Dave Harris will give the sermon this Sabbath. The title of the sermon is: “Our Relationship To God.”

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

The greatest prophet who ever lived spoke to His generation about the good news of the Kingdom of God. Of that prophet’s work, these words seem to sum up how many of those who heard Him responded: “But although He had done so many signs before them, they did not believe in Him.” (John 12:37).

This is, of course, the Savior-Jesus Christ. In chapter 8 of John, verse 43, Jesus said to some of the Jews: ” ‘Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to LISTEN to My word.’ ” But these weren’t just any Jews. In verse 31 of this same chapter, we learn that He was speaking “…to those Jews who believed Him.” However, they dismissed what Jesus taught, and we see in verse 59 that these who once believed “…took up stones to throw at Him.”

At the first, these Jews-along with many of their countrymen-found Jesus to be a great attraction. After all, they thought He might just be their promised Messiah. And though He indeed was, they were unable to recognize Him as fulfilling that role. They had so shaped an expectancy into the way they interpreted the Word of God that when they heard the truth, they rejected it!

Peter, James and John were able-in vision-to see Jesus in the kingdom. What was further revealed to them at that time was something they were to do relative to the Son of God-they were to ” ‘…Hear Him!’ “

People have from time to time been in a position to hear the truth. The children of Israel heard the voice of God. Yet, they immediately turned to idolatry. Solomon, although God appeared to him twice in vision, later turned away from God.

However, we can also look to ourselves and our own generation. The truth of God has flowered in our time with many hearing the good news of the Kingdom of God. We, too, must be on guard to not take what we hear for granted or to turn away from what is true.

Paul spoke prophetically of a time to come when people-people who hear the truth-would have “itching ears.” He showed that the reason for this was that these people would put their own desires first, and because of this, they would not continue to listen to “sound doctrine.” (Cp. 2 Timothy 4:3-4).

We are further warned in Hebrews 4, verse 7, ” ‘Today, if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts.’ “

Just as does all of God’s Word, the voice that the three disciples heard speaks to all Christians for all times-and especially those of us upon whom the end of this age now falls–“Hear Him!”

IRAQ — NO END IN SIGHT…

As we announced in our last Update (#77), Germany and France — the two leading European nations opposing a preventive military strike against Iraq — angrily rejected U.S. Minister of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld’s remarks identifying Germany and France with the “old Europe” and as an “isolated problem” within Europe. CNN.com stated on January 24 that “Rumsfeld’s comments had unusually brought unity among French and German politicians of left and right together with the two countries’ newspapers, from the German tabloids to the French heavyweights… Even the strongest advocates of U.S. policy in Berlin and Paris were annoyed, including Germany’s mass circulation Bild Daily, traditionally a vocal supporter of the United States.” CNN.com quoted excerpts from Bild’s editorial. We bring you here the entire text:

“Dear Mr. Rumsfeld:
“France and Germany are for you the ‘old Europe,’ and Poland, Estonia, Lithuania, etc., are the ‘modern Europe.’

“To start with two items: Without the old Europe, there would be no new world and you would not exist. Both your parents are of German descent. Also, ancient grandpa and grandma Rumsfeld, old residents of Bremen, do not like to hear in heaven, how you put down your native land.

“The ‘old Europe’ is a bridge to the childhood of America, and it led the way across the ocean to the forests and prairies of your country — and to the moon and back. The German rocket scientist Wernher von Braun has given you this triumph. Thomas Jefferson, the author of the American Declaration of Independence, was inspired by the ideas of the French Revolution. He almost copied them : liberte, egalite, fraternite.

“Mr. Rumsfeld, hundreds of thousands of your ‘G.I.s’ fell for old Europe, because they freed us from the tyranny of Hitler. You are sinning against your own heroes by disparaging old Europe. Your ‘G.I.s’ died for the ideals of your place of origin.”

On January 28, the Los Angeles Times reported that Secretary of State Colin Powell was attempting to “repair [the] rift between [the] U.S. and Europe.” At the same time, he warned that the United States “is prepared to go to war alone.”

The L.A. Times also reported on the same day that Chief U.N. Weapons inspector Hans Blix gave a “tough report that helps Washington’s contention that Iraq has no intention of coming clean,” and that “Saddam Hussein does not appear to be serious about disarming.” USA Today added that “Iraqi weapons are missing,” including “VX nerve gas,” “anthrax,” “artillery shells,” “chemical bombs,” and “missile deployment.”

On January 28, President Bush gave his long-awaited State of the Union address. While he spoke for the first half about the U.S. economy, his tax plan, AIDS, Medicare reform, and education, he lunged out against Iraq in the second half of his speech. He pointed out that Iraq is an imminent threat, and that trusting Hussein’s restraint is “not an option.” He linked Saddam with al-Qaeda, said the Iraqi leader “is deceiving,” and made clear that he is willing to start a war together with those who will support him, regardless of whether the U.N. approves it or not. At the same time, he said that he is willing to work with the U.N., but not indefinitely.

The L.A. Times wrote in its “News Analysis”:

“President Bush’s state of the union address Tuesday night underscored how thoroughly his presidency is being driven by the fierce engine of war… His speech Tuesday night was dominated by the prospects of military action against Iraq — if not imminently, then before very long. ‘We will consult, but let there be no misunderstanding,’ Bush said. ‘If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.'”

Reactions to Mr. Bush’s speech were mixed. Many criticized his domestic agenda as being doomed to fail, while pointing out that he did not present so far the evidence to the American people that Saddam is indeed in possession of weapons of mass destruction. While Mr. Bush stated that Saddam had not proven that he had destroyed the weapons, some observers felt that it is Mr. Bush’s burden to prove that Saddam possesses those weapons, to begin with.

Mr. Bush announced that Secretary of State Colin Powell will share these proofs with the U.N. Security Council on February 5.

On January 29, Russia’s Vladimir Putin stated that the United States must present irrefutable proof for their allegations (Der Stern). Otherwise, the weapons inspectors must be allowed to continue their search and investigation. Russia stated, too, that they had no information about ties between Iraq and al-Qaeda (msnbc news).

CNN.com reported on January 29 that “British Prime Minister Tony Blair gave full backing to U.S. President George W. Bush’s State of the Union address. But other nations — notably Russia and France — said Washington had not done enough to make the case for war against Iraq… CNN’s Jim Bittermann in Paris said that French President Jacques Chirac spoke to Blair on Tuesday night and told him nothing so far that he had seen justified military action against Iraq… German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder sounded his most pessimistic in attempting to avert war. He was quoted by Reuters as telling a conference in the western town of Wesel on Wednesday: ‘The international situation, especially the crisis over Iraq is worrying me. I am worried about whether we will succeed in avoiding a war in Iraq.'”

On January 30, another bombshell hit the world in the ongoing saga of how to deal with Iraq. Spiegel Online reported, “Bush splits Europe.” It continued, “With a diplomatic offensive, U.S. President George Bush has succeeded to prevent a unified anti-war-coalition [in Europe]. The declaration of eight European countries seems to be saying, If you are not for the United States, then you are against it.” These eight countries, supporting the United States in the attempt to force Saddam to disarm, are Spain, Portugal, Italy, United Kingdom, Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland and Denmark. Germany and France were not even informed about the declaration ahead of time.

At the same time, according to the magazine, the European Parliament passed a resolution, calling on the United States not to take unilateral military action against Iraq. Instead, the United Nations is to do everything possible to find a peaceful solution. The European Parliament reiterated their position that a preventive military strike would violate international law and the U.N. Charter. Further, as msnbc reported, “former South African President Nelson Mandela lashed out at President Bush’s stance on Iraq, saying the U.S. leader, along with British Prime minister Tony Blair were undermining the United Nations, and suggested they would not be doing so if the organization had a white leader.”

Roman Catholic Cardinal Georg Sterzinsky of Berlin, Germany, also strongly criticized President Bush. As Der Spiegel Online reported on January 30, the Catholic leader of Berlin stated that President Bush cannot expect to be viewed by the international community as a prophet. We will not do so, he said, adding that the Catholic Church has condemned a preventive military strike against Iraq.

It will remain to be seen what Germany and France will do. The attempt by some European countries to ignore them, intimidate them, or to push them into a corner might very well backfire on them. Germany and France are the leaders of Europe. They have the support of the Catholic and Protestant Churches. European countries such as Great Britain and Denmark might very well find themselves outside the confines of the European community before long. In addition, the Bible prophecies that the final United States of Europe will be “divided; yet the strength of the iron shall be in it, just as you saw the iron mixed with ceramic clay. And as the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly fragile… they will not adhere to one another.” (Daniel 2:41-43). When c
hallenged or perceived to be challenged, however, by the United States, Great Britain, and certain other nations, they will give their power, authority and strength for a short time (“one hour”) to a future powerful, autocratic, political and military European leader (compare Revelation 17:12-13). As we see events developing, this time is not too far away.

A: Many years ago, the Church of God, under Mr. Herbert W. Armstrong, the late Pastor General of the Church, made the administrative decision to ask Church members and co-workers to send one tenth of their second tithe to the Church, to be used for necessary Feast of Tabernacles expenses, including rental for Church halls. Since then, the Church has usually referred to this amount as the “tithe of the tithe.” Church members and co-workers were asked to calculate their second tithe available to them at the time of the Feast of Tabernacles, and to send ten percent of that (calculated) amount to the Church, in advance, as soon as possible. This practice has allowed the Church to avoid using for the payment of Feast expenses general contributions received to be spent for the preaching of the gospel and the feeding of the flock.

At the time of the institution of the “tithe of tithe,” and sometimes since then, consideration has been given to the possibility to, instead, charge each individual Feast attendee with the same amount for his or her Feast attendance. This possibility was rejected, however, as it was judged to be arbitrary and unfair. Some Church members do not have jobs or live on small pensions, while others earn good salaries. Following Biblical principles (compare Acts 2:44-45; 4:32-35; 2 Corinthians 8:12-15), it was determined that the institution of the “tithe of the tithe” was the most equitable way for all concerned, to provide for the payment of necessary Feast expenses to be incurred by the Church, and also to help those less fortunate, as much as possible, to attend the Feast.

The Church of the Eternal God sees no Biblical reason to change Mr. Armstrong’s decision, realizing the Biblical wisdom for the decision, and acknowledging that the Church has the administrative authority to bind and loose matters like these (compare Matthew 16:19; 18:18).

Norbert Link will continue this Sabbath his series on the “Books of the Bible.” He will specifically focus on the Writings — the third and last section of the Hebrew Bible — and their importance and meaning for us today.

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

We have been called to a way of life that is not in alignment with the way the world does things — the way it worships God or the days that it keeps. We are admonished to follow the footsteps of Christ (1 Peter 2:21). Notice also that Revelation14:4 speaks about 144,000 saints who will stand in the future on Mount Zion with Christ: “These are the ones who follow the Lamb, wherever He goes. These were redeemed from among men, being firstfruits to God and to the Lamb.” If we learn to follow our living God now as His begotten children, we will follow Him in the future as His born-again sons and daughters.

Revelation 14:4 describes a group of individuals who remained true to their calling, who were “not defiled with women,” and who had been following the Lamb – regardless of where He was leading them. Walking in the footsteps of Christ is not always an easy task. It takes determination and a willingness to be led by, and to follow the lead of God’s Spirit.

At times we face trials, as the early Church did. In Acts 9:1-2, we read that Paul was persecuting the Church. He was looking for those “of the Way,” that he may bring them “bound to Jerusalem.” The Church had to experience persecution at the very outset of its existence; therefore, we should not be shocked if we have to endure persecution now or in the near future.

This Way is not always well spoken of, as we can see in Acts 19: 9: “…some were hardened and did not believe but spoke evil of the Way before the multitude.” Christ also warned us in Matthew 24:9, what the world will do to us: “Then they will deliver you up to tribulation and kill you and you will be hated by all nations for My name’s sake.” We sometimes are not too happy about someone who doesn’t like us, but to be “hated by all nations” is something we have yet to experience. Also, notice verse 10, “Many will betray one another and hate one another.”

In spite of all this, we can draw strength from verse 13, “…he who endures to the end will be saved.” We have the sure word of God that if we remain faithful and endure to the end, continuing to walk the Way, our salvation is sure.

To do so has its trials, but also tremendous rewards – yet, we need to stay focused on the task given to us and continue to walk this way in spite of persecution. We need to always look to the Captain of our salvation, Jesus Christ, and continue to walk in His footsteps. I recall a quote from Mr. Armstrong, which I found very encouraging. His statement was, “Brethren, in the end, we win.”

Yes, we will win in the end, if we continue to “Walk This Way.”
 

BIBLICAL PROPHECY BEING FULFILLED

This week’s section on current events shows how steadily Biblical prophecy is being fulfilled in front of our very eyes. The Bible predicts a powerful Germany leading a United Europe, while the United States, Great Britain and Israel will become more and more isolated. The Catholic and Protestant Churches will also play an important role in the process.

Germany and France vs. the United States

The fear of a looming war of the United States against Iraq has prompted stronger and increased resistance by Europe and other world powers, and especially by Germany and France.

USA Today reported that “France, Germany, Russia and China have made it clear they will not be rushed by Washington’s timetable for war against Iraq, despite threats by the White House to move against Saddam Hussein without their approval.” The newspaper quoted French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, who declared Tuesday that France does not see any “justification right now for any military action.” He added that Paris aimed to mobilize the European Union to avert a war, and that it is “important that Europe speaks on this issue with a single voice.” This Wednesday, French President Jacques Chirac called a war “the worst solution.” According to Christian Malar of French TV Channel, 82 % of the French are against military action at this point. They want to see more proof that Saddam is in fact developing weapons of mass destruction. Mr. Malar stated in the Today Show that if the United States were to launch an attack without the backing of the United Nations, this would be a “terrible blow” to French-American relationships.

USA Today pointed out that German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder stated on Tuesday that Germany would vote against a new [15-nation] U.N. Security Council resolution on war, or that Germany would at least abstain. Earlier this week, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer had again warned of “disastrous consequences for long-term regional stability,” while a U.N. official pointed out that Iraq would face mass starvation if a rationing system to cope with 13 years of sanctions collapses during any U.S. invasion (Reuters).

“Though it wields no veto, Germany is set to assume a central role in Iraq war diplomacy when it takes over the council chairmanship [from France] in February,” according to USA Today. Schroeder added that Berlin’s position is increasingly being “understood by the European partners and in the world.” (USA Today). Der Spiegel Online pointed out on January 22, that only seven percent of the Germans would support a war against Iraq.

Germany joined the U.N. Security Council in January 2003 for two years. It will lead the Council for one month in February. Its affirmative vote has the same weight as that of the five permanent member states – United States, Great Britain, France, Russia and China. However, the five permanent member states have veto powers. If France should veto another U.N. resolution on war (it is certain that Russia and China will veto it), no such resolution, even with the votes of the United States and Great Britain, could be adopted.

The European Union and the United Nations vs. the United States and Great Britain

Reuters reported on January 21 that the European Union rejected Tuesday a war on Iraq without the backing of the United Nations. Speaking after a meeting with Romanian Prime Minister Adrian Nastase, Prime Minister Costas Simitis of Greece, EU president until the end of June, said that a war would harm peace and stability in the Middle East.

USA Today stated that “Britain, America’s closest ally, is the only major military power virtually certain to join the United States” in a war. “Other countries with smaller armies, such as Australia, Canada and Bulgaria, could provide supporting military roles.”

Yahoo! News reported that Tony Blair stated that Britain would support an U.S.-led war on Iraq without United Nations backing if any countries imposed an “unreasonable blockage to a new Security Council resolution.” However, as Bild Online reported, Tony Blair is increasingly loosing support for his position in his own country. Sixty-two percent of the British are unsatisfied with his Iraq-policy. Between 77 and 81 percent of the British are against an invasion of Iraq solely by the United States and Great Britain. On the other hand, Michael Smith, London Daily Telegraph, stated in an interview with the Today Show that once the war has begun, most British would support it.

USA Today also reported that, “White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the United States could go to war with a select group of allies, even without Security Council approval.” Earlier this week, Secretary of State Colin Powell had remarked in an interview with Sueddeutsche Zeitung that the United States had a duty to disarm Saddam, with or without support of the international community. Subsequently, Mr. Powell criticized in an unusually strong manner Germany and France for their refusal to unconditionally support the United States (Net Zeitung, January 22, 2003). U.S. Minister of Defense, Donald H. Rumsfeld, was quoted in Stern Online, January 23, 2003, that he believes France and Germany constitute the “old Europe” and that they are an “isolated problem” in Europe. The magazine also reported that Germany wants a second report from the U.N. Weapons Inspectors about Iraq’s cooperation. “This would deepen the rift between the United States and Germany, as the United States does not see the need for such a report,” according to the magazine.

Germany and France on Thursday angrily rejected Mr. Rumsfeld’s remarks (Reuters, as reported by MSNBC News). Der Spiegel Online commented: “Thanks to Donald Rumsfeld… for liberating Europe. With his verbal accusations against France and Germany, he has perhaps contributed more to European unity than 40 years of the Elysee Treaty [see below]… With his remarks, Rumsfeld has forced Europe to do what Europe was afraid to do for a long time — to find a unified course of action in response to the warplans of the United States… The irony is that Rumsfeld, in attacking national pride, might create a supra-national alliance… Rumsfeld’s harsh reaction shows how nervous the United States are, when being confronted with European self-consciousness… If Rumsfeld has managed to accomplish that one says, ‘I’m proud to be a European,’ rather than saying, ‘I’m proud to be a German,’ or, ‘I’m proud to be a French,’ then the United States will have to deal with a new Europe.”

In addition, Ari Fleischer’s remarks, reflecting the U.S. approach, were especially resented by several U.N. diplomats, according to USA Today. One Western diplomat was quoted: “The Americans came here saying that if we don’t buy their line then they’re going ahead anyway and people are feeling very snubbed by that attitude. And so the response is that we’re not going to give Washington the blank check that they are looking for.”

U.N. concern has also increased following a Russian military report, as well as newspaper reports from Turkey, alleging that the United States would launch its war by the middle or the end of February (Yahoo! News, dated January 22, 2003). Vladimir Posner, Russian TV Channel, stated in an interview with the Today Show that 83 % of Russians are against a war without U.N. resolution. He pointed out that there is developing an anti-American sentiment among the Russian people at a grass-root level, because of a growing perception that the United States wants to have it their way. He pointed out that many Russians believe that the reason for the escalation with Iraq is “the oil, first and foremost.” They do not believe that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, or that he has the capability to develop them.

United States Divided Against Itself?

Only 23 % of Americans support a war against Iraq, based on the evidence presented, according to a report in USA Today. David Gregory stated in the Today Show on Thursday that 63 % of Americans are against a war without a U.N. resolution.
They expect the Bush administration to present more evidence that Saddam is in fact producing weapons of mass destruction. Der Spiegel Online remarked on January 22 that the popularity of President Bush is decreasing rapidly in the United States, mainly because of his foreign and economic policies. In addition, due to Mr. Bush’s threat to attack Iraq even without international support, the U.S. dollar has lost again this week in value relative to the Euro and the Swiss currency, according to Der Spiegel Online, January 22, 2003).

Is Germany Ready and Willing to Intervene?

Der Spiegel Online reported on January 18 that Germany has invited U.N. Weapons Inspector and Swedish Diplomat Hans Blix to Berlin for a report on the situation, so that the German government can educate itself independently about the matter. Joschka Fischer is scheduled to travel to the Middle East, to visit four Arabic capitals, and to evaluate the possibilities for a peaceful solution.

The Roman Catholic and Protestant Churches of Germany vs. United States

The Roman Catholic and Protestant churches in Germany have condemned a war against Iraq. Following the Pope’s statement that a war against Iraq is not “unavoidable,” and that it would demonstrate a defeat for mankind, the German Catholic Bishops declared that any preventive attack violates Catholic and International Law. The German Protestant Church went even further and stated that any war is against God’s will, and must be overcome. The declaration of the German Protestant Church was supported by the American “United Church of Christ,” according to Der Spiegel Online of January 18 and 20, 2003. At the same time, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Pakistan and the secretary-general of the National Council of Churches in Pakistan issued a similar statement (Zenit, January 21, 2003). So did the Conference of Catholic Bishops of Malaysia, Singapore and Brunei (Zenit, January 19, 2003).

Germany and France – the Leaders of Europe

The leading European nations are clearly Germany and France. This week they marked 40 years of reconciliation with celebrations at the same Versailles palace where victorious Western powers forced a beaten Germany to its knees after World War I, and where Germany had proclaimed itself an empire, crowning William I as “Kaiser,” after beating France in an 1870-71 war. Forty years ago, former French President Charles de Gaulle and German Chancellor Konrad Adenauer signed the Elysee Treaty, laying the foundation “for what arguably has grown into Europe’s cornerstone relationship,” according to Yahoo! News. The article continued that “French-German cooperation is vital in assuring peace and stability in Europe.” Chirac was quoted: “Once again, we have shown that the French-German engine, which is essential for European construction, is functioning well.”

How well it is functioning could be seen in joint declarations of Schroeder and Chirac, describing future cooperation between the two countries, including areas of European foreign, military and security policy (Der Stern, dated January 16, 2003). They also said that both countries want to be a leading force in Europe. The head of Deutsche Bank, Germany’s largest bank, Josef Ackermann, commented, “Europe needs a dynamic Germany. Who else, if not Germany – in concert with France – should take on the leading role?”

Der Stern published an article, dated January 21, quoting statements by two European officials, the German Guenter Verheugen and the French Pascal Lamy, stating, “When we want to build a United Europe…we must create here and now a German-French treaty. Other countries, supporting our goals, are invited to join the German-French treaty. We are not planing to create an island without bridges to the European Union.”

ISRAEL’S SHARON vs. EUROPE

During a news conference, Ariel Sharon of Israel, who is running for re-election next month, stated that he is unhappy with the European Union and their peace plan proposal. He stated that Europe is not balanced toward Israel, and that only the United States and Israel are seeing eye-to-eye (In an interview last week with American television, Saudi Arabia accused the United States of not being balanced towards the Arab world, unduly favoring and supporting Israel). Sharon suggested that he would not be pressured by Europe. As long as Arafat is the head of the Palestinian people, there can’t be any progress toward peace. He said: “The EU does not understand that.” (Source: Top Stories Audio/Video NRP, “Sharon: ‘Europe is biased against Israel,’” Sunday, January 19, 2003).
 

A: It is wrong. Such words are known as “euphemisms,” which are defined as the substitution of a mild, indirect, or vague expression for another felt to be too blunt or offensive.

God instructs us not to take His name in vain (Exodus 20:7). To casually use expressions such as “My God,” “O my Lord,” or “Jesus Christ,” just to utter surprise or emphasis, is therefore clearly prohibited. So is the casual use of a common German welcome greeting (“Gruess Gott” or “Gott zum Gruss”– meaning, “Greet God” or “God as a greeting”), or the casual use of the French or Spanish farewell expressions, “adieu” or “adios” (both meaning, “to God”).

Many common expressions such as “gosh” or “gee” are used as substitutes for God the Father or Jesus Christ. God instructs us to let “no corrupt word proceed out of your mouth” (Ephesians 4:29). This prohibition applies to careless speaking or using slang expressions or euphemisms which would profane God’s name, such as “gosh” or “gosh almighty” (a substitute for “God” or “Almighty God”) or “gee” (a substitute for “Jesus”). It also applies to the careless use of words describing characteristics or concepts clearly associated with God, such as “my goodness” (compare Matthew 19:16-17), “by heaven” or “for heaven’s sake” (compare Matthew 5:34; Revelation 13:6).

The same prohibition applies to curse words, such as “damn,” or “go to hell,” or euphemisms, such as “darn” or “go jump in the lake” (compare Revelation 20:14-15).

God wants us to use language pleasing to Him. Let us note how the New International Version translates Ephesians 4:29, “Do not let any unwholesome talk come out of your mouths, but only what is helpful for building others up according to their needs, that it may benefit those who listen.”

The Broadman Bible Commentary makes these insightful statements:

“Words are an index of character (Matthew 12:34). Good words are to be chosen over evil talk… Do our words build up the hearer’s character and make him a better man for his having heard your speaking? Do they meet his need? And do they in this way ‘bring a blessing’ by supplying that need?”

Whatever expressions we are inclined to use, we need to make sure that they are helpful, rather than unwholesome, offensive or even blasphemous. Christ warns us in Matthew 12:36-37, “But I say to you that for every idle [careless, thoughtless, useless] word men may speak, they will give account of it in the day of judgment. For by your words you will be justified, and by your words you will be condemned.”

The Sermon this weekend will be given by Edwin Pope and is titled, “Prepare To Endure”.

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

As we watch events around the world, we can’t help but think that we are entering into the last days. War is imminent with Iraq, ostensibly over weapons of mass destruction. North Korea is now flexing its muscle with the announcement that it is removing itself from the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. The pope grows old, as radical candidates wait anxiously in the wings. Generations are being wiped out in Africa by AIDS. Approximately 800 million people around the world are persistently hungry. False prophets, wars, pestilence and famine are already here.

Yet, this is the best time! As the world spins more and more quickly out of control, I can’t think of a better time to be doing what’s right. That is to say, that which is right in God’s eyes. By the same token, there really has never been an easier time, specifically in our Western civilization, to be about the task of being a Christian.

In our present day climate there can be a propensity to become complacent due to the freedoms and luxuries we experience in the free world. Yet, given the illustrations above, our disposition should be diametrically opposed. We should be asking ourselves a few probing questions: Are we letting down? Are we becoming weary of doing well? Are we saying to ourselves that God is delaying His coming for one reason or another? Are we taking on any of the attributes of a Laodicean?

We have the tools readily available to combat any such tendency or merely to stay on top of those inclinations. We all know what they are…prayer, Bible study, meditation and fasting to mention a few. Let’s encourage one another to use them as time grows short.

Let’s be a light to the world as we practice being a Christian for NOW and for harder times ahead.

Captivity – Beyond the Pale

This week, riveting headlines revealed death and terror in North Korean gulags.  From www.msnbc.com, 1/15/03, a stunning article about torture and inhumanity begins: ” ‘It’s one of the worst, if not the worst situation–human rights abuse situation–in the world today,’ said Sen. Sam Brownback, R-Kan., who held hearings on the camps last year.  ‘There are very few places that could compete with the level of depravity, the harshness of this regime in North Korea toward its own people.’ “

This article reveals that some 200,000 men, women and children are held as political prisoners.  Among the atrocities inflicted on these captives:

    “Inmates are used as human guinea pigs for testing biological and chemical agents, according to both former inmates and U.S. officials.”

    ” ‘…horrific mistreatment–all sorts of suffering, beatings to death, executions.’ “

    ” ‘…from time to time a living infant is delivered.  And then if someone delivers a live infant, then the guards kick the bloody baby and kill it.  And I saw an infant who was crying with pain.  I have to express this in words, that I witnessed such an inhumane hell.’ “

Throughout history–both ancient and modern–this kind of human debauchery has occurred.  The Bible reveals yet a future time of captivity.  Revelation 13:10 states:  “He who leads into captivity shall go into captivity;  he who kills with the sword must be killed with the sword.  Here is the patience [perseverance] and the faith of the saints.”  Parallel to this time frame is the warning from Jesus in Luke 21:24:  ” ‘And they will fall by the edge of the sword, and be led away captive into all nations…‘ ” 

Note this amazing charter given to Ezekiel in chapter 21, verses 6 and 7:  ” ‘Sigh therefore, son of man, with a breaking heart, and sigh with bitterness before their eyes.  And it shall be when they say to you, ‘Why are you sighing?’  that you shall answer,  ‘Because of the news;  when it comes, every heart will melt, all hands will be feeble, every spirit will faint, and all knees will be weak as water.  Behold, it is coming and shall be brought to pass,’ says the Lord God.’ “

The people of God are commanded to watch and to pray, and as we do this it must be done just like Ezekiel had to do it–on the job–faithfully proclaiming God’s message of warning and of hope!

“Big Brother” in the United States?

A highly publicized report from the most-famous American Civil Rights group, the “American Civil Liberties Union,” (ACLU), which was released this week, has warned that the United States is “heading toward Big Brother society.” The report is titled, “Bigger Monster, Weaker Chains: The Growth of an American Surveillance Society.” As Der Spiegel Online and Yahoo! News related on January 16, ACLU‘s report states, “A combination of lightning-fast technological innovations and the erosion of privacy protections threatens to transform Big Brother from an oft-cited but remote threat into a very real part of American life.”

The study points to “the Total Information Awareness pilot project, in which the Pentagon is exploring amassing a database of Americans’ medical, health, financial, tax and other records. “There are few privacy laws to prevent businesses from selling the government such information,” according to Yahoo! News. “Moreover,” Yahoo! News continues, “under the Patriot Act — the anti-terrorist legislation passed by Congress immediately after the September 11 attacks — the government can demand that libraries turn over reading habits of patrons. Authorities can more easily attain telephone and computer wiretaps, and conduct searches in secret without immediately notifying the target… New rules, the report notes, reinstate the FBI’s ability to spy on Americans even when no crime is suspected.”

Saudi-Arabia’s Point of View

On Monday, January 13, 2003, New York‘s Today Show aired a newscast about Saudi-Arabia, followed by interviews with Crown Prince Abdullah and Prince Al-Faisal of Saudi-Arabia. In the newscast, it was pointed out that the United States needs the support of Saudi Arabia, economically and politically. A strong suggestion was given that all American governments have been overlooking problems in and differences with Saudi Arabia, wooing them instead, to secure continued access to and price control of their oil.

Abdullah said in the interview, “I have a sense it won’t come to war [with Iraq]. I can’t explain it. There is a solution to every problem. Force only brings about death and destruction. That is why I hope my sense is correct.” Prince Al-Faisal, Minister of Foreign Affairs, concurred. “We are working for the prevention of use of military force,” he said, “If we tell the Iraqis, war comes, no matter what, then they will support Saddam. If we don’t succeed peacefully, those who want their war can have it. It will be a catastrophe for the region.”

Please read first, in regard to this question, our special tribute to Herbert W. Armstrong and the excerpts from his 1984 article, titled, “How Would Jesus Vote for President?”, which are published in this issue of the Update. The tribute and excerpts give an overview regarding the problems for a Christian being involved in voting in governmental elections. We need to understand that the issues of jury duty and voting for the government are connected with the issue of military service and war. We have addressed the problems regarding Christian participation in jury duty and joining the military in previous Q&A sections of these Updates (compare Issues #66 and #67, dated November 8 and 15, 2002).

It is inconsistent to take the position that one cannot join the military, because one is an ambassador of Jesus Christ and a citizen of another government — the Kingdom of God — while at the same time serving on a jury or voting in governmental elections. For instance, in the United States, the President is also the Commander-in-Chief with the right and obligation under the Constitution, in certain circumstances, to declare war. How can one refuse to participate in war, while voting for a person with the right and obligation to declare war? In the past, people were disqualified as conscientious objectors because they did not refuse to serve on a jury and to vote in governmental elections. It was ruled that such an obvious inconsistency in position showed evidence for non-sincerity of the applicant.

In addition, when one votes for a particular political candidate, one votes for the “totality” of the person. Some have argued that one needs to vote for candidate X, rather than candidate Z, as constituting “the lesser evil.” Following that kind of reasoning, one still would vote for an “evil,” which a Christian could not do (compare 1 Thessalonians 5:22). Somebody might want to vote for candidate X, as that candidate might reject abortion. However, the same candidate might, on the other hand, support the tobacco industry, or the pollution of the environment. A Christian could not support such a candidate, who might be right on one issue, but who would still be wrong on other issues. In addition, as stated above, every candidate would support his right as the future president or leader of his nation to declare war on other nations.

Another reason why a Christian should not vote in governmental elections is the truth that this is Satan’s world. It is Satan, with the permission of God, who places candidates into governmental office. If we were to vote, we might involve ourselves quite directly in Satan’s system. Hosea 8:4 gives us God’s warning in this regard:”‘They set up kings, but not by Me; they made princes, but I did not acknowledge them.'”

Sometimes, in order to insure that certain aspects of His plan are fulfilled, God Himself might intervene to see to it that the person best (or perhaps worst) suited for the job at that time gets the job (compare Daniel 4:17). How would God look at us when He intervenes directly to place a specific person into office, while we did not vote for that person, but rather for someone whom God does not want to see in charge at that time? Wouldn’t our vote be found to be in opposition to God’s Will?

To give a prophetic and an historical example, Biblical prophecy reveals that a final political leader of the resurrected Roman Empire — the “beast” — will soon arise in Europe. According to God’s plan, this person will be placed in office at the very last days, bringing havoc on this planet. It is Satan, with God’s permission, who will give his power and authority to this person (Revelation 13:4-5). A Christian could not and should not vote for this person, of course, as he will persecute and kill many of the “saints” (Revelation 13:7), and he will even attempt to fight the returning Jesus Christ (Revelation 19:19). Neither should a Christian have voted for Adolph Hitler, although it is clear now that Hitler came to power, as prophesied, to bring about the ninth resurrection of the Roman Empire. This is to say that God allowed Hitler to become ruler over Germany, so that prophecy could be fulfilled.

The Bible shows that God sometimes appoints directly, or permits Satan to place into office, strong or weak leaders, depending on the situation, in order to insure that God’s purpose will be carried out. God allowed ancient Pharaoh at the time of the Exodus to be ruler over Egypt for a very specific reason — “that [God] may show [His] power in [him], and that [God’s] name may be declared in all the earth” (Exodus 9:16).

Further, we cannot look at the heart of a person, in any event. When God wanted king Saul to be replaced, He had Samuel anoint David as the new king. If it had been left to Samuel, he would have appointed one of David’s brothers (compare 1 Samuel 16:6-13).

Participating in voting for governmental elections shows a lack of appreciation for the Will of God. It also shows a misunderstanding of the fact that Satan rules this world, and that Christians are ambassadors of Christ, called to come out of this world to be separate.

As Christians, we are in no way to resist our leaders whom God has allowed to be placed over us. Rather, we are to be thankful for whatever good they provide for us, and we are to pray for them so that we can lead a quiet and peaceable life (1 Timothy 2:2) and fulfill our God-given job to preach the Gospel and to feed the flock (compare Q&A section on Romans 13:3 in Update #62, dated October 11, 2002).

Member Letter
Our latest member letter, which you can find at http://www.eternalgod.org/lit/letters/brethren-20030110.pdf, was sent out this week. It discusses some of the reasons why the Church of the Eternal God exists.

Booklets
The text of our booklet on the Sabbath and the annual Holy Days was forwarded to our Graphics Designer, Shelly Bruno, for finalization and layout. We will be sending the final product shortly to our printer in the United Kingdom. The proposed text for a new booklet, proving from the Old and New Testament that God is a Family, was sent this week to Phyllis Bourque for a first review.

Canada
As we announced in our last Update, we are currently running an ad in Canada for our booklet, “The Keys to Happy Marriages and Families!” The ad runs this and next weekend.

United Kingdom
We are currently conducting an advertisement campaign in Great Britain for our booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord.” The mailers were sent out on Friday, January 10. We are expecting initial responses by the end of January.

Australia
Plans are underway to advertise our booklet, “The Great Tribulation and the Day of the Lord,” in a local paper in Australia.