On July 28, 2012, Dave Harris will give the sermon, titled, “My Servant.”
 
The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

The mass murder in Colorado has shown again the incredible acts of senseless and demonic violence of which man is capable. Questions are asked as to whether gun control would have prevented a “mentally disturbed” man from carrying out his horrendous crimes; and whether the increase in violence, especially in movies and video games, has been responsible for raising indifferent and uncaring children and young adults who have become willing to strike out against their fellow man and a “socially unjust” society. These are clearly important questions to consider, and “political correctness” of leading politicians, “motivating” them not to be motivated to address these “hot potatoes,” sheds further gloomy clouds on the very dark age in which we are living.

Some asked the question as to why God lets these kinds of diabolical actions happen, and whether sin may have anything to do with them. This strikes closer to home. We must understand, once and for all, that this is NOT God’s world. Rather, it is Satan, the god of this present evil age, who is deceiving mankind to sin. He is THE destroyer, intent to do whatever he can to bring havoc and destruction on indifferent and “willfully ignorant” people who become easy targets for the evil prince of darkness and his wicked cohorts.

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

Their mind will be receptive to God’s way of life. God’s law will be in their heart (Isaiah 51:7). They will walk in God’s statutes and do them (Ezekiel 11:19-20). They will learn to live peaceably with their neighbor and with other nations. They will finally realize that committing violence against our fellow man will only bring destruction. Peter thought that he had to use his sword and strike the high priest’s servant Malchus to prevent the illegal arrest of Jesus Christ in the Garden of Gethsemane. But Christ told him: “Put your sword in its place, for all who take the sword will perish by the sword” (Matthew 26:52).

Psalm 140:11 takes on quite a stern meaning when viewed in this context: “Let evil hunt the violent man to overthrow him.”

When God’s law of love rules in our heart—and love does no harm to our neighbor (Romans 13:10)—then we would not even think of using a gun or a knife against someone. We would not even think of resorting to violence against another human being.

God hates those who love violence (Psalm 12:5). And He tells us: “Violence shall no longer be heard in your land” (Isaiah 60:18).

We cannot change this violent world today, and as long as Satan rules and until Christ returns, violence, mass murders, senseless killings and universal wars will continue. But we are to come out of this world and make ourselves ready for the peaceful world tomorrow. Are we doing this?

The mass murder in one of Colorado’s theaters during a midnight showing of the new Batman movie has shocked and bewildered many, and answers for the unthinkable are being sought. We are giving you some samples of valid considerations, which all contribute, more or less, to understanding the nature of evil deeds, but do not solve the problem at hand. They do show, however, how dark this world has become. Please make sure to read the Editorial in this Update, and to view our new StandingWatch program, “No More Guns?”, and our half hour sermon on the topic, titled, “The Colorado Massacre.”

We also report on other frightening developments in the United States and Syria, and conclude with ongoing developments in Germany (and Europe) regarding the German court decision which criminalizes circumcision of young boys.

Weapons Acquired Legally in Colorado

BBC wrote on July 20:

“Residents [are] allowed to keep guns in homes, offices and vehicles, but [they] can only carry them in public with a permit. There are no limits to how many guns can be bought a month, and the state permits sale of automatic weapons. No waiting period [exists] for buying a handgun, both state and federal state law require criminal background checks. Since [the] 1998 Columbine massacre, 20 miles from [the] scene of Friday’s shooting, it has become easier to buy guns in [the] US–a national ban on assault weapons sale expired in 2004.”

The occasional claim that the murderer acquired some of the weapons illegally —especially an assault rifle— is absolutely false.

U.S. Gun Laws Make No Sense

The Washington Post wrote on July 20:

“As President Obama said in brief but eloquent remarks Friday, there is no rational explanation for the massacre that occurred in a Colorado movie theater early Friday. ‘Such violence, such evil, is senseless. It’s beyond reason,’ Mr. Obama said… There’s something else that is senseless, though, and that is America’s gun laws. The temptation is not to mention this fact. That’s true partly because… any mention of gun control is dismissed by gun-control opponents as an ‘exploitation’ of tragedy. But it’s true also because we’ve all been worn down by the futility and repetitiveness of the debate. A massacre occurs; advocates of gun control point out the folly of total permissiveness; the laws do not change; the issue disappears until the next massacre…

“There is no rational basis for allowing ordinary Americans to purchase assault rifles… The alleged shooter in Friday’s crime, which claimed at least 12 lives, came to the theater with two .40-caliber Glock handguns, a Remington 12-gauge shotgun and a Smith & Wesson AR-15 assault-style rifle. According to NBC News, ‘the weapons were legally bought from local stores of two national chains… beginning in May.’

“Yes, the Second Amendment protects a citizen’s right to own a gun, but it does not preclude reasonable regulation for public safety. Yes, mass killings occur in societies with stronger gun laws, but not with such regularity — and not against the backdrop of daily gun violence, both criminal and accidental, that distinguishes the United States.

“We don’t expect this massacre to lead to more sensible laws. We understand the politics. Still, it’s disappointing that the president doesn’t couple his words of comfort with some reminder of the common-sense regulation that could make such tragedies less common. The politics of guns will never shift if people are too cowed or dispirited even to join the argument. U.S. gun laws make no sense.”

Indeed, they don’t—and no civilized country outside the US shows any sympathy for our “American Wild-West” mentality.

Americans in Love With Their Guns

USA Today wrote on July 22:

“There are calls now for gun laws strict enough to stop incidents like these, just as there were after previous tragedies, but those demands will fade. The nation has had a long and acrimonious debate on guns and decided to allow individuals to own them, with reasonable limits. It’s a devil’s bargain that allows millions of law-abiding people to own and use guns responsibly, while accepting thousands of deliberate and accidental shootings a year, including the sort of perverse tragedy that occurred in Colorado.

“Gun control strict enough to stop every shooting is a fantasy. Americans are fiercely devoted to their right to keep and bear arms, and the Supreme Court has upheld that right. The notion that the authorities could somehow confiscate the millions of guns in private hands in the U.S. is a delusion. So is the idea that Americans would support a ban on private handguns — the latest Gallup poll shows that just 26 % of Americans favor that.

“But that doesn’t mean there’s nothing to be done. Americans do support bans on assault weapons and large-capacity magazines, which have figured in mass shootings and were a part of this one. There’s no legitimate reason for the loophole that lets some people evade background checks when they buy guns at gun shows…”

As long as Americans continue with their love and adoration for and fascination with guns, “political correctness” will prevent meaningful changes, as the next article shows.

Political Considerations in an Election Year—Play It Safe

The Los Angeles Times wrote on July 20:

“President Obama and rival Mitt Romney issued similar statements Friday expressing shock and offering their condolences after the shooting rampage in Aurora, Colo. Absent was any discussion of gun control or ways to end gun violence… don’t count on a whole lot of substantive talk about guns or gun control between, say, next week and Nov. 6 — at least from the two main contestants for the White House. Few issues evoke as much emotion as the personal right to bear firearms, and Obama and Romney have their reasons to steer clear of any lengthy debate.

“It has become an article of faith among Democrats that Al Gore lost the White House in 2000… because of his support for gun control… the president has not signed a single piece of major gun-control legislation, nor has Congress given him the opportunity… White House spokesman Jay Carney notably mentioned 2nd Amendment rights…

“Romney… will certainly not do anything to agitate the 2nd Amendment crowd. As governor of Massachusetts, he backed an assault weapons ban and a waiting period to buy firearms; as a presidential candidate, he’s backpedaled from those heresies ever since.

“Reacting to the shootings, New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a staunch advocate of gun control, virtually taunted the two presidential candidates to offer more than platitudes, however sincere or well-meaning they may be. ‘You know, soothing words are nice,’ he said on WOR radio, ‘but maybe it’s time that the two people who want to be president of the United States stand up and tell us what they are going to do about it, because this is obviously a problem across the country.’…

“Avoiding politics may be the respectful thing to do as the nation grieves the dead and wounded in Colorado. Politically, it is also the safe thing to do.”

CNN added on July 20:

“Daniel Vice, senior attorney for the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, criticized Obama on Friday for steering clear of the issue in office. ‘President Obama has refused to even talk about guns… Unfortunately the president has shown a lack of leadership in standing up to the gun lobby’…

“Gun safety advocates have expressed disappointment with the president’s actions since taking office, particularly over his failure to fight for the reinstatement of the assault weapons ban. They pointed out Obama signed bills into law that allowed loaded weapons in some national parks and on Amtrak trains and the destruction of background check documents…”

That our leading politicians shy away from even addressing the issue of gun control for fear of their political survival is shameful and, as Piers Morgan stated correctly on CNN on July 19, “that can’t be right.” However, presumably due to pressure from the media, President Obama has now begun to speak openly about reducing gun crime. Note the next article.

President Obama to Reduce Gun Crime

Deutsche Welle reported on July 26:

“US President Barack Obama has vowed to pursue a cross-party deal on new measures to reduce gun crime across America… Obama pledged late on Wednesday to introduce ‘common sense’ measures to combat gun violence. He vowed to work with both political parties and religious groups to ensure that guns didn’t fall into the hands of criminals. ‘I, like most Americans, believe that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual the right to bear arms,’ he told the National Urban League Convention in New Orleans, referring to part of the US Constitution. ‘But I also believe that a lot of gun owners would agree that AK-47s belong in the hands of soldiers, not in the hands of criminals – that they belong on the battlefield of war, not on the streets of our cities,’ he said…

“It was the first time Obama had commented on gun control since 12 people were shot dead in a midnight showing of the new Batman movie last Friday… Previous attempts to impose gun controls have been met, however, with fierce resistance from the powerful lobbying group the National Rifle Association and many Republican members of Congress. That makes the issue of gun control extremely decisive in an election year and Obama was careful not to make any specific law change proposals.

“On Wednesday his Republican opponent Mitt Romney voiced his opposition to changes to gun legislation. He argued that a tightening of rules wouldn’t have prevented the Colorado shooting. ‘I don’t happen to believe that America needs new gun laws,’ Romney said…”

It is not quite clear what President Obama is contemplating doing, as the Washington Times added on July 25:

“Progressives are pushing Mr. Obama, who campaigned four years ago on a platform of stricter gun control, to speak out on the subject and use the tragedy to impose stricter gun regulations. But the White House has been saying since the shooting last week that Mr. Obama has no plans to seek new gun legislation. The president used the speech to the Urban League to defend his own actions to date on gun control, as much as to call for tougher controls.”

In any event, it is highly unlikely that new gun laws will be passed, as the next article points out.

No Chance for Successful Ban on Assault Weapons

USA Today wrote on July 25, 2012

“Two bills circulating in Congress would ban high-capacity ammunition magazines, such as the 100-round drum used in Friday’s attack. But passage of those bills — or stiffer bans on assault weapons — are not likely in the near future… On Tuesday, House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he would not use the shooting in Aurora, Colo., to push for any new gun laws, blaming the incident on ‘a deranged person’…”

Gun Sales Up

The New York Post wrote on July 25:

“Firearms sales are surging in the wake of the Colorado movie theater massacre as buyers express fears that anti-gun politicians may use the shootings to seek new restrictions on owning weapons.

“In Colorado, the site of Friday’s shooting that killed 12 and injured dozens of others, gun sales jumped in the three days that followed. The state approved background checks for 2,887 people who wanted to purchase a firearm — 25 percent more than the average Friday to Sunday period in 2012 and 43 percent more than the same interval the week prior…

“Day-to-day gun sales frequently fluctuate, but the numbers also look strong outside of Colorado, too. Seattle’s home county, King, saw nearly twice as many requests for concealed pistol licenses than the same timeframe a year ago. Florida recorded 2,386 background checks on Friday, up 14 percent from the week before. Oregon sales on Friday and Saturday were up 11 percent over the month prior. Four days of checks in California were up 10 percent month-to-month…

“Jay Wallace, who owns Adventure Outdoors in Smyrna, Ga., found that his sales on Saturday were up 300 percent from the same day a year ago — making it one of the best Saturdays his business has ever had…

“Some Democratic lawmakers in Congress cited the shooting as evidence of the need for tougher gun control laws — particularly a ban on high-capacity ammunition magazines. Congress, however, hasn’t passed strict legislation in more than a decade, and leaders in Washington show no sign of bringing up such measures any time soon.”

Americans Unable of Honest Debate on Gun Laws?

BBC wrote on July 20:

“The shooting tragedy in Aurora, Colorado, has reignited the debate over gun rights in America. But, argues Rod Dreher, senior editor at The American Conservative, the arguments on both sides say little, and accomplish even less… America will have a national media fit over gun violence, as we always do, and then carry on as we always have. The pattern never fails… Both sides in the US gun debate are heavily committed to absolutist positions that make little sense.

“The anti-gun side holds to a dogmatic belief that stricter gun control would prevent these kinds of killings. Norway has some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world. Those laws did not stop Anders Breivik from killing last summer… People on the pro-gun side, however, tend to carry on like fire-breathing fundamentalists at a tent revival. They meet any proposal to restrict weaponry or ammunition, no matter how sensible, as an attempt to give a toehold to the devil…

“Liberals, for example, often defend grotesque violence in film and hip-hop music, denying that it has anything to do with gun crime, and claiming that tolerating it is the price one pays for First Amendment freedom of expression. Civil libertarians object to stop-and-frisk laws that get illegal weapons off the streets. For their part, conservatives idolise the Second Amendment guarantee of gun rights, but rarely consider what that liberty does to peaceable poor people trapped in inner cities ravaged by armed young thugs…

“Americans seem incapable of honest debate among ourselves about what our permissive gun laws do – and do not – have to do with the chronic bloodletting. If our ideological hardness keeps us from talking straight about gun violence, how can we ever make any real progress on reducing it?”

This article states an interesting point. Unbalanced radical viewpoints on either side will not help in solving the issue—especially when important aspects are being overlooked. Fortunately, the issues of “gun control” and the reasons for love of guns will be swiftly and correctly addressed in the Millennium.

Can We Learn from Australia?

CNN wrote on July 21:

“The shooting was senseless. And it makes us think once again about how we can address the horrific problem of gun violence in America. The first task is conceptual — can we figure out what will work? The second task is political — can plausible solutions be implemented legislatively?

“The conceptual problem is immensely difficult, especially in a society that is already as gun-saturated as America is today. The political problem borders on the impossible. Gun policy in this country is made by the National Rifle Association, and no serious effort at gun control can currently get past its veto. Even when legislation passed during the Clinton years in the form of the Brady bill, requiring background checks at the time of gun purchases, or the assault weapons ban, the NRA succeeded in injecting gaping loopholes into the laws…

“Consider what happened in Australia after a crazed gunman killed 35 people in Port Arthur, Tasmania, in 1996.

“The Australian federal government persuaded all states and territories to implement tough new gun control laws. Under the National Firearms Agreement (NFA), firearms legislation was tightened throughout the country. National registration of guns was imposed and it became illegal to hold certain long guns that might be used in mass shootings. The gun ban was backed up by a mandatory buy-back program that substantially reduced gun possession in Australia. The effect was that both gun suicides and homicides (as well as total suicides and homicides) fell. Importantly, while there were 13 mass shootings in Australia during the period of 1979–96, there have been none in the sixteen years since.

“In 1996, then-Prime Minister John Howard stated that the ‘whole scheme is designed to reduce the number of guns in the community and make Australia a safer place to live.’ Of course, the Australian gun control law in 1997 enjoyed an extremely high level of public support and was not hampered by any domestic gun industry (since Australia did not have any). Such would not be the case in the United States where pro-gun political views and NRA power create a very different climate. In the wake of another tragic massacre of innocent lives, we should look carefully at the Australian experience to see if the American public will ever rise up as one against gun violence.”

Why can’t America do what Australia did? The answer lies in the mentality of most Americans. It would require a change of heart. As General Douglas MacArthur so pointedly put it in his famous speech of 1951:

“The problem basically is theological and involves a spiritual recrudescence and improvement of human character that will synchronize with our almost matchless advances in science, art, literature, and all material and cultural developments of the past 2000 years. It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh.”

Mitt Romney seemed to have somewhat echoed those sentiments. According to USA Today, he stated on July 25 that “changing the heart of the American people” might be what’s needed to end such violent acts. Also notice the next article.

We Have a Sin Problem

Newsmax wrote on July 22:

“Mike Huckabee, speaking on his Fox News show, said America doesn’t have a gun problem or crime problem but a ‘sin problem’ and that while the Aurora movie massacre was a horrible incident that deserves the media coverage it’s getting, other daily American tragedies such as mass abortion, suicides, and other murders should receive more attention.

“The former Arkansas governor and presidential candidate said… that the shooting ‘is impossible to understand except that we live in a world where there is evil. We simply don’t know why any person would reach deep enough into the forces of darkness to decide to kill innocent people simply watching a movie…’ Huckabee said killing a dozen people in a movie theater gets attention because it doesn’t happen every day ‘but one million innocent and unborn babies die in their mother’s wombs each year by elective abortions and we pay scant attention to that.’…

“‘Ultimately,’ Huckabee concluded, ‘we don’t have a crime problem or a gun problem – or even a violence problem. What we have is a sin problem. And since we ordered God out of our schools and communities, the military and public conversations, you know, we really shouldn’t act so surprised when all hell breaks loose.’”

True to an extent, but not completely. We have a sin problem, BECAUSE we have a crime problem, a gun problem and a violence problem. Crimes, violence and (misuse of) guns constitute sin. That our civilized world has become a terribly violent and therefore sinful place is also discussed in the next article. And, it puts much blame on inconsiderate parents, allowing their children to get more and more engaged in violent environments, being apparently oblivious to the ensuing dangers.

Violence on the Rise

On July 20, The Drudge Report linked to an article of The Telegraph, dated 26 July 2008, dealing with the previous Batman movie, The Dark Knight:

“Our attitude to violence is beyond a joke as [the] new Batman film, The Dark Knight, shows… The new Batman film reaches new levels of brutality, so why are we letting children watch it? Jenny McCartney looks at a society seduced by sadism.

“If I were 10 years old, would I be badgering my parents to take me to see the new Batman film, The Dark Knight? You bet I would… If I were the parent who relented and took a 10-year-old child to see The Dark Knight, would I be sorry? Once again, you bet I would…

“The Dark Knight… has been rated 12A by the British Board of Film Classification, which means that although the BBFC believes it is best suited to children aged 12 and over, any under-12 can see it provided he or she is accompanied by an adult. Cinemas are even holding parent-and-baby screenings…

[In the US, the movie The Dark Knight, as well as the sequel, The Dark Knight rises, received a PG 13 rating for intense sequence of violence and action, among others. Children at any age can watch those movies without being accompanied by an adult. PG-13 means parents are strongly cautioned about letting a child under 13 see the movie. It does not mean that a parent is required to attend the movie with a child if they’re under 13. So a child can go to a PG-13 alone at whatever age a parent may feel comfortable with. Just for reference, in the US, rated R means a parent or guardian is required to attend the movie with a child or teen under 17. NC-17 (aka Rated X) means no one under 17 is admitted, even if they have a parent with them.]

“In 2002, the BBFC took a stand on Spider-Man, a hugely hyped Hollywood release: it decided that it contained unsuitable levels of violence for under-12s, and therefore awarded it a ‘12’ certificate, meaning that under-12s should not be allowed into cinemas to see it. A public storm erupted; children and many parents were furious; and a number of councils announced their intention to defy the ban… Spider-Man now looks like Bambi when set next to The Dark Knight. Even since 2002, the public’s willingness to expose children to previously unthinkable levels of screen violence has soared…

“Britain appears to be gulping down entertainment values wholesale from a Hollywood intent upon mining the profit margin from barbarism. America, for all its manifold strengths, is still a country in which the population can [view] the sight of a bound man being torched to death as all-round family entertainment. Just as notable as the… violence in popular entertainment itself, however, is the rage directed at anyone who dares to question it…

“Is there a link between screen violence and actual violence? Fans of violent films will tell you – frequently in the most aggressive terms – that there is not. Yet we know that children are, to greater and lesser degrees, highly imitative of what they see… And we know that entertainment aimed at young people is becoming markedly more violent. My generation was terrified by the Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang; the current one is diverted with torture and agonising death…

“The poet WB Yeats once wrote, ‘In dreams begins responsibility’, yet Hollywood will never take responsibility for its most brutal dreams so long as the paying public still flocks to the theatre of cruelty.”

There can really be no reasonable denial of the undisputable fact that a relationship exists between watching violent movies and playing violent video games on the one hand, and becoming, in mind and sometimes in action, more and more violent towards our fellow man. When children grow up with violence, then in far too many cases, they will respond in kind when the opportunity presents itself.

Violence by Returning Soldiers

BBC wrote on July 24:

“One in eight soldiers has attacked someone after coming home from a combat deployment… Soldiers involved in direct combat were twice as likely as others to admit having hit someone at the end of the tour… A third of the victims were someone in the family – often a wife or girlfriend… This month an ex-soldier was jailed for shooting dead his landlady, just months after he had returned from serving in Afghanistan with the Territorial Army.”

An Addendum:
 
The Drudge Report asked on July 20: “What was a 6 Year Old Doing in Midnight Screening?”

A very good question!

Spying on US Citizens—“An Unholy Mess”

The Economist wrote on July 21:

“… in 1967… the court decided that fourth amendment protections extend anywhere a person has ‘a reasonable expectation of privacy’. If police wanted to wiretap a phone, they now needed a warrant, just as they would if they wanted to search a person’s home. But the warrant requirement applies only to the actual conversation, not to the numbers dialled from a phone…

“In 2001 the Patriot Act allowed pen/traps to be served on internet-service providers (ISPs) as well, where they reveal e-mail senders and recipients, the size of each e-mail sent and received, the IP address with which a computer communicates and the sites visited while browsing the web. The standards for getting a pen/trap approved are far lower than for getting a wiretap. The Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA), which was passed in 1986 and remains the main law governing access to electronic communication, requires police only to certify to a court that the information is relevant to an investigation. For a wiretap, police must show both probable cause and that ‘normal investigative procedures have been tried and failed’…

“In 2011 federal and state courts approved a total of 2,732 wiretaps; but government agencies made over 1.3m requests for data to mobile-phone companies. That figure includes wiretaps and pen/traps, but it also includes requests for stored text messages, device locations and tower dumps, which reveal the presence of everyone—suspects and not—within range of a particular mobile-phone tower at a particular time. Most of these requests require no warrants at all. Sometimes all it takes is a subpoena from a prosecutor.

“Internet companies have also seen a sharp rise in requests from law-enforcement agencies for information about their users… Among the things that Google is typically asked for are account information and location data… Web firms say that police tend to grab as much information as they can rather than targeting specific items relevant to a case…

“Among the many expansions of government snooping power contained in the Patriot Act after the attacks of September 11th, 2001, it became far easier for the FBI to issue national-security letters, which compel service providers to turn over vast amounts of data about the recipients of such letters without a court order. The FISA (Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act) Amendments Act allows intelligence agencies to eavesdrop on communications between Americans and people overseas without a probable-cause warrant. FISA investigations require an order from the FISA Court—which meets in secret, and in the 32 years from 1979 to 2011 rejected a grand total of 11 applications. They are subject to no other review…”

Western Military Intervention in Syria?

The Guardian wrote on July 24:

“Western military intervention in the Syrian crisis is ‘looking increasingly likely’ because the conflict is now in danger of provoking violence across the Arab world that could lead to cross-border invasions, a report has warned. The study, by the Royal United Services Institute (RUSI), finds fears that President Assad’s regime may turn to its stockpile of chemical weapons, or that these devices may be stolen in the chaos of the civil war. It says these concerns have intensified ‘the sense of imminent international conflict that is gripping the region’…

“The study says the stage is now set for a proxy contest, with Iranian-backed groups in Lebanon and Shia forces in Syria and Iraq being pitted against Sunni communities in the same countries, some of them supported by Saudi Arabia. ‘An arc of proxy confrontation between Iran and Saudi Arabia is likely to follow the fall of the Alawite elite in Syria… We are not moving towards intervention, but intervention is moving towards us. Events of recent days have created a step-change in the situation that will make a hands-off approach increasingly difficult to maintain.’

“The study rules out the likelihood of a full-scale invasion by the west, but suggests more limited action… Military support would then be needed to support any new government and to prevent the desire for retribution against the old order… With Assad’s family losing power and beset by defections in the lower ranks after last week’s assassinations of those in the highest ranks, the study suggests, Iran and Russia may be prepared to ‘attempt a controlled implosion, by working to replace President Assad with a favoured Sunni successor.’”

German Resolution on Circumcision – and Reactions

Der Spiegel wrote on July 20:

“Germany’s parliament approved a resolution on Thursday that called on Berlin to create legislation that would ensure that circumcision of boys remain[s] legal in the country. The move is intended to quiet international outrage over a recent German court ruling that criminalizes the tradition… The resolution is not legally binding…

“German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle of the business-friendly Free Democratic Party (FDP) welcomed the vote, saying it would be difficult for him to defend abroad any incursion into the religious right to circumcision. Günter Krings, a senior member of Merkel’s conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party in parliament, said the vote sent a clear message that Germany would not make life unnecessarily complicated for Jews or Muslims living in the country…

“But not all were pleased by the decision, including the Federation of German Criminal Police (BDK). ‘Our constitution cannot be limited by a simple law, as parliament is currently trying to do in panic,’ BDK chief André Schulz told the Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung newspaper. ‘The freedom of parents to practice religion will… be limited by a child’s more important right to physical integrity.’

“Meanwhile, a group of child-protective organizations has also issued a petition calling for a two-year delay on any new law on circumcision so that the issue could be debated more intensely by experts. The groups include the BDK as well as Deutsche Kinderhilfe (German Children’s Aid) and the German Association of Physicians in Child and Adolescent Medicine. In the petition, they warn that a working group should be created before taking any legal steps that could permit the ‘serious and irreparable intrusion on the physical integrity of a child’…”

According to an article of Der Spiegel Online, dated July 22 (which only appeared in the German edition of the online publication), many voices have been heard by now warning against a “quick solution.” Prominent doctors and lawyers pleaded not to act too rashly, advocating to focus more on the welfare of the child. They state that the charge that Jewish life becomes impossible when circumcision is prohibited must be countered with the right of the Jewish child.

Also, articles of Jews writing against circumcision are being published (so in Sunday’s Frankfurter Allgemeine, dated July 22), with the obvious attempt to find more arguments for a prohibition. Note the next article.

According to an article of Der Spiegel Online, dated July 22 (which only appeared in the German edition of the online publication), many voices have been heard by now warning against a “quick solution.” Prominent doctors and lawyers pleaded not to act too rashly, advocating to focus more on the welfare of the child. They state that the charge that Jewish life becomes impossible when circumcision is prohibited must be countered with the right of the Jewish child.

Also, articles of Jews writing against circumcision are being published (so in Sunday’s Frankfurter Allgemeine, dated July 22), with the obvious attempt to find more arguments for a prohibition. Note the next article.

Der Spiegel Online wrote on July 22:

“A fierce debate over circumcision has been raging in Germany for weeks and has caught Chancellor Merkel’s government off guard. Berlin is now hoping to introduce a law regulating the practice, but it is a delicate issue due to the religious passions involved. It could take years before it is resolved… Children have a fundamental right to physical integrity. A circumcision is no minor operation, with the German Professional Association of Pediatricians calling it a ‘form of bodily injury.’ But the child’s right contrasts with those of parents, which include religious matters — and in this case a ritual that goes back thousands of years and, for Jews and Muslims, is a vital component of their faith.

“Balancing these fundamental rights is complicated. Furthermore, Justice Minister Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger is likewise concerned about the debate shifting in an unpleasant direction. Male circumcision isn’t the only religious practice based on ancient traditions. Polygamy is another such practice, as is the prohibition of blood transfusions among Jehovah’s Witnesses or the compulsory veiling of women in parts of the Islamic world. The question will arise as to why one practice is banned while the other is allowed…

“Rolf Dietrich Herzberg, a criminal law professor in the western city of Bochum, agrees with the Cologne court. He considers the removal of the foreskin for religious reasons to be a ‘violation of the fundamental right to physical integrity [and] a heartless trivialization of what is done to children through circumcision’…

“In other Western countries, the battle over circumcision has been raging for years. Other governments are having just as much trouble as Berlin with the complicated triangular relationship between parents, children and the state. Sweden is the only European country that expressly regulates circumcision. It applies strict requirements and only permits the practice in hospitals… The French, who are especially strict about the separation between church and state, remain pragmatically silent on the issue. In principle, the removal of a boy’s [foreskin] is considered assault, and consent of the parents only justifies the procedures in exceptional cases. But there are no accounts of criminal charges having been brought to date…

“Opponents of circumcision are now looking to Germany, where legal experts will have to find a solution. It will not be an easy operation. To begin with, it’s completely unclear which code of law should apply to the regulation of circumcision. The criminal code would be one option, but the problem with that is that the criminal code is only supposed to regulate criminal acts. Family law, which defines the rights of parents and children, is another option. Justice Minister Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger has pointed out that the law on the religious education of children is also a possibility. A clear, legal solution, as the German Association of Judges demanded on Friday, will be difficult to find.

“The justice minister has appointed a task force of senior legal experts to address the complexities of the issue. The group, which includes the directors of the departments of civil law, criminal law and constitutional law at the Justice Ministry, will spend the summer brooding over how a law could neutralize the Cologne court’s decision. ‘The matter is more complicated than just inserting a simple little sentence somewhere, as some people envision,’ says the minister. ‘After this emotional debate, I wouldn’t rule out the possibility that the law will come before the Federal Constitutional Court. The judges there will have to determine whether they share the balancing of fundamental rights that we intend to make.’ This could take years.”

As can be seen, this question is not going to be solved any time soon, and in the meantime, as feared, other European countries begin to follow Germany’s lead, as the next articles show.

Circumcision Suspended in Switzerland and Austria

Haaretz wrote on July 23:
  
“Two Swiss hospitals announced last week that they would temporarily stop performing circumcisions. The announcements followed a recent ruling by a German court that the ritual is illegal, which sparked outrage among the Jewish and Muslim communities living in the country.

“On Thursday, the Zurich children’s hospital announced that it was temporarily halting circumcision operations. ‘We are in the process of evaluating the legal and ethical stance in Switzerland,’ said Marco Stuecheli, a spokesman for the hospital. Meanwhile, another children’s hospital, located in the city of St. Gallen in northeastern Switzerland, has also decided to reassess its policy on circumcision.”

The Guardian wrote on July 25:

“A group of Orthodox rabbis warned on Wednesday that the ancient Jewish practice of infant male circumcision could face further restrictions in Europe after some hospitals in Austria and Switzerland suspended the procedure by citing a German court ruling that it could amount to criminal bodily harm.

“Last month’s verdict by a regional court in Cologne… prompted angry protests from Jewish and Muslims groups, especially after the German Medical Association advised doctors not to perform unnecessary circumcisions until the legal situation was clarified…

“On Tuesday, the governor of Vorarlberg province in Austria told state-run hospitals to stop circumcisions except for health reasons until the legal situation was clarified. He said the German decision, which arose from the case of a child whose circumcision led to medical complications, was a ‘precedence-setting judgment.’

“‘Our fears that the court ruling in Cologne could have a knock-on effect across Europe are now being realised,’ said Pinchas Goldschmidt, the president of the Conference of European Rabbis… While Muslims commonly circumcise their sons at a young age, in Judaism the procedure must take place eight days after birth. According to religious law, an uncircumcised male is not considered fully part of the Jewish community, Goldschmidt said. ‘In order to change that, we would have to convene a supreme Jewish religious court, which has not convened for the last 2,000 years,’ he said.”

 

German Catholic Doctor Speaks Out Against Circumcision of Children

On July 26, Der Spiegel published an article by a German doctor, advocating against allowing circumcision of young children:

“Munich’s university hospital… stopped circumcising boys without medical indication back in 2001. Many renowned pediatric hospitals had taken similar steps even before the Cologne Regional Court recently declared religious circumcision of children illegal. The medical community has been debating the issue for almost a decade. It’s only thanks to the judges in Cologne that the matter has been brought to the attention of the public.

“One of the fundamental principles of medical ethics is that no one should be harmed. The oath formulated by Hippocrates (approx. 460-370 BC) and sworn by all doctors includes the following statement: ‘I will prescribe regimens for the good of my patients according to my ability and my judgment and never do harm to anyone.’ Another key idea lies at the heart of all ethical behavior by medical personnel: ‘Primum nihil nocere,’ or ‘First, do no harm,’ a phrase coined by Scribonius Largus, a doctor at the court of the emperor Tiberius Claudius. The treatment of patients must be with their welfare in mind, and must therefore have priority over other interests, such as science, financial gain or profit.

“Medically unnecessary circumcision causes damage because it results in an irreversible loss of healthy bodily tissue… Medically, there is no evidence of advantages for boys. Therefore non-medically indicated circumcision is not in the child’s best interests… Doctors have to weigh potential risks and benefits. There are no medical benefits to circumcision on religious grounds. For this reason it’s all the more significant that it’s a serious surgical procedure fraught with risks and complications… circumcision causes boys undue suffering. This procedure must therefore be rejected from both a medical and an ethical perspective.

“As a devout Catholic, I have great respect for the concerns of religious communities. As a scientist, I feel discredited by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s comments about how the circumcision ruling makes Germany ‘a laughing stock.’ The Cologne Regional Court presented us with an opportunity to work together with the various religious communities to consider the rights of physical inviolability and religious freedom. Some Muslims have already shown a willingness to accept that boys be circumcised only when they are old enough to give their consent…”

As can be seen, the prohibition of circumcision of young boys in Germany and Europe has been and is being carefully planned. And so, this ungodly “debate” will continue, and the danger is steadily increasing that the free exercise of religious minorities will be violated and prohibited. The Bible has prophesied that this will happen more and more in Europe. For further information, please view our StandingWatch program and our sermon on circumcision, as well as our StandingWatch program on religious persecution.

Since the Word of God is consistent in its teaching (John 10:35) and stands forever (Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:160; and 1 Peter 1:25), the instruction to both judge and not to judge is not a contradiction. Therefore, it is vital to understand the difference between the types of judgment that are appropriate and the types that are inappropriate. The Bible draws a distinction between righteous judgment and situations in which judgment is to be avoided. The Bible is clear in its instruction for Christians both to judge righteously and to abstain from judgment. How can we reconcile the difference? The answer is that not all judgment is the same. Reading closely in the Bible, we find that judgment requires context in order to determine if it is appropriate behavior.

Let us first examine situations in which judgment is inappropriate. In Matthew 7:1-2, Jesus Christ gives us a simple and concise instruction, “Judge not, that you be not judged. For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with the measure you use, it will be measured back to you.” Here, the plain statement to “judge not” is quite clear. We are not to pass judgment on others. However, Jesus doesn’t stop with that instruction, but provides a reason for not judging. It is for our own good that we do not judge others, so that we might “not be judged.” Reading further, we learn that it is really unfair judgment or condemnation that should not be performed. The judgment that we want to avoid for ourselves is that which is erroneous, overly harsh, unforgiving, and condemnatory.

The instruction to refrain from judgment – of the type that is unfair – is an instruction to be merciful. Jesus Christ emphasizes this point when making a similar statement in Luke 6:36-37, where we read, “Therefore be merciful, just as your Father also is merciful. Judge not, and you shall not be judged. Condemn not, and you shall not be condemned.” When we abstain from making judgments about others, we practice merciful behavior. Since our understanding of others is inherently imperfect and incomplete, our judgments are bound to be flawed. A flawed judgment with a lack of empathy is not the way we wish to be judged ourselves when we appear before the judgment seat of Jesus Christ. This is the practice of forgiveness.

Even Jesus Christ was careful about when he judged. In John 3:17 we read that God the Father did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save it. This too is an example of mercy. Jesus knew that the purpose of His appearance on Earth was to teach the gospel of the Kingdom of God, providing an opportunity for others to receive the gift of forgiveness. While He knew that all sinned, He abstained from condemning sinners at that point because they did not yet have the understanding of the truth.

He also was careful about what was in his jurisdiction of judgment. When asked to divide an inheritance between two brothers, He refused because it was not His position to make such judgment. Luke 12:14 states: “But He said to him, ‘Man, who made Me a judge or an arbitrator over you?’”

In this context, please note our statements in our free booklet, “Should You Fight in War?”, specifically addressing the biblical reasons and principles enjoining us not to serve on a jury:

“A true Christian is a stranger, alien and exile (1 Peter 2:11; Hebrews 11:13) while here on earth; an ambassador for Jesus Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20); and a representative of God’s Kingdom. As such, and in being a light to the world by proper conduct (Matthew 5:14-16), a true Christian does not take part in this world’s governmental or political affairs, as presently, it is not God who rules this earth, but Satan the devil (Revelation 2:13; Luke 4:5-6). Christians are challenged to come out of the governmental and political systems of this world. Christ, knowing that God’s Kingdom was not of this world (John 18:36), refused to judge a civil matter when He was asked to do so (Luke 12:14). Paul, likewise, prohibited judging those ‘who are outside’ the church (1 Corinthians 5:12).

“Further, man’s judgments are concerned with the letter of the law. In contrast, God looks on one’s heart, and is concerned with the spirit and intent of the law. Man’s laws usually do not take into account repentance, forgiveness of sins, and other spiritual factors in the way that God does (Acts 2:38). Jesus, in looking at the heart of the accused, refused to condemn a woman caught in adultery (John 8:1-11). Jesus taught that true Christians must be willing to forgive others (Matthew 6:14-15).

“Another principle against participation in jury duty is that true Christians are to learn to judge according to the law of God as seasoned by judgment, mercy and faith (Matthew 23:23). They are also to render ‘righteous’ judgment (John 7:24). Presenting selective evidence, where facts may be suppressed for technical legal reasons as permitted in the courts, may not necessarily lead to Godly justice, mercy and truth, and to the rendering of a righteous judgment.”

Even though the example and instruction of Jesus teaches us to be merciful and refrain from judgment in many kinds of situations, and never to condemn another human being, we also find examples in the Bible where Jesus judged others quite strongly. Jesus turned over the tables of the money changers in the temple, and made vehement statements about the hypocritical teachings, motives and conduct of the scribes and Pharisees. So, what is the difference between this judgment that Jesus provides by example, and that which He rejects?

A significant difference relates to the kind of judgment made. The judgment that Jesus Christ committed was inspired by God; it was the kind that was fair and righteous, being in harmony with the perfect judgment of God the Father (John 5:30, John 8:16). As mentioned, John 7:24 clarifies the difference between right and wrong judgment: “Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” This teaching is absolutely consistent with the previous claims about judgment, which is to be avoided. When relying on appearances or hearsay, we are led to make unfair condemnatory judgments, based on an imperfect understanding.

We must never condemn others, but we can make righteous judgments about situations and conduct, analyzing and evaluating whether a certain behavior is in harmony with God’s Way of Life. To give a most recent example, the horrendous mass murder in a theater in Colorado should be judged as evil and must be condemned. However, we must refrain from condemning the murderer—this is not our task, but God’s. As it has been stated so many times before: We are to condemn the sin and sinful conduct, but not the sinner.

However, when we do make judgments, they must be righteous. Applying the same concept, if we judge righteously, we too will be judged by that righteous measure; with mercy, if we are merciful, with empathy, if we are empathetic, and with fairness, if we are fair.

This is not to say that when armed with an understanding of true Godly righteousness, we have an unconditional license to judge others. A very important element of judging righteously involves self-examination (1 Corinthians 11:31), so that we too do not become hypocritical. As Jesus instructs us in Luke 6:41-42, “And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not perceive the plank in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Brother, let me remove the speck that is in your eye,’ when you yourself do not see the plank that is in your own eye? Hypocrite! First remove the plank from your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck that is in your brother’s eye.” This reminds us that even righteous judgment requires the correct source of motivation.

With an attitude of humility and an understanding of God’s righteous truth, we are also to help each other who are converted Christians today. 1 Peter 4:17 informs us that “the time has come for judgment to begin at the house of God; and if it begins with us first, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?” Since it is true that God is evaluating the behavior of a converted Christian right now, we need all the help we can get in correcting our paths when we may go astray. Because of this, converted Christians have a special responsibility to each other to help each other out.

Paul, in writing words of guidance to Timothy, provided clear direction to “not quarrel but be gentle to all, able to teach, patient, in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth, and that they may come to their senses and escape the snare of the devil, having been taken captive by him to do his will” (2 Timothy 2:24-26). Therefore, judgment made for the purpose of helping others advance and grow in their conversion is important. However, it is also important that any such judgment be made with humility, seeking the glory of God rather than our own.

Even though it is appropriate for us to use righteous judgment for the purpose of helping each other to grow, it is not appropriate to make judgments of condemnation regarding others, including non-believers. As mentioned above, 1 Corinthians 5:12-13 states, “For what have I to do with judging those also who are outside? Do you not judge those who are inside? But those who are outside God judges…” The time will eventually come when the entire world will be judged by Jesus Christ, but it is not the responsibility of Christians today to judge or condemn others, including those who are not yet converted, condemning their behavior. “For He is coming to judge the earth. With righteousness He shall judge the world, And the peoples with equity” (Psalm 98:9).

When to judge the behavior of others and when not to judge others can be a difficult matter to discern. However, understanding the nature of righteous judgment and how it is best applied will guide the converted Christian in that activity.

Lead Writers: Eric Rank and Norbert Link

A new SW program, titled, “No more Guns,” was recorded this week and will also to be broadcast on radio, beginning Sunday, August 5th, 2012. Here is a summary of this program: The mass murder in Colorado has shown again the incredible acts of senseless and demonic violence of which man is capable. Questions are asked as to whether gun control would have prevented a “mentally disturbed” man from carrying out his horrendous crimes; and whether the increase in violence, especially in movies and video games, could be blamed for those actions. Our fascination with guns will not create a better world. What is needed is a change of mind and heart. “It must be of the spirit if we are to save the flesh” (General Douglas MacArthur in 1951).

Norbert Link’s new video-taped sermon, “What Does God Say About Circumcision?” has been posted on YouTube and our website, www.eternalgod.org.

Norbert Link’s video-recorded split sermon, “The Colorado Massacre,” has been posted on YouTube and on our website, www.eternalgod.org.

A new German sermon on the series on hell, titled “Gibt es eine Hoelle, Teil 2”, has been posted on the Web. 

Our new German booklet about tithing, titled, “Die Zahlung des Zehnten—Heute?,” has been posted on the German website, www.aufpostenstehen.de  (This is a translation of our English language version, “Tithing – Today?”).

The text for our newest English booklet, titled, “Middle Eastern and African Nations in Bible Prophecy,” has been sent to our Graphic Designer, Shelly Bruno, for finalization of the booklet.

The cut-off date for submissions of articles to our Feast newspaper is to be July 31, which will give Karen Myers a month to finalize the project, submit to the printers and have the newspapers ready for the Feast. Currently we have 30 submissions, and if we could receive another 10, it would make for a first class production. As this will probably be a one-off, it would be good if as many as possible could contribute. After all, this could well turn out to be a collector’s item, with high-quality paper and full-color pictures. Please submit your article(s) to Brian Gale.

A reminder for those wishing to attend the Feast of Tabernacles with us for 2012–please review details posted on our website under the “FEASTS” heading. Our locations for this year are Pismo Beach, California, and Deganwy, North Wales

On July 21, 2012, Norbert Link will give the sermon, titled, “What Does God Say About Circumcision?”

The services can be heard at www.cognetservices.org (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

In my diary there is a list of religious festivals and today (20th July) is shown as the first day of Ramadan, which is the ninth month of the Islamic calendar, and the month in which the Quran was “revealed” in the 7th century.   This is the month that Muslims spend fasting during the daylight hours from dawn to dusk.

My diary also shows festivals and dates for a number of different religions: Christian-Western, Christian-Eastern Orthodox, Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, Sikh, Jewish and Chinese.   Quite an eclectic mix!   And most churchmen today would probably welcome such religious diversity.  

In her essay “Religious Diversity: Some Implications for Monotheism”, Rita M Gross, an international writer, states that “many people value the feeling that their religion is indeed superior to others and regard such religious chauvinism as a necessary component of religious commitment, or even a virtue to be cultivated among the faithful.   In their official theologies, most religions have dealt with religious diversity only in a cursory or inadequate fashion. Frequently, religions have encouraged mutual hostility by teaching that foreign religions are not only different, but also demonic, or at least inferior.”

However, if we believe the Bible, we will read that God says: “… the LORD Himself is God in heaven above and on the earth beneath; there is no other” (Deuteronomy 4:39), and: “Now see that I, even I, am He, And there is no God besides Me” (Deuteronomy 32:39), and: “I am the LORD, and there is no other; There is no God besides Me” (Isaiah 45:5).   There are many other references, but suffice to say that the God of the Bible is very specific on this matter.

In 1 Corinthians 14:33, God states that He “is not the author of confusion”, and my diary contains a page that is a litany of confusion when it prints out all of these various religious festivals.    As if that isn’t enough, professing Christianity is, likewise, a place where there is much confusion and even contention.

The true Church of God that Jesus founded on the day of Pentecost nearly two thousand years ago, is where the true festivals can be found.   There will come a time, after Christ’s return, when any diary will only contain the true Holy Days, and confusion will be gone.   I am sure that all of God’s people pray for that time to come.

And then religious chaos will be no more!

We begin reporting on frightening and somewhat disgusting events and developments in the United States—the once prosperous Christian land of the brave and the free—warning of the real threat of a new great depression threatening our very survival; the ongoing usurpation of powers by the Obama Administration, leading to less and less liberties and freedoms of the American people; President Obama’s controversial public revelations as to his visions of a future America; and Mitt Romney’s ongoing problems with incorrect statements pertaining to the Bain debacle. All of this shows the horrible state of affairs this country is in, which was once blessed by God for the unconditional obedience of Abraham, but which is now laboring under a curse due to its departure from God and His Law.

We continue with interesting developments in Germany. Could the fact that Germany is suffering from unparalleled droughts and mice plagues have anything to do with its lifestyle and wrong ideas—such as its controversial unbiblical court decision to label circumcision as a crime, which has been supported by most Germans?  German politicians begin to realize the irreparable international damage this whole matter has brought upon German reputation, and are struggling to mitigate it, but even if they were able to enact a law allowing circumcision of young boys, the fact that most Germans are opposed to it will have further negative consequences for the country in the long run.

Addressing European hypocrisy, we report on the European Commission’s position that a country which wants to become a EU member must support gay rights, while there seems to be much less concern for protection of religious minorities in Europe. This fact is highlighted by the European Commission’s announcement that the EU won’t get involved in Germany’s circumcision debacle, as this is a “national issue.”

We are pointing out a new possible controversy between France and England, pertaining to the British Crown Jewels; quote an interesting comment by the Pope; address the escalation of fighting in Syria and America’s dubious and inconsistent role, which is apparently merely dictated by selfish political considerations; and conclude with developments in Russia, showing desires to reinstate a dictatorship as it was known under Stalin and Lenin.

Surely, Satan IS the god of this world…

How Close to a New Depression?

CNBC wrote on July 16:

“The risk of a new depression — a sustained, severe recession — has struck fear into the heart of markets and driven monetary policy in developed economies since the current financial crisis began. ‘We’re in a very unfortunate position to be here,’ Richard Duncan, author of The New Depression, warned on CNBC’s ‘Squawk Box Europe’ Monday… ‘[The] explosion of credit created the world we live in, but it now seems that credit cannot expand any further because the private sector is incapable of repaying the debt it has already, and if credit begins to contract, there’s a very real danger that we will collapse into a new Great Depression,’ he argued. ‘If this credit bubble pops, the depression could be so severe that I don’t think our civilization could survive it… You can defer, but not prevent.’”

The Wall Street Journal added on July 17:

“Fed Chairman Bernanke delivered a bleak assessment of the U.S. economy to lawmakers on Tuesday, citing a slowdown in economic activity this year and a stubbornly high rate of unemployment.”

These are frightening warnings—but how many take them to heart?

Executive Order Gives Control of Internet to Homeland Security

Rt.com wrote on July 13:

“The White House has finally responded to criticism over US President Barack Obama’s hushed signing last week of an Executive Order that allows the government to command privately-owned communication systems and acknowledges its implications.

“When President Obama inked his name to the Assignment of National Security and Emergency Preparedness Communications Functions Executive Order on July 6, he authorized the US Department of Homeland Security to take control of the country’s wired and wireless communications — including the Internet — in instances of emergency. The signing was accompanied with little to no acknowledgment outside of the White House, but initial reports on the order quickly caused the public to speak out over what some equated to creating an Oval Office kill switch for the Web.

“Now the Obama administration is addressing those complaints by calling the Executive Order a necessary implement for America’s national security. ‘The [order] recognizes the creation of DHS and provides the Secretary the flexibility to organize the communications systems and functions that reside within the department as [Homeland Security Secretary Janet A. Napolitano] believes will be most effective,’ White House spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden tells the Washington Post. Hayden insists that ‘The [order] does not transfer authorities between or among departments,’ but the order does indeed allow the DHS to establish and implement control over even the privately owned communication systems in the country, including Internet Service Providers such as Time Warner, Verizon and Comcast, if the administration agrees that it is warranted for security’s sake.

“Immediately after last week’s signing, the Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) said the order allowed the DHS ‘the authority to seize private facilities when necessary, effectively shutting down or limiting civilian communications.’ Following up with the Post this week, EPIC attorney Amie Stephanovich stands by that initial explanation, agreeing that the DHS can now ‘seize control of telecommunications facilities, including telephone, cellular and wireless networks, in order to prioritize government communications over private ones in an emergency.’…

“According to the order, the DHS can take charge of ‘commercial, government, and privately owned communications resources’ to satisfy what is described as ‘priority communication requirements.’ With little insight from outside the White House, though, what constitutes such an emergency may very well be decided on by Washington, where the country’s elected leaders are still split on all things involving the Internet.”

As we have been reporting in previous Updates as well, do we realize that the USA is becoming a country with less and less individual freedoms and more and more governmental control? Do we really think that this is what the founding fathers had in mind when they were desirous of distancing themselves from British rule? When America celebrates the 4th of July, it should remember that freedom from governmental oppression must be an ongoing endeavor. As Paul said: “Don’t become a slave of men.”

President Obama: Let the State Do It for You!

What has been described as the single-most telling comment by President Obama over the weekend, his approach to the American Way of Life has been met with outright condemnation by small businesses and entrepreneurs, while the left-liberal media is quick and anxious to sugarcoat the President’s ill-advised remarks, which seem, however, to reveal his vision of the USA.

Mail Online reported on July 16:

“America’s leading small business association has slammed Barack Obama for showing ‘an utter lack of understanding’ of the country’s entrepreneurs when he told them: ‘If you’ve got a business – you didn’t build that. Somebody else made that happen.’ In a hard-hitting statement to Mail Online, the National Federation of Independent Businesses (NFIB) president Dan Danne said: ‘What a disappointment to hear President Obama’s revealing comments challenging the significance of America’s entrepreneurs… His unfortunate remarks over the weekend show an utter lack of understanding and appreciation for the people who take a huge personal risk and work endless hours to start a business and create jobs.’…

“The inflammatory campaign speech comments underline the extent to which Obama believes that the state rather than ordinary citizens create jobs and wealth. They highlight a key contrast with Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican nominee, who is preaching a message of wealth creation by individuals and reinvigorating the private sector.

“Andrea Saul, spokeswoman for Romney, told Fox News that the remarks ‘reflect just how unqualified he is to lead us to a real economic recovery’ and were ‘ insulting to the hardworking entrepreneurs, small-business owners, and job creators who are the backbone of our economy.’”

In an accompanying article, Mail Online wrote:

“As President Obama comes under scrutiny for remarks that he made about entrepreneurs over the weekend, it’s not surprising to many that the president has never served in a leadership level at any private sector job. The president has held a number of jobs since the late 1980s, including editor, writer and professor before getting into politics.

“But questions have been raised about Obama’s lack of business experience as the U.S. struggles with a high joblessness rate and a frail economy. It was a point that Obama’s political foes were quick to exploit in their attacks on Monday. Louisiana Gov Bobby Jindal, appearing alongside Mitt Romney today, said: ‘We have a president who hadn’t run anything before he was in the White House.’ He added: ‘[Obama is the] most liberal and incompetent president since Jimmy Carter. No offense to Jimmy Carter.’”

It is of course correct that whatever abilities we may have and whatever success we might achieve in this life is not to be attributed to ourselves, but to God Almighty who has given us all things to enjoy. But sadly, this is not what President Obama had made reference to.

Mitt Romney’s Unsolvable Bain Problem

While President Obama has been coming under attacks because of his remarks and politics, his challenger Mitt Romney is dealing—or not dealing—with problems of his own. His inconsistent position regarding health care is well-known (advocating it in his state, but rejecting it on a federal level), but another ongoing problem is the controversy regarding his position as CEO in the Bain Capital company, which outsourced jobs to companies overseas, while Mitt Romney is now strongly advocating the opposite policy.

The Washington Post wrote on July 16:

“Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney continues to struggle to get out from under questions regarding just when he departed from his job at Bain Capital. And there’s reason to believe that he won’t be able to solve his Bain problem anytime soon… Politics 101 says that when your campaign is bleeding — and Romney’s camp is bleeding right now — the best way to stop it is to get as many facts out as quickly as possible and then insist that it’s a dead issue and refuse to answer questions on it moving forward.

“That won’t likely work for Romney because of the seeming contradictions about when he left the company — and the exotic nature of his financial life. While most independent fact checkers agree that Romney had no involvement in Bain’s day-to-day operations after 1999, the fact that he was listed on Securities and Exchange Commission documents as chairman and president of Bain creates a fuzziness that allows President Obama’s campaign to continue to hammer away on the issue. That fuzziness was furthered over the weekend by Romney campaign senior adviser Ed Gillespie who said that the former Massachusetts governor had ‘retroactively’ retired in 1999.

“That phrasing might work in the business world but it points to the political problem Romney has with Bain. Regular people who aren’t CEOs don’t retroactively retire after three years in which they are listed as the head — whether titular or not — of a major company. Therefore, trying to explain that while he remained — at least on paper or in name — the chairman and president of Bain to people is no easy task…”

The Washington Times added on July 16:

“Presumptive GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney on Monday defended his campaign amidst cries from fellow Republicans that he needs to quit playing defense in his challenge to President Obama after a week in which the topic dominating the headlines was Mr. Romney’s record at Bain Capital and exactly when he left the firm. ‘I think when people have accused you of a crime, you have every reason to go after them pretty hard,’ he said, referring to allegations that he may have committed a felony by stating in Securities and Exchange Commission disclosure forms that he stayed on at Bain as a managing director past 1999, contrary to what he previously claimed. ‘What does it say about a president whose record is so poor that all he can do in his campaign is attack me? … A campaign that’s based on falsehood and dishonesty does not have long legs… if we want to talk about transparency, the real issue is why has this president used his presidential power and executive privilege to keep the information about the “Fast and Furious” program from being explained to the American people?’ he said, referring to the botched gunrunning scheme to Mexico by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives…”

ABC News reported on July 16:

“Last week, Romney demanded in five interviews with the main TV networks that President Obama apologize for his campaign’s implication that Romney broke the law by misstating his role at Bain Capital on documents filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Obama said he would not be apologizing.

“The chairwoman of the Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, revived the accusation on MSNBC today. Democrats have been helped by a Boston Globe report that said Romney was listed as the head of Bain Capital for three years after he had said he left, in 1999. Romney’s maintaining that he had left Bain that year let him escape blame for the outsourcing of jobs that happened at Bain-backed companies after 1999. ‘Either Mitt Romney was lying on SEC forms and misrepresenting to his investors — which could be a felony — that he was the sole owner, president, CEO of Bain Capital from 1999 until almost the end of 2001, or he wasn’t and represented that he was,’ Wasserman Schultz said. ‘It can’t be both. And so if he was sole owner, president, CEO, then he is to be held accountable for the decisions that were made for the outsourcing of jobs that took place during that time.’… The Democratic-aligned Huffington Post also reloaded the Bain gun by publishing a new document that shows Romney was listed as a managing member of Bain in late 2002.

“Romney said in his interviews last week that he had ‘no responsibility whatsoever’ for what happened at Bain after 1999, even if he was ‘the owner of the general partnership’ that managed Bain. Then on Sunday, one of Romney’s advisers, Ed Gillespie, claimed that Romney had stayed at Bain part-time at first, then took a leave of absence, and finally ‘retired retroactively to 1999.’…

“What’s clear is that the Obama campaign is directing the media narrative, and it’s more about taxes and Bain than the economy… Even Romney’s campaign, which would like the news to be focused on the unemployment rate, has spent a good deal of time responding to the attacks… Is that what the public wants to hear about the most? Hard to say…”

The Guardian wrote on July 17:

“With a host of pundits inside and outside the Republican party speculating about Mitt Romney’s handling of his Bain Capital tenure, outsourcing controversy and tax returns, Bloomberg Businessweek’s Joshua Green wonders about ‘Mitt Romney’s Wimp Factor,’ as his article is headlined: ‘The danger for Romney is that voters won’t parse these episodes but will instead conclude, based on their overall impression of his squealing and inability to get results, that Romney is a wimp.

“This is a charge that famously dogged another establishment Republican,’ Green notes – beneath a shot of the famous 1987 Newsweek cover entitled ‘George Bush—fighting the wimp factor’ which is said to have damaged Bush senior’s image – and continues: ‘It’s not clear Romney can do much to prove he wasn’t running Bain between 99 and 02. An article in today’s New York Times notes that 142 documents have surfaced tying Romney to the ownership of the firm during this period…”

And so, the mud-slinging contest of American politics, which both sides label as false, dishonest and destructive, is bound to continue and to get even more dirty in the ensuing months… proving again why true Christians should have absolutely nothing to do with any of it…

Germany’s Harvests in Danger Due to Weather and Mice

Der Spiegel Online wrote on July 11:

“Millions of field mice are overrunning the central German states of Thuringia and Saxony-Anhalt, much to the concern of local farmers. The rodents are devastating food crops, cutting yields by up to 50 percent. Getting birds of prey to hunt the critters didn’t help, and now farmers want to be allowed to use a banned rat poison… The furry rodents are currently wreaking havoc in the states, which are suffering the worst field mouse plague in over 30 years… Farmers estimate that they may have to write off an average of 10 percent of their crops as a result of mouse damage, and up to 50 percent in extreme cases.”

The Local added on July 15:

“Current harvesting work has been interrupted by the rain recently, while harvests were already expected to have been hit by the spring frosts which damaged many fields. Lower Saxony’s state farmers’ association said it was expecting a ten percent drop in grain harvest this year compared to last, which itself was a disappointing one. ‘With 5.1 million tonnes of harvested grain, that was already an abysmal year,’ said a spokeswoman. Farmers in Brandenburg, Saxony and Schleswig-Holstein said it had been too wet recently to expect a good result.

“And in Thuringia the wet weather was compounded by a mouse plague. ‘Where the weather was not so awful, the mice came,’ said Reinhard Kopp from the Thuringia farmers’ association… Farmers in the more southern states of Baden-Württemberg, Rhineland Palatinate and Hesse say their grain suffered badly from the frost, while the spring was too dry…

“There are fears in Bavaria that the dry May could result in a smaller harvest…”

German Court Decision Prohibiting Circumcision Under Further Attack

Der Spiegel Online wrote on July 13:

“A controversial German court ruling on circumcision has outraged Muslim and Jewish groups in Germany and abroad. German commentators say the decision was misguided and could have devastating consequences.

“The ruling came nearly two weeks ago, but the reaction is getting increasingly vocal… In addition to Jewish and Muslim groups in Germany, the ruling has also drawn strong condemnation from the state of Israel… In recent days, the ruling has drawn nearly universal criticism in the press. On editorial pages on Friday, most newspapers writing on the topic call for the German government to move to provide clarity for religious groups that their freedoms will be protected.

“Center-left Süddeutsche Zeitung writes: ‘It is understandable when religious leaders protest because they feel their faith and their rituals are being ridiculed… circumcision is an act of recognition: It makes the child the member of a faith and represents entry into a community. Some Christians and atheists may smirk over that, but Christians also don’t have to celebrate the ‘Feast of the Circumcision of Christ’ on Jan. 1 if they don’t want to. … The Cologne court’s ruling was rash and the loud outcry is justified.”

“The regional Saarbrücker Zeitung writes: ‘Under no circumstances can the circumcision ritual … of Judaism be reduced to an inherited, archaic religious law. To an overwhelming majority of secular Jews, it is viewed as much more of a foundation that is indispensable for establishing identity. Viewed in this context, there is no exaggeration in the objection that this legal decision makes Jewish — as well as Muslim — life in Germany impossible. … Another court, presumably (the Federal Constitutional Court) in Karlsruhe, will have to re-weigh the issues. If it affirms the (lower court’s) ban, it would be unique in the entire world. It would do so in the full awareness that it risks triggering an exodus of Jews and Muslims (from Germany). One can’t imagine what the consequences of this would be for Germany.’

“Conservative Die Welt writes: ‘The circumcision of Jewish boys on the eighth day after their birth is a foundation of the Jewish religion. If it is suspended through disregard for freedom of religion, then Jewish life in Germany will no longer be possible. For the first time since the end of the Third Reich, Jews would be forced to leave the country in order to be able to adhere to this mandate of the scriptures. If that happens, it would send out a message with disastrous political consequences. There are also other reasons that legal certainty in the interests of freedom of religion and faith under Article 4 of the German constitution be created. A ban on circumcision, be it Muslim or Jewish, is a manifestation of the increasing intolerance shown towards religious groups in the world… Intolerance can swell like a flood: If you don’t dam it up, it will continue… The Cologne judges…  issued a ruling that is unprecedented in the Western world. It is a shameful farce for Germany.’

“The left-leaning Frankfurter Rundschau writes: ‘The rabbis’ worries are justified. As long as German jurisprudence is concerned with finding a balance between the legally protected right of religious freedom and the right of physical integrity, religious Jews and Muslims will see themselves as confronted by a climate of defamation…’”

The Local wrote on July 14:

“The German government on Friday pledged quick action to protect the right of Jews and Muslims to circumcise baby boys on religious grounds, after a court ruling that prompted international outcry… German diplomats admit that the ruling has proved ‘disastrous’ to the country’s image abroad…

“Legal experts… note that drafting legislation could prove tricky in balancing religious freedom on the one hand against ‘physical integrity’ on the other. Justice Minister Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger noted this week that even with a new law, a federal court would likely have the last word on the issue. The Cologne judges’ ruling is final and cannot be appealed to the Federal Constitutional Court… attorneys say that doctors and parents run the risk of prosecution under the status quo.”

In an article by Der Stern of July 14, the Minister for Health, Daniel Bahr (FDP), questioned in an interview with Die Welt whether legislation could even be passed in such a case.

Deutsche Welle wrote on July 17:

“Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel has told her party that it risked becoming a ‘laughing stock’ after a court in Cologne ruled that religious circumcision was a criminal act. ‘I do not want Germany to be the only country in the world in which Jews cannot practice their rites,’ Merkel was quoted as saying this week…

“The regional court ruling came at the end of June, but it’s only now that reactions are coming in from various groups around the world, especially from the US, where male circumcision is more common… The ruling… may mean that families will have to wait until their sons are over the age of consent before they can be circumcised.

“This is something that’s worrying Dr. Aaron Tobian, assistant professor of pathology, medicine and epidemiology at Johns Hopkins University in Baltimore. ‘There are multiple advantages of neonatal male circumcision compared to adult circumcision,’ Tobian told DW…

“Whilst male circumcision is relatively uncommon in Europe, the practice saw a dramatic increase in North America during the 20th century… Neonatal and childhood male circumcision rates in the US rose to about 80 percent in the 1960s, and remain relatively high today, although they have fallen somewhat in recent years…

“Unsurprisingly, Jewish and Muslim groups have responded angrily to the ruling, saying it poses a threat to religious freedom. Britain’s Chief Rabbi, Jonathan Sacks, wrote in the Jerusalem Post earlier this month: ‘It is hard to think of a more appalling decision…’ In the United States, Charles Lane of the Washington Post wrote a blog post on the subject entitled ‘The stink of Cologne’ – in which he took issue with what he called a ‘blatant affront to the Muslim and Jewish peoples’… The European Union, meanwhile, seems reluctant to get involved in the debate. A spokesman for the European Commissioner for Health told DW that this was a ‘national issue.’”

The Local wrote on July 19:

“[A new German] survey published on Thursday shows 45 percent supported a ban on circumcision, in line with a recent court ruling which said the conducting the operation was inflicting bodily harm. But 42 percent said they disagreed, telling pollsters from the YouGov firm they thought the ritual carried out by Muslims and Jews on young boys and babies should be allowed.

“Parliament is set to vote for a resolution on Thursday which would call on the government to lay out a law which would explicitly legalise circumcision. It is expected to be supported by all the major parties… The resolution will call on the government to legalise, ‘a medically professional circumcision of boys without unnecessary pain.’ The legal rights of the child must be considered, as should their physical integrity, but also freedom of religion and the right of parents to raise their children as they see fit. The resolution was adopted on Thursday by the German parliament. The Greens and the Left did not participate in the vote. Even though an overwhelming majority of the major parties—CDU/CSU, SPD and FDP—voted for the resolution, there were numerous abstentions and opposing views in all parties. The resolution has only symbolic value, without any binding legal effect.

“The survey also suggested that 83 percent of Germans feel religions should move with the times and not cling to old traditions at all price. Only nine percent of those asked said they did not think modernisation of religious practices were necessary. Global anger at the Cologne district court’s decision from last month has damaged Germany’s standing in the world, said 33 percent of those questioned, while 55 percent disagreed.”

The positon by the EU Commission regarding lack of protection of religious minorities is highly hypocritical, as the next article shows, which addresses the proclaimed need for protection of sexual minorities.

Gay Rights Legal Criterion for EU Accession

The EUObserver wrote on July 13:

“The European Commission has said in a written note that respect for gay rights is a legal criterion for EU accession.  It cited the 1993 so-called Copenhagen criteria for EU eligibility and article 2 of the EU Treaty, which prohibit discrimination against ‘minorities.’  It also cited articles 10 and 19 of the EU Treaty and article 21 of the European Charter on Fundamental Rights, which explicitly forbid discrimination on grounds of ‘sexual orientation.’ ‘Rights of LGBT [lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender] people thus form an integral part of both the Copenhagen political criteria for accession and the EU legal framework on combatting discrimination. They are closely monitored by the EU commission, which reports annually on the progress made by enlargement countries with regard to the situation of the LGBT community,’ it said.

“The commission note was sent to EUobserver in response to a question born of an interview with an Armenian cleric. Armenia, a deeply Christian country where church teaching has more authority than in many EU states with Christian roots, is keen to become an EU member. Homosexuality is not against the law. But according to a recent study by the Brussels-based rights group Ilga-Europe, it scores better only than Moldova and Russia in terms of legal protection of LGBT people in Europe.

“Armenian law does not prohibit discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation or gender identity. It does not recognise any form of same-sex partnership and has no provision for legally changing one’s gender, the study says. Its legal edifice is reflected in popular feeling… Three priests came to speak to media, one of whom recalled the Biblical story of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah to justify anti-gay views…

“Bishop Hovakim Manukyan, an ecumenical officer at the Armenian catholic church, made no bones about the situation. ‘It’s not in our culture to accept homosexuals. I mean, we don’t reject the person, but we reject the sin and this is our freedom as Armenians. Our culture does not accept this,’ he told EUobserver in a recent interview in Etchmiadzin, the official seat of the Armenian church. He said Armenia upholds basic human rights, but gay rights are a ‘secondary’ issue where difference of opinion should be permitted…

“But for Ulrike Lunacek, an openly lesbian Austrian Green MEP who co-chairs a European Parliament gay rights group, this does not mean countries can choose which values they adopt. ‘Accession of a country will not be possible if certain LGBTI [the I stands for ‘intersex’] rights are not put into law and into practice… ‘Protection of Pride marches has become a recurrent monitoring theme in the commission’s progress reports on enlargement countries,’ she added.”

What a joke. While “gay rights” are to be enforced under the cloak of protection of sexual minorities, religious persecution of minorities is running rampant in the EU and labeled as “national issues.”

French City Petitions for British Crown Jewels

The Christian Post wrote on July 17:

“A French city that once produced generations of English kings has created a petition insisting that the British Crown jewels be given to the city as compensation for ending the Plantagenet line, once heirs to the English throne, in the 15th century. The city of Angers was the capital of the Anjou province and home to the Plantagenets, rulers of England from 1154 until 1485. It was during this time that some of the most famous monarchs ruled, including Richard the Lionheart and Henry V.

“The mayor of Angers will send the signed petition to Queen Elizabeth II, which calls the execution of Edward Plantagenet a ‘state crime’ that brought to an end more than three centuries of rule… Edward Plantagenet, the Earl of Warwick, was executed for treason in the Tower of London in 1499. His death brought the legitimate male line to an abrupt end.

“While there might be a shred of merit to the claims, the French petition disregards the fact that most of the crown jewels came after the date of execution. During the time of Oliver Cromwell in the 17th century there was a serious financial crisis in which many of the royal jewels were sold. The jewels were eventually replaced over the centuries either for a succession of monarchs or created for a specific person. The petition was started in the spring and refers to the people of Angers as ‘moral heirs’ of the Plantagenets. The petition received little attention initially, but since the story has made the rounds on British media officials are hoping that more people will support the cause.”

Will this development cause further antagonism between France and Great Britain?

“Pope: Do Not Preach What the Powerful Wish to Hear”

Zenit wrote on July 16:

“The Pope… spoke of the courage to announce the truth despite being rejected by men, as was seen in the first reading from the prophet Amos, who preached against the abuses of the power of the king. ‘And this remains the mandate of the Church: do not preach what the powerful wish to hear. The criterion of prophets is the truth and justice even if this goes against human applause and human power,’ he said.”

Good advice—and so very true. One could also think of Jeremiah’s preaching, or the challenges of John the Baptist towards Herod.

Terror Attack Against Jews in Bulgaria

Deutsche Welle reported on July 19:

“Wednesday’s bombing of the bus containing Israeli tourists in the Bulgarian coastal town of Burgas, in which at least seven people were killed, should not come as a surprise. There have been several indications in recent months that such an attack would occur. In January, Israeli security forces warned their Bulgarian counterparts of the possibility of Islamist terrorist operations against Israeli tourists…

“Bulgarian Middle East expert Vladimir Chukov suspects the Islamic Hezbollah militia of being behind the attack, and diplomatic sources in Sofia indicate that Bulgarian authorities agree with him… Solomon Passy, former Bulgarian Foreign Minister and national security specialist, is convinced that Bulgaria is now dependent on the support of NATO and the European Union. Bulgaria’s European Commissioner Kristalina Georgieva has also called for intensive cooperation with the EU and Europol to investigate Wednesday’s attack.”

Der Spiegel Online added on July 19:

“Investigators believe that the attackers specifically targeted Israelis traveling abroad, following a pattern similar to several other terror attacks and attempted bombings in previous months. The date of the attack has also aroused suspicion. Wednesday was the 18th anniversary of the attack on a Jewish cultural center in the Argentinean capital of Buenos Aires in which 85 people were killed. Argentina believes that Iran and Hezbollah were behind that assault and has issued an international arrest warrant for Iran’s former president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani…

“Intelligence officials in both Israel and abroad believe that recent months have seen an increase in attempts to stage terror attacks targeting Israelis traveling overseas. Evidence indicates that most of those attempts were steered from Iran or from the southern suburbs of Beirut, where Hezbollah is based.”

Fighting in Syria Escalates

The Associated Press reported on July 17:

“Syrian government forces backed by helicopter gunships battled rebels in heavy clashes in Damascus, a clear escalation in the most serious fighting in the capital since the country’s conflict began last year… The fierce clashes, which have raged over the past three days in at least four neighborhoods across the city, were the latest sign that Syria’s civil war is moving ever closer to the heart of President Bashar Assad’s regime. Government forces already have thrown tanks and armored personnel carriers into the battle in the capital, but the use of air power reflected the intensity and seriousness of the fighting…

“The clashes are the most sustained and widespread in the capital since the start of the uprising against Mr. Assad in March last year and a crackdown that activists say has claimed the lives of more than 17,000 people. In the past, clashes happened at night in the capital. Now, the fighting rages during the day — a sign of the growing strength and boldness of the rebels. That increased fighting has brought bloodshed to the heart of Damascus — and Syria’s largest city, Aleppo…

“As the violence across the country has spiraled out of control, diplomatic efforts to halt the bloodshed have seemingly come to a dead end. Much of the international community has condemned Mr. Assad’s crackdown, but world powers remain deeply divided over who is responsible and how to stop the fighting. The U.S. and many Western nations have called on Mr. Assad to leave power, while Russia, China and Iran have stood by the regime.”

Deutsche Welle added on July 19:

“China and Russia on Thursday vetoed a United Nations’ resolution that would have imposed sanctions against the regime of President Bashar Assad in Syria.

“Both German Foreign Minister Guido Westerwelle and British Prime Minister David Cameron had called on Russia to abandon its opposition to sanctions at the UN Security Council… The veto comes as the Syrian capital, Damascus, is seeing ongoing bloody clashes between government forces and rebels calling for the ouster of President Bashar Assad.

“The situation was exacerbated by a rebel bomb attack on Wednesday that killed three top Syrian officials, including Defense Minister General Daoud Rajha and Assef Shawkat, President Assad’s brother-in-law. General Hassan Turkmani, the head of the crisis cell, also died in the attack.”

That the big villains and violators of individual freedoms, Russia, China and Iran, are supporting Bashad Assad is no surprise. The sad part is, they are indirectly supported by the inconsistent position of the USA due to political and highly hypocritical considerations, as the next article shows.

USA Won’t Help Syrian Rebels for Now

The Telegraph wrote on July 16:

“Despite mounting fury from the Syrian rebels, who are seeking assistance for their efforts to overthrow the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, the White House has refused all requests for heavy weapons and intelligence support. Syrian lobby groups in Washington, who only a few weeks ago were expressing hope that the Obama administration might give a green light to the supply of anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles, said they had now been forced to ‘take a reality pill’ by the US government…

“The Obama administration has also made clear to its allies that it will not intervene…The American position means there is little hope of any swift resolution to the Syrian crisis, with the stage set instead for a protracted civil war. Russia repeated yesterday that it was ‘unrealistic’ of the West to expect the country to convince Mr Assad to step down…

“Abdulbaset Sieda, chairman of the official Syrian National Council… called on the US not to abandon the rebels for the sake of domestic political calculations… ‘We want for America and the Western countries to carry out their responsibilities,’ he said. ‘With regard to America, specifically, we would like to say to President Obama that waiting for election day to make the right decision on Syria is unacceptable for the Syrians. We cannot understand that a superpower ignores the killing of tens of thousands of Syrian civilians because of an election campaign that a president may win or lose…’

“Jonathan Schanzer, vice president of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies think-tank in Washington… said division among Republicans had also helped to give the Obama administration a ‘free pass’ politically. ‘The Right is split between those who say the US has a moral imperative to intervene and those who say Syria is an enemy of the US and there is no national interest in intervening. The result is that no one [wants] to touch this. The reality is that the US appears to have no coherent foreign policy since the Arab Spring. It is not clear why we helped topple Gaddafi and we let Mubarak fall but we let Assad stay in power.”

We are not commenting on the advisability of direct US involvement in the matter. We are opposed to human violence in any manner, shape or form. But we are quoting the article above to show American inconsistencies in the dealings with the “Arab Spring” movement, which reveal mere egoistic motives and the desire for political advantage. God is most certainly not pleased by such objectionable strategies.

New Dictatorial Measures in Putin’s Russia

The Los Angeles Times wrote on July 14:

“Russian lawmakers this week passed three measures to increase government control over the Internet, media and foreign-funded activist groups, despite widespread protests from Web professionals, journalists and human rights advocates.

“A bill that criminalizes libel and imposes fines of up to $153,400 on violators, and a measure that requires nongovernmental organizations, or NGOs, that receive foreign funding to register as ‘foreign agents,’ were approved by the lower house of the parliament Friday, the last day of the legislative session. On Wednesday, the lower house unanimously approved a bill that provides for a federal registry of websites that could face being shut down for carrying prohibited material. The bills are the latest in what is seen as an attempt to crack down on resistance to the rule of President Vladimir Putin, dissent that became more pronounced with mass opposition rallies in December, when Putin was still prime minister. The measures must still be approved by the upper house and signed by Putin, who in May began his third presidential term, but both moves are expected by the end of the month…

“The bills follow other government moves to encumber its critics. A recently adopted law sharply increased fines for organizers of unsanctioned rallies and participants. A bill initiated by the ruling United Russia party this week and under consideration in the lower house would crack down on independent volunteers. It would require contracts and official approval for any donated resources or labor to any cause or event… Devastating floods last weekend in southern Russia brought an unprecedented number of volunteers to the region, which only highlighted the failures of the government amid popular mistrust.”

Russia is bound to become again a dictatorship, and it will clash with Europe. Ultimately, two dictatorial power blocs (a United States of Europe under Germany and a United Confederation of Asian countries under Russia and China) will be engaged in a terrible and all-encompassing world war, which will be fought with nuclear and biological weapons.

The Bible teaches that it is the potential and destiny of man to enter the Kingdom and Family of God; that is, to become an immortal and eternal God being. Much information on this intriguing subject is provided in our free booklets, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God” and “God Is a Family.” We will be quoting at length from these and other booklets throughout this Q&A.

Those who are called and chosen in this day and age, are to qualify for entrance into God’s Kingdom, when Jesus Christ returns to this earth. But what, exactly, will they be? And what powers will they have?

The Bible tells us that we, who are called today, will be what Christ is today. We will be like Him, as He is. We will share the Father’s and His very divine nature (2 Peter 1:4). The only exception is that we will not have the same authority as Christ, as Christ has not the same authority as the Father. God is—and always will be—a hierarchical Family—with God the Father on top, under Him Jesus Christ, and under Christ those who are to be born into the very Family of God.

But even though Christ is under the Father, He still has—and always had, as a God being—the unlimited power to create life. God the Father created everything—the visible as well as the invisible—through and by Jesus Christ (Hebrews 1:1-2; Colossians 1:15-16).

Notice what we wrote in our free booklet, “God Is a Family,” pertaining to man’s potential:

“In Hebrews 1, verse 2, it says of Jesus Christ that God the Father ‘…has appointed [Him] heir of all things.’ It is further revealed in Hebrews 2:7 that although man was created ‘for a little while’ lower than the angels, as the margin has it correctly, he will ultimately have ‘…all things in subjection under his feet’’ (verse 8).

“The eighth chapter of the book of Romans presents us with even more astounding proof of the tremendous future God has in store for man. ‘For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are sons of God. For you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you received the Spirit of adoption [correctly translated, ‘son-ship’] by whom we cry out ‘Abba, Father.’ The Spirit Himself [Itself] bears witness with our spirit that we are children of God, and if children, then heirs—heirs of God and joint heirs with Christ, if indeed we suffer with Him, that we may also be glorified together’ (verses 14–17).

“Romans 8:18–19 continues: ‘For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God.’

“These two short verses open up the truth of the vast master plan of God and the very purpose for man’s creation—to increase His Family by having sons and daughters born into His very Family! We are told in 2 Corinthians 6:17–18, ‘Therefore “Come out from among them And be separate, says the Lord. Do not touch what is unclean, And I will receive you.” “I will be a Father to you, And you shall be My sons and daughters, Says the LORD Almighty.”’

“After explaining that mankind was to become conformed to the image of His Son, Jesus Christ, God shows the underlying purpose in His plan in Romans 8:29: Christ was to ‘be the firstborn among many brethren.’ So important is the purpose of God in bringing many sons and daughters to glory that He was willing to give His only begotten Son in fulfillment of His objective (compare John 3:16). Romans 8:32 also clarifies this point: ‘He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things?’

“‘All things’ means exactly that—it includes rule over the entire universe AND the unending future of God’s Kingdom. Man is to become a ‘joint heir’ with Christ in ‘all things’…”

We will become members of the God Family—God beings. We will be “like Christ”—sons and daughters of God, with Christ being our elder brother. We are to inherit “all things” with Christ. We will rule with and under Christ for all eternity. It is therefore obvious that we will be able to do what Christ is capable of doing.

We will be ruling angels. We will be possessing much higher powers than they do.

Notice the following additional excerpts from our booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God”: 

“In 1 John 3:1-2, we read: ‘Behold what manner of love the Father has bestowed on us, that we should be called children of God…. Beloved, now we are children of God; and it has not yet been revealed what we shall be [we are still flesh and blood—we have not been changed yet to spirit beings], but we know that when He is revealed [when Christ comes back in power and glory, to establish the Kingdom of God on this earth], we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.’

“No human being can look at God in His glorified state, as He is, and live. But when we are changed, we can look at God and His Son Jesus Christ in their glorified state and live. Why? Because we will be like them, Jesus Christ being the image of God the Father. And what does it mean to be like Christ? To bear His image? It means that we will look like He looks. And how does He look in His glorified state? Let’s read Revelation 1:14-16, which gives us a glimpse of what Christ looks like today: ‘His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and His eyes like a flame of fire. His feet were like fine brass, as if refined in a furnace, and His voice as the sound of many waters…and His countenance was like the sun shining in its strength.’ That’s exactly how we will look too, when we are changed and are in the Kingdom of God…

“Christ will establish this Kingdom, the Kingdom of God, on this earth. It’s a Kingdom ruled by God. It’s a Kingdom composed of God—the Father and Jesus Christ. But remember… we also will be in that Kingdom…

“We will be like Christ, we will bear His image, we will look like He does, we will be in God’s Kingdom, we will reign with Christ. What does this all mean? Does this mean that we will be like the angels of God—higher in essence than man, but lower in essence than God? No, because Paul tells us in 1 Corinthians 6: 3 that we will rule over, and judge, angels. So we will be higher than the angels. Further, angels won’t be in the Kingdom of God, because they are not God…the Bible is very clear that whoever is in the Kingdom of God must actually be God. We must become God beings, sharing in Christ’s glory, the firstborn of many brethren.

“That is indeed a mystery that only very few understand today—that God is a Family, consisting presently of God the Father and the Son Jesus Christ, but that God is enlarging His Family. We are already called His children, but we have not been glorified yet. And when we are glorified at the time of our resurrection to eternal life, we will be entering the Kingdom of God, as literal God beings, as glorified sons and daughters of God, made immortal…

“That we are to become members of the God Family, or God beings, is clearly taught in scripture. Let’s look at a few more proofs.

“In Psalm 17:15, we read about man’s potential: ‘As for me, I will see Your face in righteousness; I shall be satisfied when I awake in Your likeness.’ David understood that we will look like God when we are resurrected. Also Philippians 3:20-21: ‘For our citizenship is in heaven… [Our names are written in heaven, where God is. We belong to Him, we are His children. We belong to a different country, a heavenly government, which will come down to this earth when Christ returns.]…from which we also eagerly wait for the Savior, the Lord Jesus Christ, who will transform our lowly body that it may be conformed to His glorious body.’ We already read that we shall bear the image of Christ, we will look like He does, in His glorified state.

“But more than that—we will actually BE GOD BEINGS. We are told that it is our potential to be filled with the fullness of God. That is what it says in Ephesians 3:19. Paul wants us ‘to be filled’—ultimately—‘with all the fullness of God.’ What does this mean? It means that we will be God beings…

“Christ Himself confirmed this human potential in John 10:31-36: ‘Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?” The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.” Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, You are gods?’ If He called them gods, to whom the Word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, You are blaspheming, because I said, I am the Son of God?”’”

“What is Jesus Christ telling us here? That He, the Son of God who had become man, would be God again. But also, that it is man’s potential to become God beings as well. Although stated in a present tense, Christ was mainly referring to the future, speaking about future things as if they already existed (cp. Romans 4:17). God created man so that man could become God—a member of the God Family… as Christ is the Son of God, so will we be sons and daughters of God. Of course, God the Father will always be greatest of all, and Christ will always be greater than we. But still—we will be God beings in the Family of God, literal children of our loving Father, and brothers and sisters of our elder brother Jesus Christ. What an awesome potential—what a destiny!”

The fact that we, as God beings, will of course have the ability to create, as God the Father and Jesus Christ create, is expressly confirmed in Scripture.

1 Corinthians 15:45 tells us that Christ is “a life-giving spirit.” That is, He is a Spirit being who can give and create LIFE. In fact, that is what He did before He became a human being. That is what He is doing today, and what He will continue to do after His return. We know, for instance, from the book of Revelation that all living things in the oceans and rivers will have died before His return (Revelation 16), but we also read in several passages that there will be fish in the Millennium (Ezekiel 47). This shows that God will create LIFE – in this case, physical fish. He created life when the surface of the earth was renewed; and He created (“had prepared” or “had made”) a great fish to swallow up Jonah (Jonah 1:17).

This understanding has wide-ranging consequences. Some have wondered about the fate of our pets, when they die. Even though the Bible does not say anywhere that animals will be resurrected, as human beings will be, there is also nothing in the Bible that says that they will not be. We read that animals have a spirit, and while Solomon states that the spirit in man will go back to God who gave it, he wonders about the fate of the spirit of animals, without giving a decisive answer (Ecclesiastes 3:21). Consider that God can CREATE animals—including those resembling our pets. When scientists can clone animals today, how much more will God the Father and Jesus Christ be able to create or recreate animals that God had created in the first place?

Since we will be as Christ is, we will be given the same capabilities.

Romans 8:20-23 tells us that the entire creation waits for us. Why? Ultimately, to be transformed into the glorious liberty of the children of God. The entire physical creation will be freed from corruption – it will become spirit, too. (For more information, please read our booklets, “God Is a Family” and “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World.”). But as will be explained in a subsequent Q&A, that won’t happen until God creates new heavens and a new earth—which will be long after Christ’s return.

But what will occur prior to God’s new creation? It says that the present creation waits for our manifestation as Spirit beings. We will, already at that time, do something with this earth. Consider that the earth will be in a terrible state, still suffering from the aftermath of nuclear wars and waste. And so, we read that the ruins will be rebuilt; and that the earth will become a beautiful paradise. We will assist Jesus Christ to beautify it, which includes, CREATE physical life.

Please note Isaiah 58:10-12: “You shall be like a spring of water whose waters do not fail” (or: “never run dry,” New Jerusalem Bible). Primarily, this talks about our role in the Millennium, directing the rebuilding of old places that had become waste. BUT, there is also an overriding meaning, hinting at our ultimate potential—to be a continual spring of living fresh water regarding others, giving them health and REAL life.

Notice Christ’s words in John 7:37-38, where we read that out of our hearts will flow rivers of living water. That is, God’s Spirit will flow out of us to create LIFE. Christ is a life-giving Spirit, and so we will be, because we will be God too, and we will be like Christ, as He is. We, as God beings, will have the power and awesome privilege to heal and create, UNDER the leadership of God the Father and Jesus Christ. God’s living waters in us will flow out of our hearts like rivers of living waters.

In addition, Christ said in John 4:14, referring to the Holy Spirit,  that the “water that I give him will become in him a FOUNTAIN of water springing up into everlasting life.” We will be fountains of living water, leading to life.

An interesting Scripture can also be found in the book of Proverbs. Although it speaks primarily about our own mind and its effect on our own body, it can also be understood as referring to the mind of others and the effect on others. Notice Proverbs 14:30: “A sound heart is life to the body” –not just our own body, but also the body of others. To have a sound mind is a result of the Holy Spirit, which is a Spirit of soundness. And with God’s Holy Spirit, we will be able to impart real “life” to the physical world.

The biblical truth is overwhelming. Once we have entered the Family of God as immortal God beings, we will have the same abilities and capabilities which God the Father and Jesus Christ have. We will be ruling angels. We will be healing people. We will be assisting Christ in judging mankind. And we read that we will rule for ever and ever.

Rule over what and how? This will be the subject of a subsequent Q&A. For a short preview, let us conclude by quoting some excerpts from our free booklet, “The Gospel of the Kingdom of God”:

“When we become members of God’s Family, we will be ruling this earth, as we have seen, for a thousand years, together with Christ who received His authority and power from God the Father. But what after that? What is going to happen once the thousand years have expired? Our reign will never stop. Notice Revelation 22:4-5, which speaks about a time long after the 1000 years: ‘They shall see His face, and His name shall be on their foreheads [the name of God will be their name as well]…the Lord God gives them light. And they shall reign forever and ever.’

“What will we do for all eternity? Over what will we reign, forever and ever? We have not been told everything yet, but one thing we do know: We will beautify our entire universe. Notice Romans 8:18-23: ‘For I consider that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us. For the earnest expectation of the creation eagerly waits for the revealing of the sons of God. For the creation was subjected to futility… in hope; because the creation itself [the entire universe] also will be delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. For we know that the whole creation groans and labors with birth pangs together until now. Not only that, but we also who have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, eagerly waiting for the adoption [better translated ‘sonship’], the redemption of our body.”

“This passage indicates that once we are God beings and full members of the God Family, we will participate in the process of beautifying and finishing the creation of the presently unfinished universe. The universe is in decay—the planets are, from all that we can tell, waste and empty. But it is our human potential to become God and to free the universe from decay and corruption under the leadership of Jesus Christ.”

HOW, exactly, this is going to be accomplished will be the subject of a subsequent Q&A.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

The new July member letter by Norbert Link has been posted on the Web.

A new SW program, titled, “Enslaved to the Government?,” was recorded this week and will also to be broadcast on radio, beginning Sunday, July 29, 2012. Here is a summary of this program: Are we in danger of losing our individual liberties and freedoms? Are we becoming slaves of the government? As examples, consider the individual mandate in the new health care law; controversial executive orders pertaining to Immigration proposals bypassing Congress and the control of the Internet by Homeland Security; invoking the executive privilege to withhold documents from the House Committee in the Fast and Furious debacle; the use of drones throughout the US; and the reading of private emails by the government. It is high time to wake up.

Norbert Link has begun a new series of German sermons on the subject of “hell.” The first in this series, “NEU! Gibt es eine Hoelle?,” is now posted.

A new booklet about tithing, in German and titled, “Die Zahlung des Zehnten—Heute?,” has been finalized and will be posted shortly (this is a translation of our English language version, “Tithing – Today?” ).

The cut-off date for submissions of articles to our Feast newspaper is to be July 31, which will give Karen Myers a month to finalize the project, submit to the printers and have the newspapers ready for the Feast. Currently we have 30 submissions, and if we could receive another 10, it would make for a first class production. As this will probably be a one-off, it would be good if as many as possible could contribute. After all, this could well turn out to be a collector’s item, with high-quality paper and full-color pictures. Please submit your article(s) to Brian Gale.
 
A reminder for those wishing to attend the Feast of Tabernacles with us for 2012–please review details posted on our website under the “FEASTS” heading. Our locations for this year are Pismo Beach, California, and Deganwy, North Wales.

by Gilbert DeVaux

I was thinking about trust, and that I have put my trust in the Eternal. He provides all my needs. He hears and answers my prayers. He cares for me. He has revealed His grand plan for mankind to me. I am grateful for my calling, as the Eternal God has also put His trust in me.

This is His undeserved kindness toward me, when I look at this and compare myself to the world. I am very grateful, for mankind has no real hope. There is no one to put their trust in; their governments are failing them; they are lost; they are in fear; they are losing their jobs; they have no one to turn to for help.

I do not have their fears; my trust is in  the right place, because He has given me real and lasting hope. He has given me the truth of His Word and His Holy Spirit. I know that the return of Christ is soon. I am sorry for mankind, but I know that Christ will set up His Kingdom, and that mankind will then put their hope and trust in the right place, and I will be there to help. I have much to look forward to.

May I always keep my trust in the Eternal God and never take Him for granted.