On December 26, 2009, Eric Rank will give the sermon, titled, respectively, “Glorification.”

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.

One of the most moving and emotionally charged accounts in the Bible is the story of Joseph in chapters 37 to 50 of the book of Genesis–especially those Scriptures which describe his reconciliation with his brothers and the settlement of his father Jacob and his whole family in the land of Goshen in Egypt.

The record covers the jealousy of Joseph’s brothers because of his special relationship with God and Jacob; their original intent to murder him; and, due to Reuben’s intervention, their decision to sell him into slavery. It reports that the brothers deceived their father by presenting to him Joseph’s tunic of many colors which they had covered in animal blood; and relates how Joseph became a servant in the house of Potiphar in Egypt.

We can read about the famous episode of Potiphar’s wife trying to seduce Joseph; his rejection of her advances since he did not want to sin against God or betray his employer; and his imprisonment as a consequence. Because of his correct interpretation of two dreams, he came to the attention of Pharaoh. He was released from prison; rose to prominence in Egypt; and set aside grain to provide for food, as God had warned that a famine would come over the whole world. This famine caused Jacob to send his brothers to Egypt to buy food there. After several incidents, Joseph revealed himself to them and obtained the consent of Pharaoh to bring his whole family to Egypt in order to settle there.

Joseph set an inspiring example for us in the way he directed his life, and how he coped with the trials which he faced.

He was betrayed by his brothers; and while he was testing them later to see whether they had repented, there is no account of him seeking revenge for their misdeeds. While in Potiphar’s household, he was faithful in his responsibilities and resisted the easy temptation and continued insistence of Potiphar’s wife to commit adultery with her. He set a fine example for young men in this day and age who may encounter similar temptations, and he showed a solid foundation in not wanting to sin against God.

Due to the lies and false accusations of Potiphar’s wife, he went to jail, but while waiting patiently for God’s intervention, he found favor with the keeper of the prison. He eventually was released and rose in power and authority within the Egyptian ruling class, and he finally understood that God had planned from the outset to bring him to Egypt and give him great power in order to be able to save millions of people from famine. Ultimately, he was able to reconcile with his brothers and present himself to his father Jacob, who had thought him dead for many years. All of this shows that with endurance and continued trust in God and His plan for us, things will eventually work out for good.

For those of us who are called in this day and age and who will be given eternal life at Christ’s coming, we will ultimately experience the great joy of an emotional reunion with our families who were not called to salvation in this life, but who will be raised in the Second Resurrection. As Joseph’s brothers realized what they had done and bitterly repented, so we will be able to assist our relatives in their choice to accept Christ as their Savior and walk in God’s way which will lead to eternal life for them. Imagine their surprise when they see they have been raised from the dead as physical beings and see us alive–as glorified beings. And as Joseph was able to satisfy the physical needs of his family members, so we will be able, on a much greater level, to take care of our relatives in physical and spiritual ways.

Joseph’s inspiring example contains the abiding lesson for all of us that patient endurance of our trials and unwavering faith in God will bring a positive, joyful and successful outcome–not just for us, but also for others.

We begin with reports on the health care “reform.” On December 21, the Senate conducted the first of several procedural votes needed before a vote on the bill could take place on December 24. While Republicans were unanimously opposed, Democrats managed to muster the necessary 60 votes. Politics went into high gear when Democratic votes were only secured after granting special concessions–a procedure which was criticized as “corrupt” and “bribery.”

The Wall Street Journal wrote on December 21: “Change Nobody Believes In. A bill so reckless that it has to be rammed through on a partisan vote on Christmas eve. And tidings of comfort and joy from Harry Reid too… Mr. Obama promised a new era of transparent good government, yet on Saturday morning Mr. Reid threw out the 2,100-page bill that the world’s greatest deliberative body spent just 17 days debating and replaced it with a new ‘manager’s amendment’ that was stapled together in covert partisan negotiations. Democrats are barely even bothering to pretend to care what’s in it, not that any Senator had the chance to digest it in the 38 hours before the first cloture vote at 1 a.m. this morning… Even in World War I there was a Christmas truce.

“The rushed, secretive way that a bill this destructive and unpopular is being forced on the country shows that ‘reform’ has devolved into the raw exercise of political power for the single purpose of permanently expanding the American entitlement state. An increasing roll of leaders in health care and business are looking on aghast at a bill that is so large and convoluted that no one can truly understand it, as Finance Chairman Max Baucus admitted on the floor last week. The only goal is to ram it into law while the political window is still open, and clean up the mess later.”

On December 24, the Senate adopted the new health care bill. As USA Today reported, “It was the first time since 1963 that the Senate met on the day before Christmas and the first time since 1895 that senators cast a roll call vote on this day… The bill would require most individuals to purchase health insurance and offer subsidies for those who cannot afford the coverage. It also makes companies with more than 50 employees subject to penalties if they do not provide health care and their workers require subsidies…

“The Senate vote now sends the legislation to a conference committee, where Democratic leaders will try to reconcile differences between House and Senate bills on such things as how to pay for health care; how to help low- and middle-income-earners pay for the insurance they will be required to buy; and what restrictions to place on insurance coverage for abortions. The committee cannot formally meet or take action until Jan. 19… Republicans are vowing to wage a public relations campaign to derail the legislation before the next round of votes…”

Turning our attention to the climate summit in Copenhagen, President Obama announced an “unprecedented breakthrough.” However, what was achieved was a non-binding “agreement” between just five nations. It has been described as a trick; and the Copenhagen summit was labeled as an “utter failure”; and the Obama Administration and China are being blamed for it. The summit has received so much negative coverage in the European press that it was coined “Flopenhagen.” While most news reports regret that no results were obtained, the German conservative paper, Die Welt, warns that our approach toward perceived man-made global warming might be totally off track.

We also tell you about continued bank failures in the USA–with no end of the recession in sight; the incredible appointment of President Obama’s “safe schools czar”; another example why our legal system does NOT work, reporting on the conviction of an innocent person; strained relations between the Vatican and Israel; and conclude with an article about ambitions of the Habsburg family to run for the Austrian presidency.

How Votes Are “Bought”…

Fox News reported on December 21:

“Sen. Ben Nelson [is] hardly the only lawmaker extracting sweetheart deals out of the health care reform bill. While the Nebraska Democrat got a particularly juicy concession in exchange for a ‘yes’ vote on the 10-year, $871 billion package — permanent and full federal aid for his state’s expanded Medicaid population — support from a slew of other senators likewise came with a price…

“Senate Democrats said the payoffs are nothing unusual, and in fact typical. ‘People fight for their own states. That’s the nature of a democracy,’ Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., said… ‘This is just part of the normal legislative process,’ said Jim Manley, spokesman for Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

“As a measure of just how typical they are, a slew of payoffs and concessions have been struck over the past several months.

“Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., won between $100 million and $300 million in additional federal aid for her state’s Medicaid population. The deal, secured before she cast her critical vote in favor of bringing the health bill to the floor, was immediately dubbed the ‘Louisiana Purchase,’  though the actual Louisiana Purchase was considerably cheaper.

“Vermont and Massachusetts got $1.2 billion in Medicaid money… Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders also boasted Saturday that he requested and won an investment worth between $10 and $14 billion for community health centers.

“Western states secured higher federal reimbursement rates for doctors and hospitals that serve Medicare patients. The provision covers the low-population ‘frontier’ states and applies to Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah and Wyoming — the latter two states are both represented by two Republicans, but ended up as beneficiaries anyway since they qualify…

“Florida, New York and Pennsylvania — where five of six senators are Democrats — will have their seniors’ Medicare Advantage benefits protected, even as the program sees massive cuts elsewhere. Sen. Max Baucus, D-Mont., reportedly secured expanded Medicare coverage for victims of asbestos exposure in a mine in Libby, Mont.

“One unknown state is receiving $100 million for a ‘health care facility’ affiliated with an academic health center at a university that contains the state’s only ‘public academic medical and dental school.’ It’s unclear for which state that language was written.

“Nebraska’s Nelson won permanent federal aid for his state’s expanded Medicaid population, a benefit worth up to $100 million over 10 years. Other states get the federal aid for three years, but Nebraska’s benefit is indefinite. His state also got an exemption for nonprofit insurance companies from a health insurance company tax. Many believe this was targeted at Mutual of Omaha, but senior Democratic aides would not confirm that…”

Whatever will come out of this, the methods and means used do not “sanctify” the outcome. God hates corruption, bribery, payoffs and political maneuvering for personal gains. “Unless the LORD builds the house, They labor in vain who build it” (Psalm 127:1).

President Obama Blamed for “Copenhagen Debacle”

The Associated Press reported on December 18:

“President Barack Obama said the United States, China and several other countries reached an ‘unprecedented breakthrough’ Friday to curb greenhouse gas emissions – including a mechanism to verify compliance – after a frenzied day of diplomacy at the U.N. climate talks. The agreement, which also includes the developing nations of India, South Africa and Brazil, requires each country to list the actions they will take to cut global warming pollution by specific amounts, a senior Obama administration official said…

“The U.S. got its share of blame… Obama may eventually become known as ‘the man who killed Copenhagen,’ said Greenpeace U.S. Executive Director Phil Radford… Swedish Environment Minister Andreas Carlgren, negotiating on behalf of the 27-nation European Union, blamed the impasse on the Chinese for ‘blocking again and again,’ and on the U.S. for coming too late with an improved offer…”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 19 that President Obama did not appear in Copenhagen as the “Messiah,” but as the “Debunked” or “Disenchanted.” The magazine also wrote that one participant at the summit said that President Obama offered developing nations “30 pieces of silver” for their future.

Deutsche Welle reported on December 19:

“For US President Barack Obama, Copenhagen offers no good news. His last trip in Copenhagen was his failed attempt to bring the 2016 Olympics to Chicago. Now with the stakes much higher, he has failed again. His speech was good – but others like Brazil’s Lula da Silva were better. His effort was good, but simply not good enough. In terms of his leadership, there was little to be seen.”

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 19:

“What a disaster. The climate summit in Copenhagen has failed because of the hardball politicking of the United States, China and several other countries — and because people just can’t seem to fathom how catastrophic climate change will be… The debacle of Copenhagen is also Barack Obama’s debacle…

“When it comes to immediate assistance for impoverished countries, the United States intends to contribute a total of $3.6 billion between 2010 and 2012. But, if you compare that with what other regions contribute, this figure appears rather miserly. The European Union plans to contribute about $10.6 billion, or about three times as much. And even Japan is chipping in $11 billion. In poor countries, people are presumably confused about whether they should laugh or cry about the US contribution.”

The world is turning away from confidence in American leadership. As the next selection of articles shows, some strongly implore Europe to take a leading role in the world. Bible prophecy reveals that while the USA will drift further and further into political oblivion, Europe will emerge as the most powerful entity on the planet.

Now What After “Flopenhagen”?

Deutsche Welle reported on December 21:

“After the widely disappointing UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen – aka ‘Flopenhagen’ – European editorialists let the bitter comments flow… Britain’s Guardian newspaper saw positives alongside negatives in the outcome of the conference… ‘while the Copenhagen product is every inch the sham that campaigners say it is, the Copenhagen process has set important precedents,’ the Guardian wrote. ‘Most obviously …the sheer fact that it took place – and at such a high political level – means it will probably do so again.’…

“Taking a harsher line, left-leaning French newspaper La Libération oozed disappointment in the ‘large countries which, in a delirium of diplomatic ineptitude and the blindness of superiority, torpedoed the binding worldwide accord’ they had hoped for. The paper pitched for the EU to take immediate, unilateral action: ‘Eco-reformers need to focus on the US and China,’ it wrote… ‘If the EU took the necessary actions from its side, it would jump to the head of the movement. Then the fiasco of Copenhagen could be overcome step by step’…

“German editorialists were less inclined to focus on positive signals from the conference. The Sueddeutsche Zeitung called the Copenhagen summit an ‘insult to the world community,’ noting that ‘never were expectations for a climate conference higher, and never before were so many heads of state and government officials in one place, meeting to solve one single problem. But they didn’t solve it – they made it worse’…

“Finally, the Stuttgarter Zeitung expressed the disappointment felt by many in Europe when they compared US President Barack Obama’s focus on China and other developing countries with his relative lack of interest in the European negotiators… ‘The trans-Atlantic relationship is coming up on hard times. Barack Obama showed one thing for certain in Copenhagen: His focus will be on the trans-Pacific axis with China,’ [the paper wrote].”

Der Spiegel Online added on December 21:

“German papers on Monday are scathing in their criticism of the climate conference and most are resoundingly pessimistic about the prospects for ever reaching an agreement in the future… The left-leaning Die Tageszeitung writes: ‘Above all national selfishness stood in the way of an agreement… That can only change if such a refusal has consequences. There are already methods of imposing sanctions…’

“The Financial Times Deutschland writes: ‘Forget Copenhagen, now we are making a climate treaty in 2010 in Bonn and Mexico. That is the message from those who are talking up the conference, and trying to sell the result as some kind of progress. But after the fiasco there is no sensible reason for assuming that things will be any better next year. From the very beginning it was an illusion to believe that the two biggest climate sinners — China and the US — would allow themselves to be roped into a binding agreement with clear emissions targets and international monitoring’…

“The conservative Die Welt writes: ‘Even if Chancellor Merkel is warning people not to bad mouth the climate summit, the result is still deplorable. Over 40,000 politicians, diplomats, scientists, journalists, lobbyists and NGO activists traveled there to save the world. One hundred and forty private jets landed, 1,200 limousines ferried delegates around. The feverish summit, which gave a new name to gigantism, offered a soapbox for alarmists and the self-important. But now it is time to consider whether smaller, more matter-of-fact conferences would make more sense. It would also mean allowing those scientists to speak who have expressed well-founded doubts about the scenarios presented by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). They have many facts on their side.

“‘Evaluation would be more appropriate than roaring that the world is about to end. The question of whether binding and dramatic limits of CO2 emissions are the only correct way to protect the climate must also be revisited. This is not only dogmatic but would also cost a fortune and have little effect. The plan to limit the average rise in the global temperature to 2 degrees Celsius is the most expensive task of all time. … Besides, it is a figure that has been set arbitrarily. The one-sided fixation on CO2 limits could be a greater detriment to the global economy than climate change itself. A global competition for the cleanest energy production and investments in saving and replanting forests would be more useful than the rabid caps in emissions at the cost of economic growth.’

“The center-right Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung writes: ‘The climate summit in Copenhagen was no success — not even a small one. That’s why one can’t bad mouth the results, which Merkel has warned them not to do. No one can make them sound better than they are: Copenhagen was an all-out failure. … How this (process) is to be brought to an end in the next year remains a mystery. The format of the consultations at the UN level, in which every member state can exercise veto power, holds no promise for any success…'”

More U.S. Banks Fail…

The Associated Press reported on December 18:

“Regulators on Friday shut down two big California banks, as well as banks in Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Michigan and Illinois, bringing to 140 the number of U.S. banks brought down this year by the weak economy and mounting loan defaults. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. took over all seven. Regulators shuttered First Federal Bank of California…[and] Imperial Capital Bank… [bringing] to 17 the number of California banks to fail this year…

“As the economy has slumped, with unemployment rising, home prices tumbling and loan defaults soaring, bank failures have accelerated around the country. The 140 bank failures are the most in a year since 1992 at the height of the savings-and-loan crisis. They have cost the government-backed deposit insurance fund – which has fallen into the red – more than $30 billion so far this year. The failures compare with 25 last year and three in 2007. The FDIC expects the cost of bank failures to grow to about $100 billion over the next four years…

“If the economic recovery falters, defaults on the high-risk loans could spike. Nearly $500 billion in commercial real estate loans are expected to come due annually over the next few years. Last week, the Obama administration extended until next October the $700 billion financial bailout program, saying the fund was still needed to prevent further turmoil in the banking system.”

Reality is sinking in that the recession is by no means ending–expressions of political correctness notwithstanding. The Bible shows that in these last days, the political, economic and even military downfall of the USA will be accelerating.

Obama Czar “Promotes Sex Between Children and Adults”

On December 9, the Washington Times reported the following:

“The Obama administration is stonewalling serious inquiries about sexual filth propagated by a senior presidential appointee who is responsible for promoting and implementing federal education policy. Democrats clearly are terrified of ruffling the feathers of their activist homosexual supporters, who are an influential part of the Democratic party’s base. This scandal, however, is not merely about homosexual behavior; it is about promoting sex between children and adults – and it’s time for President Obama to make clear that abetting such illegal perversion has no place in his administration.
 
“It is curious why White House officials and Education Secretary Arne Duncan believe it’s worth… politically to continue taking arrows for defending Kevin Jennings, who is Mr. Obama’s controversial ‘safe schools czar.’ The evidence suggesting he is unfit to serve as a senior presidential appointee is startling and plentiful. It was revealed this week that Mr. Jennings was involved in promoting a reading list for children 13 years old or older that made the most explicit sex between children and adults seem normal and acceptable…

“But there is more. There are shocking new revelations this week of tape recordings from a youth conference involving 14-year-old students. The conference, billed as a forum to encourage tolerance of homosexuality, was sponsored by Mr. Jennings’ organization and was held at Tufts University in March 2000. Mr. Jennings was executive director of the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) from its founding in 1995 until August 2008. The conference sessions appear to have had less to do with promoting tolerance and more to do with teaching children how to engage in sex.

“Andrew Breitbart’s Biggovernment.com provides tapes of some of the sessions. Describing the subject matter as smut would be putting it lightly. The conference discussions were very graphic… Teaching children sexual techniques is simply not appropriate. Unfortunately, it is part of a consistent pattern by some homosexual activists to promote underage homosexuality while pretending that their mission is simply to promote tolerance for so-called alternative lifestyles. It is outrageous that someone involved in this scandal is being paid by the taxpayers to serve in a high-powered position at the Education Department, of all places.”

This is awful. The agenda of homosexual activists destroys the very fabric of our nation. When innocent children become victims in the hands of these kinds of influences, which are not restricted by our leadership, then we should know that the end of this God-defying civilization is drawing near (compare 2 Peter 2:4-9; 3:1-13; Jude 5-7).

But “Our Legal System Works…”???

CNN reported on December 17:

“After more than three decades in prison, a man in Florida was set free Thursday after a DNA test showed he did not kidnap and rape a 9-year-old boy in 1974. James Bain, 54, was 19 when he was convicted on charges of kidnapping, burglary and strong-arm rape… Bain was serving a life sentence… Of the 245 people in the United States who have been exonerated by DNA testing, none has spent more time behind bars than Bain…

“Bain was convicted in 1974 of taking a 9-year-old Lake Wales, Florida, boy from his bed and raping him. According to police records, the victim told police that he fell asleep with his brothers and sisters, but when he woke up a man was dragging him by a baseball field. The boy said he was forced to the ground and raped. The Lake Wales police report says that the boy told police that his attacker had bushy sideburns and a mustache. After being shown five photographs of potential suspects, the report says, the victim picked out the photo of Bain…

“Florida in 2001 passed a statute allowing cases to be reopened for DNA testing. Four times Bain submitted handwritten motions seeking such testing, only to be denied. His fifth try was successful only after an appeals court ruled that he was entitled to a hearing… His twin sister, Jannie Jones, told police that James was home with her, watching a popular television medical drama called ‘Medical Center’ at the time of the attack.”

The Bible prohibits the conviction of an accused unless at least two eye witnesses agree on and confirm the facts of the underlying charge. If, however, the witness lied or was negligent in his or her testimony, he or she had to be punished.

Strained Relations Between Vatican and Israel

Deutsche Welle reported on December 19:

“Pope Benedict XVI is facing criticism after he put a controversial wartime predecessor one step closer to sainthood. Jewish groups say Pope Pius XII did not do enough to save Jewish lives during the Second World War… Pope Benedict has approved a decree that recognizes the pontiff, who is accused of doing too little to help Europe’s Jews during World War II, as having ‘heroic virtues.’ The posthumous honor gives the former pope the title ‘venerable’ and places him two steps from full canonization.

“Pius XI has been accused of turning a blind eye to the Nazi genocide of the Jews, in a controversy that has strained relations between the Vatican and Israel… Attempts to beatify the former pope had been described as ‘unacceptable’ by Israel’s social affairs minister Isaac Herzog… ‘Throughout the period of the Holocaust, the Vatican knew very well what was happening in Europe,’ Herzog told the Haaretz newspaper in 2008.”

The New York Times added on December 23:

“In an effort to calm growing tensions with Jewish groups, the Vatican said Wednesday that Pope Benedict XVI’s decision moving the wartime pope Pius XII closer to sainthood was not a ‘hostile act’ against those who believe Pius did not do enough to stop the Holocaust. The Vatican spokesman… issued a statement saying that the beatification process evaluated the ‘Christian life’ of Pius, who reigned from 1939 to 1958, and not ‘the historical impact of all his operative decisions’… Benedict confirmed the ‘heroic virtues’ of Pius — along with those of John Paul II — on Saturday, opening the door to beatification once a miracle is attributed to each. A second miracle would be required for sainthood.

“The move created anger among many Jewish groups, which have argued that Pius did not speak out vocally enough against the Nazis or intervene to save Jews during World War II, and that the Vatican helped many former Nazis escape to South America after World War II. The decision by Benedict — a German who was an unwilling member of the Hitler Youth — to move Pius closer to sainthood was the latest in a series of controversies. It came less than a year after he revoked the excommunication of a schismatic bishop who had denied the scope of the Holocaust, an act that caused the pope and the Vatican to issue a series of extensive clarifications. Benedict also upset many Jews when he did not directly mention the Nazis or Germany during a visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust memorial in Israel in May, as John Paul II had done, although Benedict has denounced the Holocaust on many other occasions…

“[The Vatican spokesman] added that the Vatican hoped the pope’s expected visit to the Rome synagogue next month would reaffirm ties between Judaism and the Roman Catholic Church… The legacy of Pius is particularly sensitive for the Jewish community in Rome. More than 1,000 of its members were rounded up in 1943 and deported to Auschwitz. Documents in the Vatican archives indicate that Pius knew of the deportation and did not act to stop it.”

The Bible shows that ultimately, the Roman Catholic Church will be at odds with Israel. In spite of wrong assumptions taught by some, there is nothing in the Bible prophesying a future friendship pact, contract or treaty between Catholic Europe and the state of Israel, which will allegedly last for 3 1/2 years. Rather, the relationship between these two entities will steadily deteriorate. For more information, please read our Q&A on Daniel 9:27.

Will the Habsburgs Run for Presidency?

Europe World News reported on December 16:

“Austria’s Habsburg family suffered a blow in their bid for the Austrian presidency Wednesday, after the country’s Constitutional Court delayed a ruling on whether the former rulers could be barred from running for office until after forthcoming elections. Ulrich Habsburg-Lothringen and his daughter-in-law Gabriele Maria Habsburg-Lothringen are seeking to overturn a clause in the constitution that excludes members of current or former ruling families from being elected head of state. The court said it has no mandate to take up the matter before the elections in April – but advised the Habsburgs on how to proceed in order to have their case heard eventually.

“They should formally announce their candidature, which would be rejected by the national election authority, and Habsburg-Lothringen and his daughter-in-law could then contest the decision at the court. ‘Of course, I will follow through with this,’ said Ulrich Habsburg-Lothringen, 68. He is a third-degree nephew of Otto von Habsburg, the son of the last emperor Charles. He is set to run as an independent candidate, but the Green party, along with the far-right Freedom Party, has said it wants to change the constitution so that former ruling nobility can be elected. Habsburg-Lothringen said he was confident that he could collect the 6,000 signatures necessary to launch a presidential bid.”

This development is worth watching, as the Bible says that modern Europe will unite as the tenth resurrection of the ancient Roman Empire, and the Habsburgs (under Charles V.) constituted the seventh revival of the Roman Empire (and the fourth revival of the Holy Roman Empire). For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

Surprisingly to many, the “magi” were neither “astrologers,” nor did they visit Joseph, Mary and the Christ Child in the inn, nor is it biblically revealed how many there were. However, there are traditions which would support the idea that they were twelve, not three, as commonly assumed.

The idea that they were “astrologers” derived, in part, from the fact that the magi saw Christ’s “star” (compare Matthew 2:2). But this was clearly not an ordinary star, as J.H. Blunt, The Annotated Bible, confirms. He says: “Taking the evidence into account, and not mere conjecture, the star must have been an appearance of a supernatural kind… [It] guided them westward to Jerusalem… it afterwards moved in a manner so different from that of fixed stars, planets or even ordinary comets, that they could distinguish its motion as leading them six miles southward to Bethlehem… then it ‘stood,’ as ‘stars’ are never known to stand still… it may have been a guiding angel… and such an idea is in accordance with that of ancient art which represents the star as a child [of course, the Bible never represents angels as children or babies] bearing a scepter and surrounded by a star-like glory…”

The Bible describes at times angels as stars (compare Revelation 1:20; Isaiah 14:13; Job 38:7); so it appears certain that this “star,” which was not always visible to the “magi,” was an angel who showed them the way to the place where Christ dwelled. At that time, Christ was no longer in a manger or an inn. Rather, He was now in a house (compare Matthew 2:11). Blunt states that some time had passed since His birth, “for the Presentation in the Temple had taken place… and during the interval the Holy Family had doubtless left the public inn for a private dwelling-house.”

We stated the following in a recent Q&A (Update 422):

“The whole Christmas manger scene is a complete fraud. There were no wise men at the manger. The number of the wise men is not specified. It is only stated that they gave three types of gifts, but they didn’t see Christ until He was a young child. At that time, He was no longer in a manger, but lived in a house (Matthew 2:11). According to Matthew 2:16, Christ was at that time perhaps as old as two years, since King Herod had all children two and under killed, based on the information which he had received from the wise men.”

In this regard, let us also quote from our booklet, “Is that in the Bible?–Man’s Holidays or God’s Holy Days”:

“The Archbishop of Canterbury said that the Christmas story of the ‘Three Wise Men’ was nothing but a ‘legend.’ The British Daily Telegraph reported on December 20, 2007: ‘Dr Rowan Williams has claimed that there was certainly nothing to prove there were three of them… or that they were kings. He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew’s gospel and the details were very vague. Dr Williams said: “Matthew’s gospel says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, that’s all we’re really told. It works quite well as legend.”

“’The Archbishop went on to dispel other details of the Christmas story, adding that there were probably no asses or oxen in the stable. He also argued that Christmas cards which showed the Virgin Mary cradling the baby Jesus, flanked by shepherds and wise men, were misleading. As for the scenes that depicted snow falling in Bethlehem, the Archbishop said the chance of this was “very unlikely”. He added that Jesus was probably not born in December at all. He said: “Christmas was when it was because it fitted well with the winter festival.”‘”

But as we will show, the “magi” were not astrologers, either. The Church of England came up with even more spectacular conclusions in the past. The Telegraph reported on February 11, 2004: “The Three Wise Men who brought gifts of gold, frankincense and myrrh to the infant Jesus may not have been particularly wise and could have been women, the Church of England has ruled.”

This is of course utter nonsense.

First, let us quote from additional commentaries and encyclopedias which describe the nature of the “magi” or “wise men.”

The Bible Encyclopedia states:

“The term ‘wise men’ appears 44 times in the Bible, and the meaning varies somewhat. The first mention of ‘wise men’ is in the account of Jacob’s son, Joseph, in Genesis 41:8 where it says that the pharaoh ‘called for all the magicians of Egypt and all its wise men’ [Hebrew: chakam] to interpret his dream. Chakam means intelligent, skillful, artful or cunning man. This same word is used throughout the rest of the Old Testament, except in the Book of Daniel. In Daniel, the word used in the original language is chakamim or chakkiym from a root corresponding to chakam. The first of these ‘wise men’ is mentioned in Daniel 2:12…

“[Regarding the] Magi who worshipped Jesus [the word] translated ‘wise men’ is the Greek word magos. This is the same as magus, an old Persian word equivalent to the chakam of the Old Testament (above). Magi is the plural of magus… There is no indication that they practiced sorcery or claimed magical powers. Their recorded conduct is sincere and worshipful. They appear to have researched the Old Testament and believed its prophecies about the Messiah… The record does not specifically say that there were three, or that they were kings… but there was obvious wealth involved… These magi did not arrive until possibly almost two years after Christ’s birth, certainly sometime after his presentation in the Temple (Luke 2:22-39)… There is no mention of camels or any mode of transportation in the biblical record. There is also no mention of their names…”

The Catholic Encyclopedia adds:

“No Father of the Church holds the Magi to have been kings… Neither were they magicians… The Gospel narrative omits to mention the number of the Magi, and there is no certain tradition in this matter. Some Fathers speak of three Magi; they are very likely influenced by the number of gifts. In the Orient, tradition favours twelve.”

The Lutheran Church published the following comments:

“There is no conclusive evidence that they were kings… How many magi were there? Unknown. Matthew 2:1-16 simply uses the plural… Where did they come from? The only thing we can say with certainty is ‘from the east’ (Matthew 2:1). Our best knowledge is that members of the Magian priesthood existed in [the] Parthian empire at this time, which encompassed a large area to the east of the eastern frontier of the Roman Empire… Did the magi visit baby Jesus while He was still in the manger? No. Matthew’s Gospel clearly says that the magi entered a house (2:11).”

On December 18, 2001, the Meredian Magazine published an article, titled, “Who Were The Wise Men?” It pointed out:

“Among the more intriguing figures in the scriptures are the wise men who visited the infant Jesus. The story of their journey to Bethlehem is found in the Gospel of Matthew, where we learn that they came ‘from the east’ (Matthew 2:1-2) when Jesus was apparently two years old (Matthew 2:1-2, 7, 16). By that time, Mary and Joseph were no longer in the place where the shepherds had found them (Luke 2:7), but in a house (Matthew 2:11)…

“What… did the wise men follow from Jerusalem to Bethlehem? We cannot know for certain, but it is interesting that an early Christian document indicates that it was an angel in the guise of a star… Some early traditions indicate that there were twelve wise men. The most prevalent tradition says they were three kings, their number derived from the three gifts they brought: gold, frankincense, and myrrh (Matthew 2:11)…”

However, as we point out in our booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas,” the conclusion that there were three magi, based on the three types of gifts, is not compelling:

“The P.M. magazine published an article some time ago, entitled, ‘What do we know about the Three Holy Kings?’ It pointed out:

“’That they… became kings, can be accredited to the theologian Tertullian (160 until 220). He wrote, “in the east, Magi were normally kings.” So we see how quickly the wise men of the Bible had become kings… According to Persian tradition, these Magi were descendants of the ancient Median priesthood… In the gospel, we are not told how many they were. The oriental churches speak of twelve Magi.

“’Jacob of Edessa (640-708), one of the most important ancient writers of the Church of the Jacobites, writes: “The Magi were from Persia, but they were not three, as portrayed by artists for the people, as derived from the threeness of the gifts of gold, myrrh and frankincense, but rather twelve, as can be seen in many traditions. Those who came were princes and well-respected persons from the country of Persia. Many people, more than a thousand men, accompanied them, so that Jerusalem became very excited when they arrived.”‘

“The article also speculates that the number of the Magi was reduced to ‘three,’ not because of the three types of gifts mentioned, but because another argument for the Trinity was searched for. Allegedly, the remains of the ‘three kings’ rest today in the dome of Cologne in Germany. However, P.M. notes that ‘the garments, in which the bones are wrapped, were made in the second or third century after Christ in Syria.’”

Over 20 years ago, the Worldwide Church of God published the following comments about the “Magi”:

“Many people believe that the Magi were astrologers. However, God condemns astrology (Deut. 4:15, 19; 17:2-5; Isa. 47:13-14)… One of God’s most righteous men [Daniel] was made leader of the Babylonian magi [“wise men” or “magi” in Daniel 2:48]! Since Daniel remained in this position for a long time, this Bible example proves there was at least one righteous magus–Daniel… Now who were the Magi of Matthew 2? And where did they come from?…

“Matthew says the Magi are from ‘the east’ (or ‘eastern parts’…) or the distant East… One great empire east of the Euphrates… conquered the lands east of the Euphrates area, had Babylon as its capital, and included the areas of Persia, Bactria, etc. It was the Parthian Empire… the Parthians rose to power around 250 B.C. in and around the southern shores of the Caspian Sea. That was the very land into which the house of Israel–not Judah–was exiled. The exiles in this land were members of the ten tribes of Israel. The Parthian Empire included exiles from the lost ten tribes of Israel–many of whom remained in the land of their captivity until about A.D. 226. Certain of the ancient magi could claim Abraham as their father (see McClintock and Strong’s Cyclopedia, article, ‘Magi.’) Thus, historical and biblical evidence reveals that the Magi of Matthew 2 were not astrologers whose observations of heavenly bodies led them to the Christ Child. Instead, they were representatives of the tribes of Israel in exile who were led to their King by an angel…”

Following this rationale and concept, then additional interesting aspects would be worth considering: Since the Jew Daniel was one of the righteous “magi,” and he and many other Jewish exiles lived in Babylon as captives, after King Nebuchadnezzar had conquered the house of Judah, and since the Parthian Empire subsequently absorbed the Babylonian Empire, it stands to reason that Jews continued to live in the Parthian Empire, and that they still dwelled there at the time of the birth of Christ. The tradition that it was TWELVE magi who visited Christ would be quite interesting, in that the magi could have been representatives of ALL the twelve tribes of Israel AND Judah (being descendants of the TWELVE sons of Jacob or Israel), who were led by an angel to their King.

Jesus was called the King of the Jews (Matthew 2:2; 27:11, 37), as well as the King of Israel (John 1:49; 12:13). He will also be recognized as the King of all peoples (Isaiah 2:2-4; 9:6-7; Daniel 7:14), and the time will come when ALL nations will accept Him as their King and obey, honor and worship Him (Philippians 2:9-11).

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch and You Tube. It is titled, Religious Persecution in Germany? The following is a summary: Surely, there could not be lack or violation of religious freedom in Germany! Don’t be too convinced! And what’s worse, the Bible prophesies that continental Europe will soon begin–as it did in the past–to inflict tremendous persecution on all those who don’t agree with the EU’s religious concepts of “Christianity.” Don’t be duped into thinking it could not happen.

A new German sermon, titled, “Du Sollst Nicht Luegen, Teil 2” (“You shall Not Lie, Part 2”), was posted on the Web.

On December 19, 2009, Kalon Mitchell and Michael Link will give split sermons, titled, respectively, “The Christian Soldier,” and “Longsuffering.”

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 Proverbs 27: 7, King Solomon stated: “A satisfied soul loathes the honeycomb, But to a hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet.”

This ancient proverb is very relevant today, even though its meaning may not be all that clear at first sight. The New Ungers Bible Dictionary explains that the word “honey” is used in the Bible to “denote sweet discourse,” and that the “Word of God is compared to honey and described as spiritually delectable.” Psalms 119:103-104 confirms this, saying, “How sweet are Your words to my taste, Sweeter than honey to my mouth! Through Your precepts I get understanding; Therefore I hate every false way.”

But why would–and how could–a satisfied soul “loathe” honey? And more to the point, could we in the Church of God adopt an attitude of “loathing” the “Word of God”? The answer is simply “yes”–and this is so because of our “human nature.” God was aware of our tendency to forget Him and “loathe” His Word. He inspired Moses to write a warning for ancient Israel, which also applies today to the modern descendants of Israel and to spiritual Israel–the Church of God.

In Deuteronomy 8:11, He says through Moses: “Beware that you DO NOT FORGET the LORD your God by not keeping His commandments, His judgments, and His statutes which I command you today…” He continues in verses 14-19: “… when your heart is lifted up, and you forget the LORD your God… who fed you in the wilderness… [and] you say in your heart, ‘MY power and the might of MY hand have gained me this wealth,’ [then] you shall remember the LORD your God, for it is He who gives you power to get wealth… Then it shall be, if you by any means forget the LORD your God, and follow other gods, and serve them and worship them,  I testify against you this day that you shall perish.”

It is within human nature to forget God and His Word–to “loathe” His Way of life–and to return to sin. Solomon is warning us that it is possible to become so satisfied with our own accomplishments that we can become self-sufficient, instead of relying on God. In the end time, this tendency will be predominant in the church of the Laodiceans. In Revelation 3:16, Christ says that He will vomit luke-warm Church members out of His mouth. Continuing in verse 17, Christ describes the true nature and condition of the “satisfied” and “self-sufficient” soul which “loathes” the Word of God–without even realizing it: “Because you say, ‘I am rich, have become wealthy, and have need of nothing’–and do not know that you are wretched, miserable, poor, blind, and naked…” (Compare James 1:22-24).

But Solomon is not only warning those who “loathe” God and His Word, he is also giving encouragement and praise to those who do not fall into this trap. He continues to say in Proverbs 27:7: “…But to a hungry soul every bitter thing is sweet.” When we are hungry for God and His Way of Life, we will consider even “bitter” experiences as “sweet” and necessary; realizing that they are happening to us to help us to become more and more perfect.

Notice how Christ continues with His strong reproof to the Laodiceans, in Revelation 3:18-19: “I counsel you to buy from Me gold refined in the fire, that you may be rich; and white garments, that you may be clothed, that the shame of your nakedness may not be revealed; and anoint your eyes with eye salve, that you may see. AS MANY AS I LOVE, I REBUKE AND CHASTEN. Therefore be zealous and repent.”

Job was self-righteous and thought that he could do no wrong. Without realizing it, he “loathed” and rejected God’s chastening. But after God allowed him to be “put in his place,” he came to comprehend how wrong he was. He had to go through severe tests. He had to reach the point where his soul was hungry for God’s chastisement in his life, understanding that it was necessary for his perfection.

We need to be careful not to exclude God from our lives. Christ is not “in the lives” of the Laodiceans; rather, He is standing outside–at the door; knocking; wanting to be let in (Revelation 3:20). We must never forget that “every good gift” –including tests and trials–comes from above. We need to keep in mind that the bitterness of God’s tests and trials is shaping our character and helping us to grow and to overcome. Revelation 3:21 contains this promise: “To him who overcomes I will grant to sit with Me on My throne, as I also overcame and sat down with My Father on His throne.”

Our future is right in front of us. Let us never think that we have no need for growth and spiritual perfection. Let us never “loathe” God’s Way and HIS Will for us, and let us embrace the “bitterness” of God’s trials, considering them as “sweet” and counting them as “joy” (James 1:2).

We begin with a few articles covering President Obama’s acceptance of the Nobel Peace Prize. The Financial Times utters the opinion that the Nobel committee made fundamental misjudgments; the left-liberal Huffington Post chides the President for confusing war with peace in his acceptance speech; and the Israeli paper, Haaretz, strongly condemns the award and feels that the world needs a leader–but that it isn’t President Obama. (When one may think the decision regarding the Peace Nobel Prize was controversial enough, Time magazine just announced that they chose Mr. Bernanke as the “person of the year.” While Mr. Bernanke denied for over a year that we were in a recession, the editors of “Time” congratulate him for having averted a depression.)

The health-care debacle continues, with political maneuverings, changed positions and disappointed players. The Wall Street Journal wonders about the reasons for the Obama Administration’s disdain for Britain, while Britain angers Israel due to breached promises to repudiate an antiquated law. It also appears that the EU wants to accept a plan to establish East Jerusalem as the capital of a Palestinian state.

While Iran accelerates the production of powerful weapons and while the debate of the spread of Islam in Europe continues, the German paper, Die Tageszeitung, rejects the decision of Germany’s constitutional court to generally ban shopping on Sundays, and asks this pointed question: “How is it that Switzerland’s recent prohibition on minarets can be seen as an affront to religious freedom, but in Germany we allow churches rather than a democratically elected government [to] tell us what to do with our Sundays?” (We have posted a German StandingWatch program on the Web, Sonntagsverkauf unchristlich? discussing this decision and its ramifications; as well as the fact that Sunday is NOT the Biblically-commanded seventh day of rest, but an “invention” of the Roman Catholic Church, adopted from worship of pagan sungods.)

The Catholic Church is beginning to lay down the ground rules for non-Catholic priests [such as members of the Anglican clergy] to join the Church of Rome as priests, and the requirements are not as “liberal” as some might have thought. We also report on Germany’s tradition to celebrate “Nikolaus’ day” on December 6, and conclude with an article in the Daily Mail that Prince William–and not Prince Charles–could be the next King of England.

The 2009 Nobel Peace Prize–“Fundamental Misjudgments”

The Financial Times wrote on December 10:

“When the Nobel committee awarded Barack Obama the annual Peace Prize a few months back, it made two fundamental misjudgments. First, it failed to recognise that there would be widespread dismay that the prize was being awarded to someone at the outset of his public journey, with little to show in terms of solid international achievement. Secondly, it failed to predict that Mr Obama would end up making his acceptance speech little more than [a] week after ordering a massive US troop uplift in the war in Afghanistan.

“To be fair to Mr Obama, his acceptance speech in Oslo recognises these points head on… while he may be winding down the war in Iraq, the conflict in Afghanistan is accelerating: ‘We are at war, and I am responsible for the deployment of thousands of young Americans to battle in a distant land. Some will kill. Some will be killed.’ As statements on war go, world leaders rarely get this blunt.

“Mr Obama’s frankness does not stop there, however. He keeps up this blunt approach before a Norwegian audience which, I suspect, must have wondered at times whether they’d chosen the right guy for the peace prize. For the major theme of Obama’s speech is his defence of the ‘just war,’ of the argument that nations are right at times to take military action…

“As ever with Obama, it all adds up to a finely crafted carefully balanced speech. Yet what stands out, when considering the audience before which he stands, is his justification of military action when necessary. Barack Obama must surely  be the first Nobel peace laureate ever to turn up at the prize ceremony and confront a notably pacifist audience with such belligerence.”

“Mr. President, War Is Not Peace!”

The Huffington Post wrote on December 12:

“Eloquence in Oslo cannot change the realities of war… From President Obama, we hear that peace is the ultimate goal. But ‘peace’ is a fixture on a strategic horizon that keeps moving as the military keeps marching… War is not peace. It never has been. It never will be…

“In the name of pragmatism, Obama spoke of ‘the world as it is’ and threw a cloak of justification over the grisly escalation in Afghanistan by insisting that ‘war is sometimes necessary’ — but generalities do nothing to mitigate the horrors of war being endured by others. President Obama accepted the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize while delivering — to the world as it is — a pro-war speech. The context instantly turned the speech’s insights into flackery for more war.”

As Christians, we are not to participate in any war fought by humans. The Bible clearly prohibits this. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Should You Fight in War?” Also, please watch our most recent StandingWatch programs on the subject, “Lessons from the Afghan War,” and “Coming–Worldwide Nuclear War.” 

“Obama Does Not Deserve the Peace Prize”

The Israeli paper, Haaretz, wrote on December 10:

“An American president who has not yet managed to make peace anywhere in the world will be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He will be awarded the prize even though he is personally responsible for scores of targeted killings and much slaughter of civilians in aerial bombardments. He will be awarded the prize even though he has just decided to escalate one of the two ineffectual wars he is conducting. He will be awarded the prize only because he is a Democrat, a liberal and a black man who defeated the Republicans and cast George W. Bush out of the White House.

“Oslo has provided us with many amusing jokes in recent decades. However, the joke of Obama as peace prize laureate is the funniest of all. It proves the absurdity of the lengths to which the self-righteous European culture of political correctness can go. Obama is not to blame for the Norwegians having decided to act foolishly. However, if he had any courage he would have refused to accept a Nobel [Peace Prize] prematurely. He would have asked the prize committee to judge him at the end of his term in office and not at its start.

“Obama hasn’t done so, and this isn’t surprising. Thus far the glamorous president has not shown courage on any issue or in any area. True, Obama is intelligent, articulate and charismatic. However, he hasn’t really done anything yet in the international arena. He has orchestrated neither confrontations nor reconciliations. He has neither won a victory nor made peace. He has not evinced willingness to pay any sort of price for any sort of achievement. In his first year as president of the world, Obama has not proved he has a backbone. He has not yet manifested himself as a leader.

“In 2010 the world will need a leader. From day to day, Iran is increasingly becoming a nuclear nightmare; Pakistan is a barrel of nuclear explosives and North Korea is a nuclear rogue. The Iranian-Pakistani-North Korean triangle makes clear what the challenge of the 21st century is: how to prevent turning the world into a nuclear jungle. How to maintain nuclear order and prevent nuclear chaos. How to get through the next half-century without a Hiroshima or Nagasaki.

“Obama’s Washington understands the challenge very well. So do Nicolas Sarkozy’s Paris, Angela Merkel’s Berlin and Gordon Brown’s London. Even Dmitry Medvedev’s Moscow is beginning to understand. But the general public in North America and Europe has not yet internalized what its leaders know. The media are indeed reporting on centrifuges, enrichment programs and warheads. Politicians and pundits are indeed paying lip service to the Iranian-Pakistani-North Korean nuclear triangle. But there is no fervor in the talk. There is no real sense of urgency. There is no committed discourse. International public opinion is still focused on global warming, not global nuclearization, as the most urgent issue on the agenda…”

The Bible clearly prophesies that in these end times, the world will be facing nuclear war–and that no human being would SURVIVE this terrible time soon to come, unless God was to intervene and cut those days short. For more information, please listen to our StandingWatch program, “Coming–Worldwide Nuclear War,” and read our free booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.”

The Ongoing Health-Care Debacle–Politics at its “Finest”…

ABC News reported on December 16:

“President Obama said he likes the Senate health care compromise and wants it passed by Christmas, but he faces a revolt from some liberals who say the health care bill has been gutted to appease insurance companies. ‘This is a bigger bailout for the insurance industry than AIG,’ former Democratic National Committee chairman and medical doctor Howard Dean [said]… ‘A very small number of people are going to get any insurance at all, until 2014, if the bill works… Dean sent shockwaves when he said Tuesday… that the removal of the Medicare buy-in means Democrats should just kill the health care bill and start over.”

ABC News added on December 16:

“[Joe] Lieberman has scrambled the politics of health care overhaul continually… His objections to including a public option were a main reason Democrats fashioned a compromise that would replace such a mechanism with a Medicare expansion, allowing people as young as 55 to buy into the system. Then, on Sunday, Lieberman seemed to reverse himself on that provision, notifying Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada that he couldn’t support the expansion in Medicare after all.

“That leaves Senate Democratic leaders, who can’t afford to lose a single vote on health care, poised to strip that out as well, with the White House’s acquiescence… Lieberman benefits from the simple fact that Democrats need him, even if many of them don’t like him. He might be among the few political figures who comes out of the grueling health care debate with a smile.”

The Associated Press reported on December 16:

“The Senate is in health care gridlock after a Republican senator forced the clerk to read aloud a 767-page amendment. GOP Sen. Tom Coburn of Oklahoma had sought approval to require that any amendment considered by the Senate must be offered 72 hours in advance and with a full cost report. When he was rebuffed by Democratic Sen. Max Baucus of Montana, Coburn invoked his right to require that an amendment by another lawmaker be read aloud. That sent the Senate into limbo, since the amendment by Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont, is 767 pages long.”

ABC News reported on December 16:

“President Obama told ABC News’ Charles Gibson in an interview that if Congress does not pass health care legislation that will bring down costs, the federal government ‘will go bankrupt.’”

At the same time, the Associated Press reported on December 16:

“President Barack Obama has signed into law a $1.1 trillion bill that increases the budgets in many areas of the government by about 10 percent, including health, law enforcement and veterans’ programs. Obama signed the bill privately at the White House on Wednesday after receiving the bill from Congress on Sunday… Most Republicans opposed the bill, citing runaway federal spending… Democrats said the spending would help the economy recover from the recession.”

Why the Disdain for Britain by Obama Administration?

The Wall Street Journal wrote on December 14:

“Britain is the only European country President Barack Obama can really count on to respond positively to his plea for NATO to provide extra forces for Afghanistan. So why is it, then, that the Obama administration can barely conceal its disdain for a nation that, by its deeds, time and again proves itself to be America’s staunchest and most reliable ally?…

“Before he became president it was said that Mr. Obama harbored a deep grudge against Britain for its colonialist past. It is alleged that his paternal grandfather, Hussein Onyango Obama, was tortured by the British during the Mau Mau rebellion in Kenya in the 1950s, when it was controlled by Britain. In his autobiographical book “The Audacity of Hope,” Mr. Obama unflatteringly compares the British Empire to South Africa’s apartheid regime and the former Soviet Union.

“Soon after his inauguration, he sent back to the U.K. a bust of Sir Winston Churchill that had been loaned to President George W. Bush after the 9/11 attacks. The sculpture had enjoyed pride of place in the Oval Office.

“There is also an important ideological reason that Britain’s leading policy makers find themselves increasingly shunned by the U.S. Key foreign-policy advisers to Mr. Obama are keen advocates of a federal Europe, one in which the European Commission based in Brussels is the main center of power and influence, rather than the individual capitals, such as London, Paris and Berlin. In this context, Britain’s dogged attachment to a ‘special relationship’ with America is regarded as an embarrassing relic of a previous era.”

Britain Angers Israel

Deutsche Welle reported on December 14:

“Israel has slammed an arrest warrant issued by a British court against former Israeli Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. The now opposition leader is under fire for her role in the offensive in the Gaza Strip one year ago… A statement released by the foreign ministry urged Britain to change the law to prevent such action from being taken in the future.

“The details of the warrant are currently unclear. British daily The Guardian reports that the warrant was issued on the weekend for Livni’s role in the war in the Gaza Strip almost a year ago. The warrant has now been withdrawn after it emerged that Livni had cancelled a planned visit to Britain…

“Several Israeli officials have previously called off trips to Britain as a result of efforts by Palestinians to prosecute Israelis in British courts. In September, pro-Palestinian activists tried to have Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak arrested for his role in the Gaza conflict but the attempt was rejected on the grounds of diplomatic immunity. Livni would not have enjoyed this immunity as she is no longer a government minister.”

The Jerusalem Post wrote on December 15:

“British Foreign Secretary David Miliband called Kadima head Tzipi Livni and Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman Tuesday evening in an apparent effort to prevent the diplomatic crisis stemming from a British arrest warrant issued against Livni from spinning completely out of control. According to a statement put out by Livni’s office, Miliband expressed his ‘shock’ at the arrest warrant and promised to work immediately to ensure that a similar occurrence would not happen in the future against Livni or other Israeli leaders. Miliband told Lieberman that the warrant was ‘completely unacceptable.’

“While Israel has heard such promises numerous times over the last five years, there was a sense in Jerusalem Tuesday night that the wall-to-wall outrage in Israel that accompanied news of the warrant against Livni had registered in London. Britain’s outgoing ambassador Tom Phillips bore the brunt of Israeli anger over the matter, being summoned to the Foreign Ministry and having a conversation on the matter with National Security Council head Uzi Arad.

“Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s office issued a statement saying he instructed Arad to deliver a ‘clear message’ to Phillips that Israel expected the British government to ‘act against this immoral phenomenon which is trying to impair Israel’s right to self-defense’…

“While in the past Israel did not press too hard on the issue, that policy seemed to change abruptly when the Foreign Ministry issuing a statement Tuesday morning, surprisingly harsh in the cautious world of diplomacy, saying that Israel rejected the ‘cynical’ move taken in the British courts at the behest of extremist elements in Britain and called on the British government ‘for once and for all’ to keep its promises and work to prevent the manipulation by anti-Israeli elements of the British legal system against Israel. ‘The lack of determined and immediate action to correct this distortion harms the relations between the two countries,’ the statement read. ‘If Israeli leaders cannot visit Britain in a dignified manner, it will naturally be a real obstacle to Britain’s desire to have an active role in the peace process in the Middle East’…

“The crisis comes at a time of already deteriorating relations between Israel and Britain, with Jerusalem frustrated at London for its abstention in the UN General Assembly on the Goldstone report, its support of the Swedish proposal that the EU recognize east Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, and its guidelines to stores and retailers last week to label produce from the territories as either coming from Palestinians or the settlements.”

Britain’s conduct in this matter can only be described as outrageous, provocative, negligent, ignorant and stupid at the same time. As the Associated Press reported on December 16, “Livni’s office says the British premier phoned her Wednesday afternoon and said he intends to act to change a law that allows non-citizens to be brought before British courts.”

It added: “Britain is vowing to curtail a peculiar legal power that lets judges order the arrest of visiting politicians and generals — a threat currently focused on Israeli visitors that, one day, might be invoked against Barack Obama or Vladimir Putin. Lawyers working with Palestinian activists in recent years have sought the arrest of senior Israeli civilian and military figures under terms of ‘universal jurisdiction.’ This ill-defined legal concept empowers judges to issue arrest warrants for visiting officials accused of war crimes in a foreign conflict.”

The shameful truth is that the British government knew of this ridiculous law to empower political judges to issue offensive decisions, promised Israel to repeal this law, and did nothing to keep this promise. Britain must be careful that it does not find itself alienated from and abandoned by the rest of the world because of its own doing.

Is EU Backing East Jerusalem as Palestine Capital?

The EUobserver wrote on December 11:

“Palestine Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has said that the EU backs the establishment of East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state, fueling the dispute over a recent EU communique. Mr Fayyad on a visit to Brussels on Friday (11 December) said Tuesday’s EU statement on the Middle East makes a number of references to East Jerusalem that, ‘if added [together], in my reading, add up to nothing less than recognising East Jerusalem as the future capital of the state of Palestine’…

“Mr Fayyad’s remarks continue a dispute on what the EU really thinks about Palestine, which erupted two weeks ago when Israel first attacked a Swedish draft of the EU statement, which contained more explicit pro-Palestinian language. East Jerusalem – which is home to Muslims and Jewish settlers as well as some of the holiest sites in Islam and Judaism – lies at the heart of international efforts to bring peace to the region, with Israel claiming it as part of its own ‘indivisible’ capital…

“The [EU] commission is preparing to launch a new Action Plan for Palestinian relations that is to involve sending in more EU experts and ‘front-loading’ €158.5 million of aid in early 2010…”

The Bible states that Jerusalem will be “surrounded” by European armies [of the LAST resurrection of the ancient Roman Empire], and that it will become a stumbling block for ALL nations. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Europe in Prophecy.”

Iran’s Latest Advanced Missile

On December 16, the Associated Press reported the following:

“Iran on Wednesday test-fired an upgraded version of its most advanced missile, which is capable of hitting Israel and parts of Europe, in a new show of strength aimed at preventing any military strike against it amid the nuclear standoff with the West. The test stoked tensions between Iran and the West, which is pressing Tehran to rein in its nuclear program. British Prime Minister Gordon Brown said it showed the need for tougher U.N. sanctions on Iran…

“Wednesday’s test was for the latest version of Iran’s longest-range missile, the Sajjil-2, with a range of about 1,200 miles (2,000 kilometers). That range places Israel, Iran’s sworn enemy, well within reach, as well as U.S. bases in the Gulf region and parts of southeastern Europe… Iran has repeatedly warned it will retaliate if Israel or the United States carries out military strikes against its nuclear facilities, at a time when the U.S. and its allies accuse Tehran of seeking to develop a nuclear weapon… Nuclear negotiations have been deadlocked for months…

“The name ‘Sajjil’ means ‘baked clay,’ a reference to a story in the Quran, Islam’s holy book, in which birds sent by God drive off an enemy army attacking the holy city of Mecca by pelting them with stones of baked clay… Solid-fuel missiles like the Sajjil-2 are more accurate than the liquid fuel missiles of similar range currently possessed by Iran. They are also a concern because they can be fueled in advance and moved or hidden in silos. Iran previously had a solid-fuel missile, the Fateh, with a far shorter range of 120 miles (200 kilometers).”

The Australian wrote on December 18:

“Israeli officials told Haaretz Mr Obama warned Chinese President Hu Jintao during the US President’s visit to Beijing a month ago as part of the US attempt to convince the Chinese to support strict sanctions on Tehran if it does not accept Western proposals for its nuclear program. The Israeli officials said the US had informed Israel about Mr Obama’s meetings in Beijing on Iran. They said Mr Obama made it clear to Mr Hu that at some point the US would no longer be able to prevent Israel from acting as it saw fit in response to the perceived Iranian threat, the report said.”

How Much Allah Can Europe Bear?

Der Spiegel Online wrote on December 11:

“The Swiss decision has shocked Europe and the world because its ramifications go far beyond the building of minarets — they also concern the identity of an entire continent. This was a referendum on Western society’s perception of Islam as a threat. The issue is generating intense debate: Just how much of Islam is predominantly Christian Europe prepared to accept? The decision by the otherwise so tolerant Alpine country reveals the deep-seated fear of an Islam that is becoming increasingly visible…

“Surveys last week revealed that 44 percent of Germans oppose the construction of minarets, followed by 41 percent of the French. Fifty-five percent of all Europeans see Islam as an intolerant religion. Does the Swiss vote reveal an attitude that a majority in Europe would also support if given the opportunity?…

“Can Europe still be Europe if, for instance, in 2050 most young people under the age of 15 in Austria are Muslims? And when Muhammad today is already the most common name for newborn boys in Brussels and Amsterdam, and the third most common in England?…

“Dealing with Islam is perhaps the greatest challenge facing Europe… sometimes fears are stronger than facts, and sometimes a ban on minarets has nothing to do with minarets…”

The Local reported on December 11:

“A poll… for [Germany’s] public broadcaster ARD showed a third of those asked expressed great concern that Islam was growing too quickly in Germany. Thirty-nine percent were… worried about Islam’s impact on society, but to a lesser degree. Only 22 percent said they had no problem with the religion.”

We will see more and more an increased influence of orthodox “Christianity” in Europe, which will ultimately not tolerate the existence of any non-“Christian” competitive religions or convictions.

“Thou Shalt Not Shop!”

Der Tagesspiegel wrote on December 3:

“It was just another Tuesday, but Germany’s Christian churches had a reason to let their bells toll this week. In the name of religious freedom, they won a major victory at the Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe against the heathen city of Berlin. It had to be Berlin – a godless place that has ditched compulsory religion classes for schoolchildren and would like to prohibit prayer in school buildings. But the churches now have it from the highest judicial authority in the country – Berlin’s secular push has gone too far. Advent Sundays in the run-up to Christmas are holy and shops must remain closed…

“How is it that Switzerland’s recent prohibition on minarets can be seen as an affront to religious freedom, but in Germany we allow churches rather than a democratically elected government tell us what to do with our Sundays? What happened to the religious freedom of those citizens who don’t believe in the Christian ideal of the Sabbath [the author means Sunday and wrongly identifies it with the Sabbath. The biblical Sabbath is not Sunday, but the time from Friday sunset to Saturday sunset] and would rather go to the shops than church?

“The place to go for answers from now on is Karlsruhe, home to the Constitutional Court. No-one should underestimate the legal gymnastics required to reach this decision. According to the constitution, Sunday is a day to rest and rejuvenate the soul. There’s not a single word about God or Christmas or even the birth of Jesus. And no wonder – Sunday was never holy to the German constitution, which is why no-one could claim it was in the name of religion.

“But that’s all changed now. The Constitutional Court’s decision refers directly to the Christian roots of resting on Sundays, constructing a legal precedent for the churches. If politicians from one of Germany’s 16 federal states want to re-think their retail shopping hours, it might now be a good idea to stop by the local bishop’s place to see if they have his blessing first. But how do you reconcile that with the right to a neutral, secular government? This is the real reason three Constitutional Court judges rejected the ruling. Had it been just one more, Berliners could have kept their Sunday shopping during Advent. The topic of store opening hours might be banal, but the court ruling fundamentally changes the state’s relationship between religion and law…”

The Roman Catholic Church will exert more and more power in Germany and continental Europe, to enforce Sunday worship on unsuspecting people. The Bible warns us of this. To learn more about the connection between Sunday worship and the “mark of the beast,” please read our free booklet, “Is That in The Bible?–The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation.”

“Joining Rome ‘Means Commitment'”

BBC News wrote on December 11:

“Discontented Anglicans who convert must not become a ‘sect’ within the Roman Catholic Church, a senior Catholic clergyman dealing with church unity has warned… Monsignor Andrew Faley, Assistant General Secretary of the English and Welsh Catholic bishops’ conference [said:]… ‘They become members of a Church which has the ministry of the successor of St Peter as its source of unity… unity for Catholics is central to their understanding of the Church’…

“A substantial number of married ex-Anglican priests are already Catholic priests, having crossed to Rome in the years following the ordination of women priests by the Church of England in the 1990s. But the overwhelming majority of Catholic priests in Britain are required to remain unmarried and celibate… But a man in the ordinariate who wishes to be considered as a priest ‘would be ordained as a celibate priest; he wouldn’t be allowed to marry.’ And a married man who has not been an Anglican priest, could he apply? ‘No,’ says Mgr Faley, ‘A married man within the Catholic tradition cannot be ordained; the norm is celibacy.'”

The Church of Rome will not just accept clergy from other churches, with different ideas, without insisting that these ideas will not be practiced, but abolished. It is the position of the Catholic Church that the pope speaks with godly authority and that he is Christ’s representative on earth. With this claim, it is obvious that those who want to become part of that church must submit in all points to that “authority.”

The Celebration of the German “Nikolaus”

The Local wrote on December 4:

“Each year on December 6, Germans remember the [mythological] death of Nicholas of Myra (now the Anatolia region of modern Turkey), who [supposedly] died on that day in 346. He was [allegedly] a Greek Christian bishop known for miracles and giving gifts secretly, and is now the patron saint of little children, sailors, merchants and students. Known as Nicholas the Wonderworker for his miracles, he is also identified with Santa Claus. Beliefs and traditions about Nikolaus were probably combined with German mythology, particularly regarding stories about the bearded pagan god Odin, who also had a beard and a bag to capture naughty children…

“According to the legend, Nikolaus comes in the middle of the night on a donkey or a horse and leaves little treats – like coins, chocolate, oranges and toys – for good children. What do naughty children get? This depends on different family traditions. Sometimes Nikolaus only leaves a switch in the boot, ostensibly for spankings, to show that the child doesn’t deserve a treat. In other families, a man disguised as St. Nicholas will visit the family or the child’s school alone or with his… sinister-looking alter ego Knecht Ruprecht [portrayed as a demon or the devil in many ancient pictures] to question the children about their behaviour.”

Nikolaus–or Santa Claus–and his alter-ego, the demonic “Knecht Ruprecht,” are clearly of pagan origin. For more information, please read our free booklet, “Don’t Keep Christmas.”

Who Will Be the Next King of England?

Mail On Line wrote on December 13:

“The Queen is to hand over a substantial part of her public duties to Prince William to help him prepare for the day when he becomes King, according to a confidential document obtained by The Mail on Sunday. Secret papers reveal that plans to ease the strain on the 83-year-old monarch and her 88-year-old husband, Prince Philip, are at an advanced stage. The disclosures come despite months of denials from the Palace that the Queen was planning to step back from her official work in favour of her 27-year-old grandson…

“The leak will add to speculation that the Queen believes William, rather than Charles, represents the best long-term interests of the monarchy… It is bound to lead to new speculation that when the Queen dies, the monarchy could skip a generation, with the Crown bypassing Charles and being handed straight to William, although Royal sources strongly discount this option… Significantly, William will undertake his first official overseas tour in January when he represents the Queen in New Zealand and Australia. He is also expected to attend the World Cup in South Africa.”

According to further press releases, Buckingham Palace denied as “a complete lie” the allegation that Prince Charles was intended to be circumvented by appointing Prince William as the next king.

The Bible shows that the end-time royal house of England will play a prophetic role in these last days. It is therefore interesting to see who will turn out to be the future king.

In the book of Revelation, John is transported “in the spirit” to God’s throne in heaven, from where he observes events which will take place shortly in heaven and on earth. The passage in Revelation 5:8-10 describes what John sees in heaven; it reads in the New King James Bible:

“(Verse 8) Now when He [the Lamb, Jesus Christ] had taken the scroll, the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders fell down before the Lamb, each having a harp, and golden bowls full of incense, which are the prayers of the saints. (Verse 9) And they sang a new song, saying: ‘You are worthy to take the scroll, And to open its seals; For you were slain, And have redeemed us to God by your blood Out of every tribe and tongue and people and nation, (Verse 10) And have made us kings and priests to our God, And we shall reign on the earth.'”

As we explain in our free booklets, “Angels, Demons and the Spirit World,” the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders are angelic beings in heaven:

“The Bible speaks about ‘four living creatures’ in the book of Revelation that appear before the throne of God. Although their description is, to an extent, similar to that of seraphim, there are nevertheless distinctions, implying that these angelic beings belong to a separate category or order. Revelation 4:6–9 explains that they have six wings, and that all of them look different. One looks like a lion, one looks like a calf, one looks like a flying eagle, and one has the face of a man. In addition, they have voices of thunder (Revelation 6:1) and they carry out God’s Will by directing other angels (compare Revelation 15:7)…

“The book of Revelation also speaks about twenty-four high-ranking spirit beings within the angelic realm, called the ‘twenty-four elders.’ They are in heaven, clothed in white robes, wearing crowns of gold on their heads and sitting on twenty-four thrones before the throne of God, whom they worship and serve (Revelation 4:4, 10–11). The high rank of the ‘four living creatures’ and the ‘twenty-four elders’ is expressed in Revelation 5:11: ‘Then I looked, and I heard the voice of many angels around the throne [of God and the Lamb, Jesus Christ], the living creatures, and the elders…’ (Compare, too, Revelation 7:11.).”

But are these angelic beings saying in Revelation 5:8-10 that Christ redeemed THEM by His blood, and that He made THEM kings and priests, and that THEY shall reign on earth?

If so, wouldn’t this statement contradict many other passages in the Bible? For instance, please note that God will not give the world tomorrow to angels, but to man. Hebrews 2:5-6 states: “For He has not put the world to come, of which we speak, in subjection to angels. But one testified in a certain place, saying, ‘What is MAN that you are mindful of HIM…?'” In addition, we read that man will judge the world AND angels (1 Corinthians 6:2-3).

Finally, please remember that Christ did not die for angels, but for man, by becoming a human being (Hebrews 2:14-16). Since the penalty for man’s sins is death (Romans 6:23), Christ died for man and thereby paid the penalty of human sin. He became a man (John 1:14), to die for man’s sins, so that man could become members of the God Family (1 John 3:1-2; 1 Corinthians 15:49).

Angels are spirit beings who cannot die (Luke 20:35-36) –and since the penalty for the sin of rebellious angels (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6) is not eternal death, but first the “everlasting [Gehenna] fire” (compare Matthew 25:41; see also Revelation 20:10) and finally the “blackness of darkness forever” (Jude 13), Christ’s death as a man would not have paid for their sin, and His shed blood would not have redeemed them to God. In addition, there is no indication whatsoever that the four living creatures and the twenty-four elders had been SINNING angels and that they had to be REDEEMED by Christ–by His blood or otherwise.

There might be different explanations for the passage in Revelation 5:8-10. We must always recognize, to begin with, that the Bible does not contradict itself; so any apparent contradiction must be evaluated and understood in the light of the principle of harmonizing all Scriptures (John 10:35).

(1) The first possible explanation is that the passage in Revelation 5:8-10 was mistranslated.

Notice how the New International Version renders the passage, beginning with verse 9:

“(Verse 9) And they sang a new song: ‘You are worthy to take the scroll and to open its seals, because you were slain, and with your blood you purchased MEN for God from every tribe and language and people and nation. (Verse 10) You have made THEM to be a kingdom and priests to serve our God, and THEY will reign on the earth.'”

This translation is adopted by the overwhelming majority of renditions. Very similar are the renderings of the Revised Standard Version; the New Revised Standard Version; the Living Bible; the Revised English Bible; the New American Bible; the New Jerusalem Bible; the Amplified Bible; Phillips; the Moffatt Bible; and many German translations, including the German Elberfelder Bible; the German Neue Evangelische Uebertragung; the Zuercher Bible; the Menge Bible; the revised Luther Bible; and the German Schlachter Bible.

Following those translations, the answer to the potential conflict of Revelation 5:8-10 with other Scriptural passages would be obvious. There would not be any conflict at all. Rather, according to these renditions, the angelic beings sang a song to God, in which they reiterated the fact that Christ died for MAN to redeem THEM, and that redeemed and converted MEN made IMMORTAL–the “saints”–would rule on this earth as a kingdom of priests.

(2) Not everybody agrees with this alternate rendering.

(a) Some claim that even though in verse 10, the correct words are, “them” and “they,” rather than “us” and “we” (i.e., that Christ made THEM–MEN–kings and priests, and THEY shall reign on earth), they maintain that in verse 9, the correct translation is “us,” not “them” (stating that Christ redeemed “us”–ANGELS–to God, based on the understanding that the angels are singing the new song.) Translations which prefer these renderings are Lamsa; the Analytical Literal Translation; and the Margin of the New King James Bible.

However, several translations, including the annotation in the New Revised Standard Version; the Zuercher Bible; the Menge Bible and the Elberfelder Bible, maintain that the word “us” in verse 9 was supplied by the translator and is not found in the original; and that verses 9 and 10 should be rendered as follows (adopted from the New Revised Standard Version and its annotation):

“… by your blood you ransomed for God from every tribe and language and people and nation; you have made them to be a kingdom and priests serving our God, and they will reign on earth…”…” (Compare also Vincent’s Word Studies and the annotation by the Ryrie Study Bible).

(b) Other translations render the passage in Revelation 5:8-10 in the way, as quoted from the New King James Version at the beginning of this article; that is, that the message of the new song states in essence: “Christ has redeemed US with His blood, and WE will reign, as kings and priests, on the earth.” Additional translations which render the passage in such a way include the Authorized Version; the Englishman’s Greek New Testament, giving the Greek Text of Stephens 1550; and the old German Luther Bible.

(3) Although the overwhelming majority supports the view that the words should be rendered correctly in the “third,” and not in the “first” person, would the rendering in the first person, as used in the Authorized Version or the New King James Bible, among a few others, in fact contradict other Scriptural passages? There would be clearly a contradiction if (sinning) angels were saying of themselves that THEY were redeemed by the blood of Christ and that THEY would become kings and priests, ruling this earth; on the other hand, what if the rendering in the first person would be correct, but it would not be the angels that SING?

Notice carefully that Revelation 5:8 introduced the new song in the way that the angels (four living creatures and twenty-four elders) fell down before the Lamb, having a harp, and golden bowls of incense, “which are the prayers of the SAINTS.” Verse 9 continues: “And THEY sang a new song…” Grammatically and contextually (in the original Greek, there is no punctuation and segmentation into verses), the phrase, “They sang a new song,” at the beginning of verse 9, could refer to the end of verse 8; that is, to the “saints” in “… prayers of the saints.” Viewing it this way, it is the SAINTS–not the angels–who are singing this new song.

This understanding would also be in harmony with the fact that Revelation 14:1-5 speaks of 144,000 redeemed saints, who have harps and sing a new song. It says in Revelation 14:3 that these saints who were redeemed from among men (compare verse 4) are singing a new song before the four living creatures and the elders; in other words, before the same angelic beings that are mentioned in Revelation 5:8. We state the following about the 144,000 redeemed saints in chapter 17 of our booklet, “Is That in The Bible? The Mysteries of the Book of Revelation”:

“144,000 servants of God are mentioned in Revelation 14:1–5. They are depicted standing with Christ on Mount Zion, here on earth. The time setting is after Christ’s return. They sing a new song, a song that reaches God’s throne in heaven (verse 3), as do our prayers today (compare Revelation 5:8; 8:2–5). God has found no fault in them (Revelation 14:5). This description reminds us of Christ’s message to the angel of Philadelphia (compare Revelation 3:7–12).”

In conclusion, the Bible does not contradict itself. The teaching of the Holy Scriptures is clear: Christ died for man; it is men–not angels–who will inherit the kingdom of God; and men made immortal will rule on this earth as kings and priests.

Lead Writer: Norbert Link

A new StandingWatch program was posted on StandingWatch and YouTube. It is titled, “Coming–Worldwide Nuclear War?” The following is discussed: The Pravda proposes that Europe must “get rid of America’s influence”; that the EU needs a powerful army; and that it should “join forces with Russia.” Time magazine claims that more than 200 thermonuclear bombs are stored in several European countries, and that “Dutch, Belgian, Italian and German pilots remain ready to engage in nuclear war.” Will those and other nuclear weapons be used soon?

Norbert Link’s new video-recorded sermon, “Answered Prayers,” has been posted on the Web.

A new German sermon, titled, “Du Sollst Nicht Luegen, Teil 1” (“You Shall Not Lie, Part 1”) was posted on the Web.