Update 69

On this coming Sabbath, Dave Harris will be giving the main message — “No Lie!”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org at the appropriate time, just click on “Connect to Live Stream.”

In organized volleyball there are specific positions that you go to on the court when attacking on offense or defending on the other side of the net. Coach used to say, “A lesser player in the right position is more valuable than a good player in the wrong position”

Solomon and Saul were great men that were caught “out of position” (1Kings 11:4; 1Sam 16:14 ) at different times in their lives. Solomon, as we know, was one of the wisest men of all time and Saul was a strong man and a mighty warrior. Yet, with all of their wisdom and strength, they often “missed the mark”.

That being the case, what chance do we, the weak and foolish of the world, have?

With Satan roaming the earth looking to take advantage of us in any way that he can, we only have one place where we will find safety. That “position” is right on the heels of Christ, our example (1Pet 2:21). Saul and Solomon did not follow Him all the days of their lives and the chinks in their armor were found and were exploited.

Our position should be one of following Christ as He leads us to God the Father. We are to walk with Him daily keeping all the commandments of God. If we do this, we, the weak called of God, can accomplish what the great often did not and make our calling and election sure.
 

PROPHECY IS BEING FULFILLED — A GROWING GULF BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND EUROPE

We have taught it for so long, that some in the church of God have apparently grown too familiar with it — and they have looked for alternatives. Thinking that they might perhaps have received some kind of special insight, they rejected the prophetic truth, as it had been “delivered to the saints.”
 
What are we talking about?
 
We are discussing here the well-established Biblical teaching that the last resurrection of the Roman Empire — the United States of Europe — will end up on a collision course with the United States! They won’t be friends — and they won’t be part of a big happy family, either. We have known and proclaimed this for decades — but, sadly, some choose to forget.
 
It is remarkable that very recently, historical and political voices have been heard in the United States and elsewhere, pointing out this inevitable outcome. We would like to bring this astonishing development to the attention of our readers.
 
We start with a surprising article in “The Times Digest,” dated November 3, 2002, publishing excerpts from the “New York Times.” On page 8, Thomas L. Friedman writes in “Come to Berlin”:
 
“Where’s the [Berlin] wall? My German friend explained that the only trace left is a cobblestone path that snakes across Berlin, drawing a line in the pavement where the wall once ran. It’s easy to cross that line without even knowing it. And therein lies the core of the crisis between America and Germany today — triggered by Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder’s use of anti-Bush and anti-Iraq-war rhetoric to win re-election, then fueled by a German minister comparing President Bush to Hitler… Would somebody please bring back the Berlin Wall? Since World War II, America and Germany have had many disputes, but always within limits, because both sides saw a dangerous foe on the other side of that wall… But without the wall clearly defining our side and the enemy’s, all sorts of lines are being crossed.”
 
We might note here that the relationship between the United States and Germany, in particular, has not improved. According to Der Spiegel Online, dated November 27, 2002, Donald Rumsfeld still considers the relationship as critical, and even a German participation in a war against Iraq would not eradicate the damage. It seems, however, that Chancellor Schroeder will not change his position in that regard, anyway. Spiegel Online reported on November 27, 2002, that Germany will not permit the United States to use German offensive tanks, presently stationed in Kuwait, in a war against Iraq. Although Germany did grant the U.S. military forces overflight and transit rights, Germany’s refusal regarding its tanks, according to the magazine, “could bring about a new fight between the United States and Germany.”
 
We continue with a thought-provoking article by Charles A. Kupchan, titled, “The End of the West.” This article was published in the November 2002 edition of “The Atlantic.” Mr. Kupchan is Professor at Georgetown University and a senior fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations. This is what he has to say:
 
“The next clash of civilizations will not be between the West and the rest [of the world] but between the United States and Europe — and Americans [and we might add, far too many in the church of God] remain largely oblivious.”
 
A little later in the article, he writes, “The EU’s annual economic output has reached about $8 trillion, compared with America’s $10 trillion, and the euro will soon threaten the dollar’s global dominance. Europe is strengthening its collective consciousness and character and forging a clearer sense of interests and values that are quite distinct from those of the United States. The EU’s member states are debating the adoption of a Europe-wide constitution…, building armed forces capable of operating independently of the U.S. military, and striving to project a single voice in the diplomatic arena. As the EU fortifies its governmental institutions and takes in new members…, it will become a formidable counterweight to the United States on the world stage. The transatlantic rivalry that has already begun will inevitably intensify… The coming clash between the United States and the European Union will doubtless bear little resemblance to the all-consuming standoff of the Cold War. Although military confrontation remains a remote prospect, however [we might note here that there will be, at the very end, a military confrontation between the United States of Europe and the United States of America], U.S.-E.U. competition will extend far beyond the realm of trade… Washington and Brussels will just as likely lock horns over the Middle East. Europe will resist… U.S. leadership…”
 
Near the end of the 8-page-article, Prof. Kupchan writes, “The consequences of the growing rift between the United States and Europe are only just becoming apparent. The two sharply disagree on the Middle East… History is coming full circle. After breaking away from the British Empire, the United States came together as a unitary federation, emerged as a leading nation, and eventually eclipsed Europe’s Great Powers [Note that this reference to America’s greatness is absolutely prophetic. In Genesis 48:19, we read that Jacob blessed Manasseh, stating that the nation descending from him — the United States of America — would be “great.”]. It is now Europe’s turn to ascend and break away from an America that refuses to surrender its privileges of primacy.”
 
This last statement is prophetic as well. Indeed, Europe will “ascend” one more time. The Bible describes this last resurrection of the ancient Roman Empire this way, “The beast that you saw was, and is not, and will ascend out of the bottomless pit [a metaphor for the fact that it had been forgotten in the pages of history] and go to perdition.” (Revelation 17:8). Compare, too, Revelation 11:7 and Revelation 9:1-11. Especially the passage in Revelation 9 shows that the forming United States of Europe will at the very end engage in war with other nations.
 
Prof. Kupchan concludes his article with this dire warning, “Europe will inevitably rise up as America’s principal competitor. Should Washington and Brussels begin to recognize the dangers of the growing gulf between them, they may be able to contain their budding rivalry. Should they fail, however [and the Bible predicts that they will fail, and it also prophecies that Great Britain and the Commonwealth nations will not be a part of the United States of Europe in its final configuration], to prepare for life after Pax Americana, they will ensure that the coming clash of civilizations will not be between the West and the rest [of the world] but within a West divided against itself.”
 
We have also repeatedly pointed out the influential role that the Roman Catholic Church will be playing in regard to the last revival of the ancient Roman Empire — later to be named “Holy Roman Empire,” to designate the Catholic influence and involvement. In a recent article published by “Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, Inc.,” Breffni O’Rourke writes, “With the Convention on the Future of Europe now drawing up a constitution for an expended European Union of 25 members, the question arises: how can the Christian heritage of Europe be reflected in this document?… It is in this context that the pope is pressing for the world of the spirit to be recognized in the new constitution… [T]he pontiff said that building a united Europe needs leaders with ‘will and determination, with a desire to build the union on common values, aware of the Christian roots of different peoples which are an inescapable part of European history.'”
 
The article continued that some, such as Professor Hans Kung, a “German-based theologian” and “dissident who has previously clashed with the pope,” disagreed, feeling that the pope “is sending the wrong message. ‘A lot of people have the impression that this pope is precisely promoting a mo
del of Europe which is basically Roman Catholic, which tolerates other [religions], but does not really have a common understanding [with them] and which has not acknowledged the other religions as also true religions.'”
 
Of course, it has not. The official teaching of the Catholic Church, as has been recently reiterated by German Cardinal Ratzinger, is that it is the only true “mother” church, willing to embrace its dissident “daughters” upon repentance and return to the Catholic fold.
 
We pray that those who could know, and who once knew the truth, will embrace the Biblical teaching, as it is so clearly revealed in Scripture. For more information, please read our free booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord,” as well as “Europe in Prophecy: The Unfolding of End-Time Events.”
 

Both are correct.

In most cases, when using the expression, “the LORD” [“Yahweh” in the Hebrew, basically meaning “The Eternal” or “The Everliving One”], the Old Testament refers to the One Who later became known as the Son, Jesus Christ. There are statements, however, which use the expression “Yahweh” for the One Who later became known as “the Father.” This also proves that both the Father and Jesus Christ have always been God beings, and that the Old Testament teaches that there is more than just one God being.

Notice Jeremiah 23:5-6, which uses the term “Yahweh” for both God beings in the same context:

“‘Behold, the days are coming,’ says the LORD [Yahweh], ‘That I will raise to David a Branch of righteousness; A King shall reign and prosper, And execute judgment and righteousness in the earth. In His days Judah will be saved, And Israel will dwell safely; Now this is His name by which He will be called: THE LORD [Yahweh] OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS.'”

We see, then, that the LORD (Yahweh) will raise a “Branch of righteousness,” to be also called the “LORD” (Yahweh). It is the Father who raises Jesus Christ. Both are called here LORD or Yahweh.

We find a similar statement in Zechariah 4:8-9. We are quoting from the New King James Bible, as it conveys the intended meaning more clearly:

“Moreover the word of the LORD [Yahweh] came to me, saying: ‘The hands of Zerubbabel Have laid the foundation of this temple; His hands shall also finish it. Then you will know That the LORD [Yahweh] of hosts has sent Me [i.e., Yahweh] to you.'”

We see, here, that the LORD [Yahweh, i.e. Christ] speaks to Zechariah and tells him that He [Christ] was sent by the LORD [Yahweh, i.e., the Father]. In other words, the LORD sends the LORD. The expression “Yahweh” applies to both God beings.

This is not a reference to a human messenger or an angel, conveying the “word of the LORD,” while the LORD is speaking about Himself. Notice that the New King James Bible capitalizes the word “Me” in “…the LORD of hosts has sent Me to you.” They convey the intended meaning that the word “Me” refers to one of the two God beings, and not to a human or angelic messenger.

You may also want to check, for further proof, Zechariah 6:12-15, in the New King James Bible. In that passage, the LORD (Yahweh, i.e. the Father) speaks about the LORD (Yahweh, i.e., Jesus Christ), the “MAN whose name is the BRANCH.”

It is true that in most cases, the expression LORD or Yahweh is used for Jesus Christ. Notice, for instance, Hebrews 1:10-12. In that passage, God the Father (vv. 1, 5) says to the Son, Jesus Christ (v. 10): “‘You, LORD, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth…'” This is a quote from Psalm 102:12-15, speaking about Yahweh. Paul, in the Book of Hebrews, applies this Psalm, and the term LORD or Yahweh, to Jesus Christ.

There are a few statements in the Old Testament, however, which use the expression LORD or Yahweh to describe God the Father. For further evidence, notice Micah 5:2-4, referring to the Father, when using the term, LORD or Yahweh. Notice, too, Psalms 2:2, 7, 11, likewise referring to the Father as the LORD (Yahweh), and to Christ as “His Anointed,” or “My Son.” Finally, notice Psalm 110:1, which is quoted by Christ in Matthew 22:42-45, which also refers to the Father as the “LORD” (Yahweh), while referring to Christ as “Lord” (“adon” in the Hebrew, meaning “Lord, sir, master.”).