000 in Germany, 12,000 in Italy, 8,500 in the United Kingdom and 3,300 in Spain… Thousands more rotate into other European countries temporarily…”

At this point, the White House has denied that plans are being discussed to withdraw troops from Europe, and it is alleged that Congress would have to agree to such withdrawal. If so, one cannot take it for granted that Congress would necessarily oppose such withdrawal, given the tremendous amount of expenses necessary for stationing US troops in Europe.

Many Germans for US Troops Withdrawal

The Local wrote on July 11:

“A survey… has revealed that close to one in two Germans want all the US troops still stationed on German soil to leave… 42 percent of Germans would be happy if the US pulled its troops out of the Bundesrepublik. At the same time 37 percent said they want the US soldiers to stay, while 21 percent gave no answer.

“In particular, voters for the far-left Die Linke and far-right Alternative for Germany [AfD] wanted an end to US army bases, with 67 percent and 55 percent, respectively, saying the Amis should go. On the other hand, only 35 percent of voters for Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU) support this.

“… Germany… still hosts more US soldiers than any other country except Japan.”

Germany Must Step Up and Lead

Handelsblatt Global wrote on July 12:

“The consequences for security and German identity are vast. Angela Merkel understands this. That’s why she is worried. She knows that the German domestic debate lags far behind these geopolitical realities.

“The question is not when exactly Germany reaches the NATO goal of spending 2 percent of GDP on defense. It is how to explain to Germans that their country must start leading Europe to create… a European substitute for American power, as America increasingly turns its gaze from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Ready or not, Germany must step ‘up’.”

Europe’s Key Problem

The Project Syndicate wrote on July 5:

“Europeans are more worried about the future than they were a decade ago, not least because they are not convinced that their political leaders can respond effectively to current challenges…

“A key problem lies in the intricacy of the EU, which is poorly equipped to function amid chaos… The world of 2018 is one of chaotic play… Europe has too many moving parts. The EU is deliberately complex… That complexity is fine in normal times, but it is problematic at exceptional moments, when the play is frenetic. At those moments, the EU looks more like the Habsburg empire…

“The Habsburg empire had its own potential grand deal… but it was never concluded. Instead, the political elite began to believe that only an external political challenge – in the event, a brief war – could solve the problem. But World War I was no brief war, and far from rescuing the empire, it destroyed it. After 1918, nostalgia for the old empire surged. It looked better, more tolerant, and even more capable than the group of competing nation-states that succeeded it…”

In other words, what is being advocated, but missing at the moment, is a unifying authority with more or less swift and dictatorial powers. The Bible predicts that this is exactly what Europe will get very soon, at a time when, to reiterate a statement from the article, “the political elite began to believe that only an external political challenge – in the event, a brief war – could solve the problem.”

“Merkel Must Go”

The New York Times wrote on July 5:

“Admirers still speak of Merkel as if she is Europe’s last lion, the only leader with the vision and capacity to save the E.U… the longer she’s in office, the more the forces of reaction will gain strength…

“Europe needs a real security policy, backed by credible military power and less dependence on Russian energy… The stakes are too high for a muddler like Merkel to stick around.”

Half of the Germans agree.

The Circus of the Immigration Fight Continues…

News Channel 5 wrote on July 10:

“Germany’s Interior Minister Horst Seehofer presented his migration ‘master plan’ Tuesday in another jab at Chancellor Angela Merkel and her asylum policies. Seehofer has been pushing for more hard-line immigration and asylum policies and even threatened to quit over Merkel’s open-door policies. A recent agreement within Merkel’s governing coalition strengthened Germany’s asylum laws slightly.

“But Seehofer wants to take it a step further. Notably, his plan includes the establishment of ‘transit centers’ along Germany’s border, where migrants would be held during asylum proceedings. That term had been removed from the coalition’s agreement, in part because the Social Democratic Party feared the centers might be compared to World War II-era internment camps…”

Seehofer Asked to Resign

The Local wrote on July 11:

“An Afghan man deported from Germany has been found dead in a hotel room in Kabul after committing suicide, officials said Wednesday. The 23-year-old man… was forcibly returned to the Afghan capital on July 4th along with 68 other failed Afghan asylum seekers. He had been staying at a hotel used by the International Organization for Migration as temporary accommodation for returnees while he waited to go to the western city of Herat…

“According to Spiegel, he lived in Hamburg where he had been convicted of theft and assault. He came to Germany in 2011 and applied for asylum but his case was rejected. The apparent suicide is set to heap pressure on Interior Minister Horst Seehofer, who had already faced criticism for a comment made on Tuesday in which he joked that the 69 deportations to Afghanistan had coincided with his 69th birthday.

“Kevin Kühnert, leader of the youth wing of the Social Democrats responded to the news of the suicide by calling for Seehofer to resign… ‘Horst Seehofer is a reprehensible cynic whose character doesn’t befit his office. His resignation is overdue.’…

“Civilians continue to bear the brunt of the bloody conflict that has been raging since 2001, making the issue of deportations from Germany and other European countries highly controversial. Germany itself is deeply divided over the issue… Some of the deportees have spent most of their lives living outside of Afghanistan before being deported. More Afghans are likely to be deported after Merkel’s shaky three-party coalition agreed last week on a tougher migration policy that will reduce the number of asylum-seekers in the country…”

Seehofer’s popularity has sharply declined in Germany, and the call for his resignation gets louder, while the right-wing AfD party—Germany’s biggest opposition party– has gained further support.

How Martin Schulz Sees It

El Pais wrote on July 6:

“Martin Schultz’s story is right out of a Greek tragedy. President of the European Parliament from 2012 to 2017, he did not seek re-election… [He gave the following] joint interview with EL PAÍS, La Repubblica and Le Figaro:

“It is almost fascist for the interior minister [of Italy] to want to register the Roma people. What we are experiencing is a brutalization of language in politics… this means the end of democracy… the right has been organizing itself for a long time now… In this case, ‘the right’ means anti-democratic, anti-European and populist forces. It is disgraceful the way they attack minorities…

“This will take us to the abyss… Matteo Salvini in Italy, Heinz-Christian Strache and Sebastian Kurz in Austria, Viktor Orban in Hungary and other right-wing populists are determined to liquidate the EU…

“It’s understandable that people want more security and simple things. Those who paint the world in black and white, like Trump or Salvini, propagate their simple ideas and that’s very attractive. You need to have the courage to say that the world is complicated…

“The domestic chaos [in Germany] caused by the Christian Social Union (CSU) is dramatic for Europe. At a time when we are experiencing American unilateralism and Russian authoritarian expansion, Europe cannot engage in regressive politics… I want to be a deputy who will defend the European chapter of [Germany’s] coalition agreement. This coalition must wage the battle for the European Union.”

Schulz’s assessment that Kurz is willing to liquidate the EU, is overblown. Kurz supports the EU, as the next article shows, but not that kind of EU which Schulz would like to see.

Sebastian Kurz—Europe’s New Leader?

Bloomberg wrote on July 6:

“German Chancellor Angela Merkel has often been called the European Union’s real leader… A different chancellor seems positioned for leadership now: Austria’s Sebastian Kurz…

“Few people care much about the rotating presidency of the Council of the European Union, which Austria assumed on July 1. It’s usually just a public relations opportunity for member states that otherwise get little time in the limelight. It’s different with Kurz, though. In the six months since he became chancellor at the head of a coalition between his center-right People’s Party and the far-right Freedom Party, he has positioned himself as a go-to figure for European politicians as well as for powerful outside forces…

“Kurz has said that he’d like to be a ‘bridge-builder’ between the Visegrad Four (Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia) and the rest of the EU.

“… Russian President Vladimir Putin, who rarely travels to Europe, has visited Kurz in Vienna and asked for his help in arranging a meeting with U.S. President Donald Trump… The Austrian chancellor is one of the Trump administration’s favorite European politicians. ‘Look, I think Sebastian Kurz is a rock star,’ Richard Grenell, Trump’s unloved ambassador to Germany, told Breitbart News in a recent interview. ‘I’m a big fan.’

“… Kurz is at the center of events, hated by no one, blamed for nothing… a poll in May showed that if he led a party in Germany, it would have won more votes than Merkel’s center-right bloc, the country’s most popular political force…”

England’s Brexit Disaster

Breitbart wrote on July 9:

“Prominent Brexiteer and senior government minister Boris Johnson resigned his cabinet post Monday afternoon, following his colleague David Davis who departed as Brexit Secretary Sunday evening. The development will leave Theresa May looking increasingly vulnerable, as a growing Brexit rebellion attempts to face off her move to lead Britain into a so-called Brexit in name only [so-called “soft Brexit”], where Britain will remain mostly tied to the European Union…”

The Project Syndicate wrote on July 9:

“May now has a full-blown political crisis on her hands – and all the while, the massive economic and social costs of crashing out of the bloc are beginning to sink in.”

Newsmax added on July 9:

“If Davis’s resignation rattled May, Johnson’s shook the foundations of her government… Johnson is one of Britain’s best-known politicians, and one of the most prominent advocates for Brexit… With Britain due to leave the currently 28-nation bloc on March 29, 2019, EU officials have warned Britain repeatedly that time is running out to seal a deal spelling out the terms of the divorce and a post-split relationship…

“Britain and the EU hope to reach broad agreement by October so the national parliaments of the remaining countries can ratify a deal before Britain leaves. The timetable increasingly looks overly optimistic, and EU frustration with British division and chaos is growing. European Council President Donald Tusk said Monday that ‘the mess caused by Brexit is the biggest problem in the history of EU-UK relations and it is still very far from being resolved.’

“Opposition Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn said the government was incapable of delivering Brexit… The fear among May’s allies is that more resignations may follow…”

The Huffington Post wrote on July 9:

“May promised to deliver a ‘hard’ Brexit when she came to power, but has since dialed back those aspirations… ‘Theresa May’s Government is in meltdown,’ deputy leader of the Labour Party Tom Watson said. ‘This is complete and utter chaos. The country is at a standstill with a divided and shambolic government. The Prime Minister can’t deliver Brexit and has zero authority left.’”

Coming—a Disorderly No Deal?

Politico wrote on July 11:

“May herself conceded to MPs that unless the EU changes its negotiating position, ‘there is serious risk it could lead to no deal.’ She said this would be a ‘disorderly no deal’ as well because neither side would be able to countenance signing a withdrawal treaty under this scenario. Despite the chaos in the British Cabinet Monday, Brussels showed no sign of changing track…

“But if the EU’s red lines do not change, May will be back facing another crisis by the end of the year. Only this time, she may not be able to survive.”

Trump Backs Johnson

Breitbart wrote on July 10:

“President Trump has poured petrol onto the flames of UK Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit crisis by coming out for her chief opponent Boris Johnson…

“To his numerous enemies – in which the UK media abounds: even in the conservative press, Trump coverage is almost uniformly negative – this will [be] seen as yet further evidence that Trump is entirely unsuited to any political office, let alone the leadership of the free world. To his admirers, though… this is precisely the kind of behaviour that makes Trump one of the most… winning presidents ever…

“At the weekend, Britain was effectively hijacked by a Remainer coup… Trump does not want that coup to be successful for a number of obvious reasons, from his friendship with ex-UKIP leader Nigel Farage… and his instinctive loathing of the EU project to his sense that the Brexit vote in the UK was the precursor to his own victory in the presidential elections.”

Turkey’s Dictatorship Increases

The Week wrote on July 8:

“The Turkish government on Sunday fired and canceled the passports of some 18,000 civil servants, about half of them police officers, alleging ties to terrorist organizations. Another 6,000 are members of the military, and many of the remaining 3,000 are teachers and professors.

“The move comes shortly before President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is expected to lift the two-year national state of emergency imposed following a failed coup in 2016. About 160,000 Turkish civil servants have been similarly purged since the coup attempt, and 50,000 of them have been charged and jailed.”

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 9:

“Recep Tayyip Erdogan is set to hold greater powers than any other Turkish leader has seen in decades… Turkey’s transition from a parliamentary democracy to a system featuring an all-powerful executive president marks the country’s largest shift in governance since the Turkish republic was founded out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire almost a century ago.

“Several foreign leaders were set to attend Monday’s inauguration. They included leaders from Ankara’s allies in Africa, the Middle East and Soviet Union, although relatively few EU figures. The only sitting EU leaders expected were Bulgarian President Rumen Radev and Hungary’s hardline Prime Minister Viktor Orban.

“Former German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder was set to attend on behalf of the German government. According to a spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry in Berlin, it was usual for the government to send to a former leader to such an inauguration ceremony.”

Schröder was invited by Erdogan as a special friend. This fact, combined with Schröder’s special friendship with Putin, has led to much consternation in Germany.

Ethiopia and Eritrea End War

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 9:

“Ethiopia and Eritrea officially declared an end to a two-decades-old war on Monday, a day after their leaders held a historic summit in the Eritrean capital Asmara. The two neighbors also agreed to resume flights, open embassies and develop ports together… The rapprochement is a result of the peace talks… in a bid to end 20 years of enmity. Eritrea was part of Ethiopia until 1993, when it declared its independence in a referendum.

“The two neighbors started a frontier war in 1998 that killed an estimated 80,000 people. Full-blown fighting ended in 2000, but their troops have faced off across their disputed border ever since…”

The united country of Ethiopia/Eritrea fulfilled an end-time prophecy in Daniel 11, when it, as the “king of the South”, pushed against the king of the North (the emperor of Italy) who then responded via an attack under Mussolini. It will have to be seen whether the prophecy was dual and will find a further fulfillment in the days ahead through a modern king of the North and a king of the South.

Trade War Escalates

Politico wrote on July 10:

“The Trump administration escalated a mounting trade war with China on Tuesday by publishing a list of $200 billion worth of Chinese goods that it proposes to hit with an additional 10 percent tariff. ‘Rather than address our legitimate concerns, China has begun to retaliate against U.S. products,’ U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said… ‘There is no justification for such action.’

“The new tariff list broadens the types of goods caught up in the trade war by targeting items like seafood, minerals, chemicals, and personal care items, such as shampoo and soap. It also includes a number of consumer products such as handbags, luggage, gloves and paper. The new U.S. move came after China retaliated in kind against tariffs that President Donald Trump imposed last week. Other Chinese-made goods [are] slated to face the new 10 percent tariff. The list include[s] building supplies, such as plywood and floor panels; certain wool products, cotton yarns and threads; woven cotton fabrics; and certain automobile parts, including tires…”

JTA wrote on July 11:

“Israel will not be exempt from steel and aluminum tariffs recently imposed by the Trump administration. The 25 percent tariff on steel and the 10 percent tariff on aluminum has the potential to seriously harm the Israeli metal industry… The United States is Israel’s largest goods export market…

“The lack of an exemption was announced Monday… Canada, Mexico and the European Union also did not receive exemptions. Australia, Argentina, Brazil and South Korea have received permanent exemptions.”

Nomination of Brett Kavanaugh as Supreme Court Justice

The Associated Press reported on July 9:

“Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell says that Judge Brett Kavanaugh [a practicing Roman Catholic] is a ‘superb’ Supreme Court pick and that senators should ‘put partisanship aside’ in considering him… Democrats are already lining up against Kavanaugh as too conservative. But McConnell says senators should give him ‘the fairness, respect, and seriousness that a Supreme Court nomination ought to command.’…

“Republicans hold a mere 50-49 Senate majority, with the prolonged absence of the ailing Arizona GOP Sen. John McCain. The defection of one Republican would kill the nomination unless at least one Democrat votes yes.”

Kavanaugh first faces a bipartisan Senate committee, which will issue a recommendation to the full Senate following their hearing. That is followed by a debate and vote by the full Senate. Kavanaugh will need at least 51 votes to receive confirmation. Vice President Mike Pence can cast a vote to break a tie.

The Huffington Post wrote on July 9:

“If confirmed, the 53-year-old U.S. circuit judge could tilt the balance of the court in a solidly conservative direction for decades to come, likely affecting decisions on abortion… gay rights and capital punishment…

“Kavanaugh’s most prominent opinion on abortion rights came in 2017 when he wrote in dissent not to allow an undocumented teenager to seek an abortion while in federal custody at the U.S. border in Texas… Kavanaugh also dissented with the majority in Priests for Life v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, arguing that the Obama administration had imposed a “substantial burden” on the rights of religious groups by requiring them to include birth control coverage in their health insurance plans…”

JTA wrote on July 9:

“Kavanaugh… is well respected by the Republican establishment, although some on the right have said he is not conservative enough. Trump reportedly was wary of Kavanaugh’s close ties to George W. Bush, who nominated him to his current position in 2003… He helped draft the Starr Report, which called for President Bill Clinton to be impeached because he lied about having had a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinsky… He fought on the legal team urging Florida not to have a recount in the 2000 presidential election between Bush and Al Gore, Clinton’s vice president. The Supreme Court decision not to do so led to Bush becoming the president…

“… the Jewish establishment tends to take progressive stances on domestic issues such as reproductive rights, LGBTQ rights, voting rights, gun control and separation of church and state…

“Orthodox groups are likely to welcome a court that protects public religious expression over strict separation, as it did in recent rulings confirming a baker’s right to refuse to bake a cake for a same-sex wedding…”

Jehovah’s Witnesses Bound by EU Data Protection Law

Reuters reported on July 10:

“Jehovah’s Witnesses must obtain consent from people before they take down their personal details during door-to-door preaching in order to comply with EU data privacy rules, Europe’s top court ruled on Tuesday. The case arose after Finland in 2013 banned Jehovah’s Witnesses from collecting personal data during door-to-door visits.

“The U.S.-based Christian denomination… challenged the decision, saying that its preaching should be considered a personal religious activity and as such the notes taken down during such visits are also personal. A Finnish court subsequently asked the Luxembourg-based Court of the Justice of the European Union (ECJ) for advice, which said on Tuesday that such religious activity is not covered by exemptions granted to personal activity…

“Jehovah’s Witnesses differ from mainstream Christianity in a number of their beliefs, including rejecting the doctrine of the Trinity and opposing blood transfusions and military conscription.”

Newsweek elaborated on July 10:

“‘The Court concludes that EU law on the protection of personal data supports a finding that a religious community is a controller, jointly with its members who engage in preaching, of the processing of personal data carried out by the latter in the context of door-to-door preaching organised, coordinated and encouraged by that community, without it being necessary that the community has access to those data…’

“The group’s tenets significantly differ from other mainstream sects of Christianity and forbid participating in military service, giving blood and celebrating holidays, including religious feasts [the reference here is to “religious feasts” such as Christmas, Easter or New Year’s] and birthdays…

“As a result, the EU court found that ‘the concept of a “filing system” covers a set of personal data collected in the course of door-to-door preaching, consisting of the names and addresses and other information concerning the persons contacted, if those data are structured according to specific criteria which, in practice, enable them to be easily retrieved for subsequent use…

“The Jehovah’s Witnesses have run into trouble elsewhere, too. Russia has arrested a number of the group’s followers in the country after declaring the religious community to be an ‘extremist organization’ in 2017 and utilizing other methods to crack down on their activities.

“Like Russia, South Korea has mandatory military service and has so far denied offering Jehovah’s Witnesses a pass. Seoul’s constitutional court ruled last week that such a strict stance was unconstitutional and that the government must present an alternative option, but the group’s representatives told Newsweek that over 2,000 of its followers remained imprisoned in South Korea for refusing military service.”

Jimmy Carter: Jesus Would Approve of Gay Marriage and Certain Abortions

Breitbart wrote on July 9:

“Former U.S. President Jimmy Carter said Sunday that Jesus would approve of gay marriage and certain abortions… Asked about gay marriage, he replied that it is ‘no problem with me. I think everybody should have a right to get married regardless of their sex.’

“Regarding whether he thinks Jesus would approve of gay marriage, Carter replied ‘I don’t have any verse in Scripture,’ but added, ‘I believe that Jesus would approve of gay marriage.’ ‘I think Jesus would encourage any love affair if it was honest and sincere and was not damaging to anyone else and I don’t see that gay marriage damages anyone else,’ he said… ‘The only thing I would draw a line on,’ he said, is ‘I wouldn’t be in favor of the government being able to force a local church congregation to perform gay marriages if they didn’t want to. But those two partners should be able to go to a local courthouse or to a different church and get married.’

“Mr. Carter said that abortion has always been a struggle for him, because he does not believe Jesus would be in favor of most abortions… ‘I have a hard time believing that Jesus would approve abortions unless it was because of rape or incest or if the mother’s life was in danger’… he said.”

Well, the Jesus Mr. Carter believes in is most certainly not the Jesus of the Bible who taught marriage between a man and a woman and who condemned homosexuality and the killing of innocent life (abortion) for any reason.

US Delegation Opposed to Breastfeeding?

Ars Technica added on July 9:

“In May, a US delegation to the World Health Organization issued stunning trade and military threats in its opposition to a well-established and otherwise uncontroversial resolution encouraging breastfeeding… The resolution simply put forth that mother’s milk is the healthiest option for infants and that countries should work to limit any misleading or inaccurate advertising by makers of breast-milk substitutes. It affirms a long-held position by the WHO and is backed by decades of research.

“But more than a dozen participants from several countries—most requesting anonymity out of fear of US retaliation—told the Times that the American officials surprised health experts and fellow delegates alike by fiercely opposing the resolution. At first, the US delegates attempted to simply dilute the pro-breastmilk message, voiding language that called for governments to ‘protect, promote, and support breastfeeding’ and limit promotion of competing baby food products that experts warn can be harmful. But when that failed, the US reportedly put the squeeze on countries backing the resolution by making aggressive trade and military threats—a move that further stunned the assembly.

“The Ecuadorian delegation, for instance, was expected to introduce the resolution but was weaned off the idea after the US threatened to impose harmful trade measures and withdraw military assistance—which the US is providing in the northern part of the country to help address violence spilling over the border from Colombia. Officials from the US, Uruguay, and Mexico said that at least a dozen other countries—many of which are poor countries in Africa and Latin America—dropped the resolution…

“The Times notes a 2016 series in the Lancet in which researchers estimated that universal breastfeeding could spare the lives of 823,000 children each year and save $302 billion in economic losses. The WHO has long said that breastfeeding is the optimal feeding method for infants and recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of a child’s life and continued feeding with introduction of other foods up to two years of age.

“In the end, the US’s effort to dash the WHO resolution encouraging breastfeeding was largely unsuccessful. Russia ultimately sponsored the resolution and the American delegation did not issue any threats to the country.”

We wonder why the US delegation opposed encouragement of breastfeeding. It is indeed well-established and beyond any reasonable dispute that it is the most preferable feeding method for infants.  

Acknowledgement and Disclaimer

These Current Events are compiled and commented on by Norbert Link. We gratefully acknowledge the many contributions of news articles from our readership. The publication of articles in this section is not to be viewed as an endorsement or approval as to contents or accuracy of the selected articles, but they are published for the purpose of pointing at worldwide developments in the light of biblical end-time prophecy and godly instruction. Our own comments are provided in italics.

In the first part, we discussed the biblical passages pertaining to the second Passover, i.e. Numbers 9 and 2 Chronicles 30. We read that those who were unable to partake of the first Passover [at the beginning of the 14^th day of Nisan, the first month in the Hebrew calendar], due to ritual uncleanness or absence because of a long journey, were allowed to take the second Passover. They would do so EXACTLY 30 days later [at the beginning of the 14^th day of Iyar, the second month in the Hebrew calendar], and in EXACTLY the same way as the first Passover was observed. We also saw that under King Hezekiah, the whole congregation kept the second Passover, and they proceeded to keep seven Days of Unleavened Bread, followed by another seven days of celebration.

In the past, there has been some confusion as to whether or not to keep the Days of Unleavened Bread [or some resemblance of abstaining from unleavened bread for seven days], following the second Passover.

For instance, it has been recommended that if a person keeping the second Passover did NOT observe the Days of Unleavened Bread after the first Passover, he or she should observe seven days of unleavened bread after taking the second Passover. It was also mentioned, however, that the first and last days of this period of unleavened bread following the second Passover would NOT be Sabbaths.

This approach does not seem to find biblical support. Numbers 9 does not mention anything about keeping any of the Days of Unleavened Bread after the second Passover. Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible points out correctly that in Old Testament times, the second Passover was to be eaten “in the same manner as the first passover was eaten, Exodus 12:8; only no mention is made of keeping the feast of unleavened bread seven days…”

When reading about how the Jews observe the second Passover (“Pesach Sheni” in Hebrew), it is pointed out that the festival is only one day this time, rather than seven. In other words, a “shifting” takes place from a seven day festival to a one day event (the Jews consider the Passover and the Feast of Unleavened Bread as constituting one festival, calling it “Passover,” even though technically, the Passover and the Days of Unleavened Bread are two different festivals). They continue explaining that it is not necessary to remove leaven from one’s premises for seven days, following the second Passover, or to abstain from eating leavened products during that time.

When reviewing the incident in 2 Chronicles 30 under King Hezekiah, we find that the whole occurrence was quite unorthodox in that people partook of the second Passover who were, under the ritual law, not permitted to do so, due to their ceremonial uncleanness (verse 18), but that Hezekiah prayed to God for “atonement” (verse 18) and God listened to him and forgave and “healed” them (verse 20), while the Levites ate throughout the feast for seven days, “making confession” (verse 22). Subsequently, the whole assembly agreed to continue the celebration for another seven days (verse 23; notice that the words “the feast” in this verse are in italics, meaning that they are not in the original Hebrew). The 14-day observance after the second Passover was done voluntarily; there was no biblical command to do so.

We do not know how exactly those 14 days were kept. But in any event, this occurrence cannot be used as a precedence for those today who keep the second Passover, so that they would need to also keep seven days of unleavened bread, because IF we were to look at the occurrence under King Hezekiah as binding for us today, then 14 days would have to be kept in some way, not just seven.

We should also understand why God was willing to “overlook” or pass over the inaccurate observance of the Passover at that time. Until King Hezekiah, there is no record that the children of Israel and Judah even kept the Passover after Joshua and Samuel (compare 2 Chronicles 35:18). They might have done so, but not with the same zeal and dedication as they did under King Hezekiah. And it appears that they did not keep it again after Hezekiah, at least not with the same zeal, until the service was temporarily restored under King Josiah (2 Chronicles 35). In the incident of 2 Chronicles 30, under King Hezekiah, God forgave them their inadequacies as He looked at their new-found zeal and dedication to His Word, even though their understanding was not perfect. Even under Moses, it appears that only very few Passovers were actually held.

Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers states the following pertaining to Joshua 5:10:

“This is the third Passover in Israel’s history. The first two were kept under Moses–(1) in Egypt, when the Lord delivered them; (2) the second at Sinai, when He had ‘brought them unto Himself.’ (3) The third is on the other side [of the] Jordan under Joshua. Two belong to the Exodus, or going out; one to the Eisodus, or coming in… The law in Exodus 12:48 is, “no uncircumcised person shall eat thereof.” Hence, while they wandered in the wilderness, this uncircumcised generation could not keep the Passover.”

The Benson Commentary agrees, stating this pertaining to Joshua 5:10:

“The children of Israel kept the passover — Which was their third passover: the first was in Egypt, Exodus 12.; the second at mount Sinai, Numbers 9.; the third here; for in their wilderness travels, these and several other sacrifices were neglected, Amos 5:25. While they were in the wilderness, they were denied the comfort of this ordinance, as a further token of God’s displeasure. But now God comforted them again, after the time that he had afflicted them.”

Likewise Matthew Poole’s Commentary: “This [in Joshua 5:10] was their third passover: the first was in Egypt, Exo 12; the second at Mount Sinai, Num 9; the third here; for in their wilderness travels these and all other sacrifices were neglected, Amos 5:25.”

Very little has been published in the past in Church of God literature about the specific circumstances allowing or even encouraging a person to take the second Passover, when he or she did not partake of the first Passover. If anything was said at all, it was stated that the person was “unable” to take the first Passover; that “he or she inadvertently misse[d] the first Passover due to circumstances beyond their control”; that “strenuous circumstances occurred”; or that they were “not able” to keep the first Passover “due to illness or other emergency circumstances.”

Commentaries are also very vague. Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges states that it “was understood in later days to include all good reasons which might prevent anyone from keeping the festival.” The Benson Commentary says that “the Hebrews think that other hinderances [sic] of like nature are comprehended; as if one be hindered by a disease, or by any other such kind of uncleanness.”

We are informed that the definition of “distant journey” has been interpreted very liberally by the rabbinic tradition.

In the Church of God, it has been understood for a long time that the examples in Numbers 9 are not exclusive. A baptized person who was unable to keep the Passover because of sickness (perhaps lying in a hospital bed without any privacy) was always permitted and encouraged to take the second Passover.

There might be additional unusual circumstances which might have to be scrutinized carefully; and it is important to provide here a few more specific details for the purpose of assisting and guiding in this process. The following comments are not introducing “new doctrine,” nor are they meant to be understood as providing definitive doctrinal or administrative decisions of the Church, but rather, to help sharpen our thinking pertaining to what might or might not constitute “unusual circumstances” in specific situations. However, converted members contemplating to take the second Passover should never do so without prior consultation and counsel with the ministry.

If baptized members did not take the first Passover because of what might be described as “spiritual uncleanness” (more on this term below), which was followed by genuine repentance, would they be allowed to partake of the second Passover, or would they have to wait another year and then partake of the next first Passover? Would this situation be analogous to the ritual uncleanness prohibiting a person to partake of the first Passover? Persons who were ritually unclean could not take the first Passover, but they could take the second Passover when they had become ritually clean. Would the spiritual analogy apply so that those who were “spiritually” unclean could not/should not take the first Passover (that is why it is always emphasized during the Passover ceremony that no one should take the Passover if he/she is harboring grudges against someone else), but once they became spiritually clean, they could partake of the second Passover?

[On the other hand, a person thinking that he or she should not partake of the first Passover because of “spiritual” uncleanness would make a mistake when unilaterally deciding not to do so. Such a person might very well be sinning, as Paul commands us to examine ourselves and then to TAKE the Passover (1 Corinthians 11:28). A decision in this regard, pro or con, should always be first discussed and counseled with the ministry.]

In addition, when someone is not baptized, he would not be spiritually “clean,” but once he is baptized, he would be spiritually “clean” and therefore able to take the Passover. Does this understanding help us in determining certain developments pertaining to the second Passover? Let us suppose that someone would be ready for baptism prior to the (first) Passover, but could not be baptized just before the Passover, because of practical problems, such as no minister being present prior to Passover. Would this person who becomes baptized a few days after the first Passover be allowed to take the second Passover? We saw that a person could not partake of the first Passover when he was ritually unclean, but he could partake of the second Passover if he became ritually clean in the meantime. Would this analogy apply to spiritual cleanness due to baptism; in other words, could the spiritual analogy apply that when an unbaptized person who is spiritually unclean and therefore prevented from taking the (first) Passover, as he or she would take it unworthily, would be able to take the second Passover after he or she becomes spiritually clean through baptism?

One argument against this concept might be that the ritually unclean person was physically circumcised; that is, he could have taken the first Passover if it had not been for his ritual uncleanness or his being on a journey. The spiritual analogy might mean that the person was baptized (spiritually circumcised), but could not take the first Passover for reasons other than not being baptized, while an unbaptized person could not have partaken of the first Passover in the first place. In addition, there is no biblical record that a man who was not physically circumcised could partake of the Passover. On the other hand, as mentioned above, there are very few biblical records when the Passover was kept in the first place, and the command of physical circumcision only applied to men, not women, but women did participate in the Old Testament Passover observances.

One might also consider that just because conditions prevented the baptism from taking place before the first Passover through no one’s fault, should this preclude taking the second Passover after baptism which took place right after the first Passover? Had all the relevant conditions been in place; e.g., availability of a minister and a suitable place for baptism, then the baptism would have taken place prior to Passover. The person had no fault in not being baptized in time for the first Passover. The Israelites who could not keep the Passover because they were defiled by the dead body of a man, asked Moses: “Why are we kept from presenting the offering of the LORD at its appointed time among the children of Israel?” (Numbers 9:7). Today, a person presents himself, as a living sacrifice, to God the Father and Jesus Christ at Passover, while accepting THE Sacrifice of Christ for the ongoing remission of his sins.

We should also consider that in the situation under King Hezekiah, the first Passover could not be observed, among other reasons, as there were not enough Levites present who had “consecrated “ themselves (2 Chronicles 30:3). Could this analogy apply in a situation today when no minister was present prior to the first Passover to baptize a person?

In Matthew 18:18 we read Christ’s words to His ministry: “Assuredly, I say to you, whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven.”

It ultimately requires a decision by the Church ministry, considering all the facts and circumstances in a given situation, as to whether it should be recommended to a person who did not observe the first Passover to be allowed to observe the second Passover. It would have to be an individual decision of the local minister, reviewing all the facts and circumstances, whether to recommend the second Passover for someone who was baptized right after the first Passover, because the baptism could not take place before the first Passover, through no fault of the person. The same might apply when a baptized person did not take the first Passover due to “spiritual” uncleanness but subsequently genuinely repents and is desirous of taking the second Passover. This might also include a situation when an ill-advised “decision” by a member was made not to take the first Passover which might turn out to have been incorrect, due to a wrong evaluation of the circumstances or due to a wrong understanding of pertinent facts, and when the member repents of his or her mistake and has the strong desire to take the second Passover. In either case, an individual should not take it upon himself or herself, without the consultation with a minister, to take the second Passover on his or her own. Although the ultimate decision rests with the individual member, it is strongly recommended that he or she counsels first with the ministry on the matter of the second Passover.

From the way Numbers 9:10-12 is rendered in some translations, one might conclude that a person MUST take the second Passover if the situation warrants it, and that the person were to sin if he or she would not do it. The Authorized Version states that those who could not keep the first Passover “shall” keep it on the 14^th day of the second month. (The Revised Standard Version and the Revised English Bible state it in similar terms, i.e. “shall” keep it, or even “must” keep it). However, this is not what Numbers 9:10-12 seems to want to convey. Rather, the idea seems to be that when the second Passover is to be observed, it must be at that particular time; it must be “to the LORD”; and it must be in accordance with the ordinances of the (first) Passover. The New King James Bible renders these verses in this way, thereby accurately reflecting the intended meaning:

“… he may still keep the LORD’s Passover. On the fourteenth day of the second month, at twilight, they may keep it. They shall eat it with unleavened bread and bitter herbs. They shall leave none of it until morning, nor break one of its bones. According to all of the ordinances of the Passover they shall keep it.”

Also compare the New International Version; the New American Bible (“he may still keep the LORD’s Passover”); and the New Jerusalem Bible (he “can still keep a Passover for Yahweh”).

In any event, applying the principles of Numbers 9 to the New Testament Church, it will be the ministry who is to make a recommendation in a given situation, as to whether it is advisable or recommended to take or not to take the second Passover, based on godly inspiration, conveying what God may bind or loose in heaven in a specific case. Undoubtedly, the ministry has been given authority to make decisions in such cases, as God has given the ministry authority to declare, based on godly-revealed wisdom and discernment, whether someone has repented of his or her sin, or not (John 20:23). However, if the ministry, under godly inspiration, concludes that the second Passover “may” or “should be” taken, then a person’s decision to ignore the ministry and act contrarily might very well be sinful.

This would also be true for the first Passover when the ministry concludes, under godly inspiration, that there are no reasons to prevent someone from taking the first Passover, and the member just chooses to ignore such advice. The reverse is true as well: When the ministry, under godly inspiration, concludes that the first or second Passover should not be taken under the particular circumstances, then the member might sin if he or she acts contrary to that conclusion and partakes of the first or second Passover anyhow. It really boils down to the question as to whether we believe that God inspires His ministry in cases like these, or whether we are entitled to just do whatever we please (compare Judges 17:6; 21:25). [Of course, if it is concluded that a second Passover should not or does not need to be taken, then the person is of course required to partake of the next first Passover, unless circumstances dictate otherwise, as discussed above.]

Another question is how the second Passover is to be kept. The answer is: Similarly as to how the first Passover is being kept at home by those who are scattered and unable to attend the Passover service in person. The Church of the Eternal God and its international affiliates have prepared pre-recorded material for those baptized Church members who are eligible to take the first (or second) Passover at home. Normally, the Passover service consists of three parts: The footwashing; the partaking of the bread; and the partaking of the wine. When only one person is observing the Passover at home, then the footwashing ceremony must be dispensed of, for obvious reasons.

When two or more persons are partaking of the Passover at home, then—if husband and wife—they would wash each other’s feet, and if additional men and women are participating, then men would wash the feet of the other men, and women of the other women. If a ministerial couple who had partaken of the first Passover are present for the second Passover in order to assist someone who might need help, then the minister could officiate the second Passover service, but he and his wife should not partake of the Passover themselves, as otherwise, they would keep the Passover more than once within a year, which would be against God’s Law.

In conclusion, we would strongly recommend that converted members who may be in doubt as to whether or not to take the first or second Passover, should not make a unilateral decision in this regard, but counsel first with the Church ministry for guidance and direction.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

compiled by Dave Harris

A new Member Letter (July 2018) has been written and mailed our subscribers. In this letter, Michael Link encourages Christians to set our goal to be victorious in God’s calling.

“How God Views the 2018 NATO Summit” is the title of a new StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is a summary:

 It started with a bang. President Trump voiced his strong objections to Germany’s plan to build a pipeline with Russia that would bring gas from Russia to Germany, thereby becoming dependent on and being held captive by Russia. Mr. Trump is not alone with his criticism of Germany. In addition, he chided NATO members, especially Germany, for not paying enough to NATO, comparing it with the huge amount which the USA provides. Disagreements exist as to what was really committed to during the summit. Fears have resurfaced that the USA may leave NATO and withdraw its troops from Europe, especially Germany. What DOES the Bible say about these developments?

“Schon sehr bald–Weltweite Vernichtung vor Christi Kommen!” is the title of this Sabbath’s German sermon, presented by Norbert Link. Title in English: “Very Soon–Worldwide Destruction Before Christ’s Coming!”

“Turbulence Along the Way,” the sermonette presented last Sabbath by Frank Bruno, is now posted. Here is a summary:

This sermonette makes the point that true chaos as we humans experience it is well within God’s plan for his creation. What appears to be chaotic and discordant is actually quite ordered and precisely designed by God. We are not unlike a small creature living among the branches of a great tree with seemingly endless limbs, sub-branches, and intricate leaves—each with their own complex structure that God planned and designed. When we are converted and we trust and believe in God our Creator—all falls into place with His order.

“Great Leadership,” the sermon presented last Sabbath by Eric Rank, is now posted. Here is a summary:

Throughout the history recorded in the Bible, leaders emerge and come to power with a wide range of quality. Some leaders were bad, some were good, and a few were great. What are the attributes that make a great leader? What can we learn and apply in our own lives where we have a scope of leadership?