|Live Services||Not Enough|
|Current Events||This Week in the News|
|Q&A||Would you please elaborate on the ten European revivals of the ancient Roman Empire? (Part 4)|
|The Work||Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock|
by Dave Harris
In the broad scope of biblical accounts, a very important challenge emerges for those who truly seek to please God, and that is the issue of offenses.
Consider what Jesus said in this regard:
“‘Woe to the world because of offenses! For offenses must come, but woe to that man by whom the offense comes!’” (Matthew 18:7);
“‘But whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble, it would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck, and he were thrown into the sea’” (Mark 9:42).
We cannot be pleasing God when we offend people through our wrong actions. Jesus, in these statements of His, characterizes the world and how people now live. However, He also is firmly warning His followers to separate themselves from behaving in ways that offend.
The apostle Paul addresses how we are to live our lives as followers of Jesus Christ when issues do arise, and he states, “If it is possible, as much as depends on you, live peaceably with all men” (Romans 12:18).
Solomon also wrote of the serious consequences of offenses:
“A brother offended is harder to win than a strong city, And contentions are like the bars of a castle” (Proverbs 18:19).
Our challenge is to diligently avoid offenses if at all possible. That means we must be the ones to do the right thing—with the hope that the godly way will triumph. This approach applies whether we might be the source or the object of offenses.
We know that Jesus Christ’s actions and teachings caused some people to take offense (compare Matthew 11:6; 13:57; 15:12). Even among those who initially followed Him, the majority ended up rejecting Him (compare John 6:60-71).
Over the many years, some members within the Church of God have come to a point where, for any number of reasons, they have also rejected Jesus Christ and God’s calling. That has remained true from the beginning, and it is a truth that we still do and will face. Jesus warned of this occurrence—especially culminating in these last days:
“‘And then many will be offended, will betray one another, and will hate one another’” (Matthew 24:10).
We begin with paying tribute to Margaret Thatcher (87) who died Monday. She was undoubtedly the greatest British leader since Winston Churchill. She was able to restore Britain to temporary greatness. However, after her resignation as Prime Minister, Britain returned to its path of steady decline, and no leader has risen since then who would have been able to reverse the trend… nor will there be any such leader in the future, prior to Christ’s return.
Mrs. Thatcher seems to have had a discerning view regarding political developments in Europe and Germany’s future role—an insight which is lacking these days in most politicians. Her opposition to German reunification and European totalitarian integration made her unpopular in Europe and especially in Germany, but who is to tell whether she was not given an inkling of a perception as to what the Bible prophesies is going to happen in the not-too-distant future.
Turning to other news, we report on the strong economic relationship between Germany and Russia, which is overshadowed by political disunity; quote excerpts from an insightful article on Iraq, showing that America did not win that war by any stretch of the imagination; warn of another potential war in the Middle East pertaining to Iran and Israel; and conclude with more sickening news regarding pork in elk lasagna.
This Week in the News
Margaret Thatcher—a Friend of Israel
JTA wrote on April 8:
“Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher, who was considered a good friend of Israel despite a rocky relationship with Prime Minister Menachem Begin, has died. Thatcher died Monday after suffering a stroke. She was 87. Thatcher suffered from dementia at the end of her life, which was dramatized in the 2011 movie ‘The Iron Lady.’ The only female to serve as prime minister of Britain, she also was the longest continuously serving prime minister in the 20th century, leading the country and her Conservative Party from 1979 to 1990.
“Thatcher was supportive of Israel but had a troubled relationship with Begin, who served two terms in the 1980s. She called Begin the ‘most difficult’ man she had to deal with, according to the Chronicle. She also strongly opposed Israel’s bombing of Iraq’s Osirak nuclear reactor. She believed that the Arab-Israel conflict was at the center of the Western world’s difficulties in the Middle East, pressing Israeli leaders to make peace with the Palestinians in order to cool regional tensions.
“Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu mourned her passing in a statement. ‘She was truly a great leader, a woman of principle, of determination, of conviction, of strength; a woman of greatness,’ Netanyahu said. ‘She was a staunch friend of Israel and the Jewish people. She inspired a generation of political leaders. I send my most sincere condolences to her family and to the government and people of Great Britain.’…
“Thatcher reportedly had no patience for anti-Semitism nor those who espoused it. She was a strong supporter of Soviet Jewry…”
“Unless We Change Our Ways…”
The Washington Post wrote on April 8:
“’Unless we change our ways and our direction, our greatness as a nation will soon be a footnote in the history books, a distant memory of an offshore island, lost in the mists of time like Camelot, remembered kindly for its noble past.’ Margaret Thatcher… presented that grim vision for Britain in 1979, the year she became prime minister.
“Then, for the next 11½ years — almost as long as three U.S. presidential terms — she worked with fierce determination and unrelenting stubbornness to dispel it. By the time she left office, reluctantly, in 1990, there was not much talk anymore of Britain’s inexorable decline. Ms. Thatcher…had changed not only her country’s direction but also its standing in the world. She continued to be passionately detested by some and admired and respected by others long after she left office, and her record will be debated for decades — or centuries. What is hardly debatable is the proposition that she was, in every sense of the word, a leader…
“Ms. Thatcher’s great domestic battles as prime minister were waged against the institutional left and its supporters among the British intelligentsia, which meant, of course, that they were extremely entertaining. They were fought on the same issue that divides Europeans to this day: When does the people’s demand for security become so all-consuming that it overtaxes the economy, saps initiative and buries the state under a mountain of debt?…
“But outside Britain she will be remembered primarily as a world figure. She strengthened Britain’s ties with the United States, bolstered its military, supported the placement of intermediate-range missiles in Europe (an extremely controversial move at the time) and spoke out with undiplomatic boldness when she took offense at some countries’ actions. She saw a great divide between freedom and the various forms of tyranny in the world, and she made it clear, always, which side she was on. She voiced harsh criticism of the Soviet Union but also, like her good friend President Ronald Reagan, moved to engage its new leader, Mikhail Gorbachev… ‘I can’t bear Britain in decline, I just can’t,’ she said in an interview shortly before her election as prime minister 32 years ago. She did what she thought necessary to stop that decline, and she didn’t really seem to have much worry about what anyone else thought of it…”
“She Made Britain Stand Tall Again”
Mail On Line added on April 8:
“Prime Minister David Cameron said she had a ‘lion-hearted love of this country’ and ‘fought for Britain’s interests all the way’. ‘We’ve lost a great leader, a great Prime Minister and a great Briton’, he said. ‘There were people who said she couldn’t make it, who stood in her way, who said that a woman couldn’t lead, and she defied them all.
“‘Margaret Thatcher took a country that was on its knees and made Britain stand tall again. She was the patriot prime minister. When people said Britain could not be great again, she proved them wrong.’”
Opposed to German Reunification
Deutsche Welle wrote on April 8:
“Former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher… was the most important British politician of the post-war period… [and] one of the most influential politicians of the 20th century… She was… initially opposed to German reunification, telling Gorbachev two months before the fall of the Wall that it ‘would lead to a change in post-war borders, and we cannot allow that because such a development would undermine the stability of the whole international situation and could endanger our security.’ Thatcher’s ‘Iron Lady’ stance was eventually to prove her downfall…”
The Betrayed Wartime Hero
Der Spiegel added on April 8:
“… she drove West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl to the verge of desperation with her dogged resistance to German reunification. As a member of the war generation, she didn’t trust the Germans to find the right path…
“Even her own critics don’t dispute that Thatcher was one of the most dominant political figures of the 20th century. When she was elected prime minister in May 1979, the country was suffering from hopeless self-doubt and an anemic economy. The country that was once the world’s greatest empire had become the sick man of Europe…
“As with all successful figures in history, Margaret Thatcher got lucky. If the Argentine military junta had not invaded the Falkland Islands off their coast in 1982, Thatcher may have remained the unpopular prime minister she was back then. But the Falklands War transformed her into a national hero. After Britain’s easy victory over Argentina, she was able to continue in office and easily win re-election twice…
“The end of her term came in November 1990, not with an electoral defeat but a rebellion from within her own party. Her anti-EU policies had isolated her from her cabinet, leading her to resign when she realized she no longer had their support. Throughout her life she was unable to get over this betrayal.”
The “New” Iron Lady Praises the “Old”
The Local wrote on April 8:
“German Chancellor Angela Merkel hailed former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher… as an ‘extraordinary leader’ who played a pivotal role in overcoming Europe’s Cold War division… Merkel [is] a fellow conservative who was often compared to Thatcher when she became chancellor in 2005… Germany’s ex-chancellor Helmut Kohl also had fond words for Thatcher… Kohl, 83, who governed Germany for a record 16 years, said fellow conservative Thatcher was ‘an upstanding fighter and representative of the interests of her country.’… Kohl was a driving force behind European enlargement and integration in the years after the Berlin Wall fell in 1989 leading to German reunification which Thatcher initially vehemently opposed.
“Shortly after news broke that Thatcher had died, British Prime Minister David Cameron announced that he would be cancelling the rest of his tour of Europe which he started in Madrid this week. He was supposed to be pressing his case for reform of the European Union ahead of a referendum on his own country’s membership of the bloc. Instead, he will pay his respects to Britain’s first female premier at her funeral in London.
“Cameron was meant to visit Berlin at the end of the week for ‘further discussions about taking forward his (EU) reform agenda,’ Downing Street said. Britain sent shockwaves through the EU in January after Cameron set out plans to wrest back powers from Brussels and to then put Britain’s reshaped membership to an in-out referendum by the end of 2017.”
It is interesting to recognize how unexpected events seem to influence what could otherwise become disruptive movements. God’s plan will be fulfilled, and it is prophesied that Europe will unite—without Great Britain.
Germany and Russia—A Shaky Relationship
Deutsche Welle wrote on April 8:
“Russia is the partner country for the 2013 Hannover Messe – the trade fair for the industrial sector. While German-Russian economic ties are booming, political problems are straining relations between the countries… The German government expressed its concern over Russian officials’ raids of German organizations in Moscow and St. Petersburg. At the end of March, Russian authorities inspected the offices of the political Konrad Adenauer and Friedrich Ebert foundations, temporarily confiscating computers and documents…
“Yet political tensions don’t seem to be putting a burden on the intense economic relations between Russia and Germany. Russia has become the partner country for the Hannover Messe for the second time in a decade. The trade fair for the industrial sector is the largest of its kind in the world… According to the Committee on Eastern European Economic Relations, bilateral trade volume between Russia and Germany reached a record of over 80 billion euros ($104 billion) in 2012…”
As the Bible prophesied, many countries, including Russia, would have a rich economic relationship with EU under German rule.
Iraq—America’s Lost War
Deutsche Welle wrote on April 9:
“When Iraqi civilians and American soldiers toppled the statue of Saddam Hussein in Baghdad 10 years ago, no one had any idea how long the war would last, or how far-reaching its effects would be… Ten years after the fall of the Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, neither the situation in Iraq nor the relationship between Iraq and the United States are what the architects of the war imagined they would be back in 2003. America now has virtually no influence in Iraq, a country characterized by weak institutions, violence, human rights abuses, and the growing strength of the terrorist group al Qaeda. And critics say this is the fault of the United States government – both the previous administration and the current one.
“Erin Evers from Human Rights Watch, for example, said America set a bad example when it comes to human rights policy. The humiliating treatment of Iraqi prisoners in the prison of Abu Ghraib was just one example. ‘Before 2002/2003 we had a certain amount of credibility in the eyes of the world where human rights were concerned,’ said Evers. That, she explained, has changed, which has made it difficult for the US government to denounce human rights abuses in Iraq. ‘We haven’t seen any improvements under [President] Obama, either,’ Evers said. ‘In 2009 he decided not to hold any of the superior officers [in Abu Ghraib] to account. That was a big mistake.’
“At present, 10,500 Americans are still on official missions in Iraq, including diplomatic personnel, and employees of private companies responsible for security, catering, and other administrative support. By the end of the year this number should have been reduced to 5,100, around one-fifth of whom are in the diplomatic service. Soldiers could have assumed responsibility for ensuring security, but there have been no US soldiers in the country since the end of 2011. Negotiations to try to secure a troop agreement broke down over the question of immunity for American soldiers. Peter Feaver, professor of politics at Duke University in the US, blamed the Obama administration for this failure. ‘[The Iraqi] Prime Minister Maliki was prepared to guarantee their immunity,’ he said, ‘but the US attorney insisted it had to be confirmed by parliament.’ The Iraqis didn’t think they would be able to push this through, so the negotiations ultimately failed.
“The security situation in Iraq remains unstable. People still frequently die in terrorist attacks. The situation is especially tense at the moment, before elections in 18 of the 20 provinces, due to take place on April 20. The fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime has not improved the situation of the people, Evers said. ‘People say, yes, it was terrible under Saddam, but there was just one enemy, and if you steered well clear of politics it was possible to lead a halfway normal life,’ she said. Now, though, the various dangers are far more difficult to locate, and affect every aspect of their lives…
“The American people are… divided… in their assessments of the Iraq war. According to a survey conducted by the Pew Institute, 44 percent said it was wrong to go to war, while 41 percent said it was the right decision. And although 46 percent were of the view that the United States has, broadly speaking, achieved its goals, 43 percent said America more or less failed… This mood is much the same as in 2008, when Obama won the presidential election, in part because of his opposition to the war in Iraq…
“Americans have paid a high price for their invasion of Iraq. The latest study from Brown University puts the bill at more than $2.2 trillion. Furthermore, according to Phillips, ‘The United States’ standing in the Arab world has suffered, and it has put a strain on its relationship with its European allies.’… Washington has also grown cautious when it comes to military deployments, as can be seen from its reluctance to get involved in Syria.”
The Bible prophesied that in these end times, America will not win any more wars. This has certainly become true since World War II. America has consistently lost its wars, including the Koran War, the Vietnam War, the Afghanistan War and the Iraq War. The next big event with be a war with Europe, which America is also going to lose.
Hayden: Military Action Against Iran Unavoidable
Lignet.com wrote on April 6:
“Former CIA Director Michael Hayden told LIGNET this week that it may be too late for diplomacy to stop Iran from building nuclear weapons. ‘I am doubtful, and pessimistic, that we’re going to be able to solve this without someone taking some sort of kinetic action against the Iranians,’ he said. Hayden saw poor prospects for diplomatic efforts, a concern that grew today after Western diplomats said the latest round of nuclear talks with Iran ended in failure.”
Another war in the Middle East, involving Israel, Iran and perhaps the USA and other nations, would have devastating consequences for the entire region, but it might very well happen. If the USA was to get involved, it would not emerge victoriously.
Netanyahu: Israel Responsible for Its Own Security
The Jerusalem Post wrote on April 7:
“Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu spoke at the main state ceremony marking Holocaust Remembrance Day at Yad Vashem in Jerusalem on Sunday, quoting anti-Semitic statements by Iranian religious leaders as evidence that the hatred against the Jews that existed during the Holocaust is still in existence. Netanyahu quoted Iranian religious leaders as recently saying, ‘the Zionists are microbes and bacteria, the Jews are polluted people that spread disease.’…
“Netanyahu stated that anti-Semitic hatred ‘has not disappeared, it has been switched with murderous hatred against the state of the Jews. What has changed is our ability to defend ourselves.’… The prime minister stated that while Israel appreciated the efforts of the world to thwart Iran’s nuclear ambitions, Israel ‘cannot forfeit our security to other nations…not even to our closest allies.’”
The Bible foretells that ultimately, no one will be helping the state of Israel.
Pork Found in Elk Lasagna
BBC wrote on April 6:
“Ikea has confirmed it has withdrawn nearly 18,000 of its elk meat lasagnas from sale in Europe after they were found to contain pork. The Swedish furniture giant said sales were stopped in late March, and tests confirmed the contamination on Friday… It is the latest in a series of meat contamination scandals across Europe.
“Ikea was among several companies whose meat products were found to contain horsemeat. Earlier this year it withdrew its meatballs from sale in its restaurants and grocery departments. The European elk is known in north America as a moose.”
Is there any clean food left to eat?
Would you please elaborate on the ten European revivals of the ancient Roman Empire? (Part 4)
Previously, we covered the first six revivals of the ancient Roman Empire, after its demise. The sixth revival under Otto the Great occurred about 962 A.D., but it too would come to an end. It would take more than 450 years after Otto’s death, before the next revival of the ancient Roman Empire would occur.
The Seventh Revival under Charles V of Habsburg
Charles V of Habsburg was crowned in 1530 A.D. by pope Clement VII as Holy Roman Emperor, and Germany could speak again “with its former authority in Europe,” as it had done under Otto the Great. According to P.M. History, Charles V ruled over an empire which never saw the setting of the sun. The Book, “The Living World of History” states:
“Charles V., who was crowned in , dominated Europe… His grandfather, the Emperor Maximilian, had gained the Netherlands by marrying the heiress Mary of Burgundy. His father, Philip the Handsome, had espoused Joanna… [the] future heiress of Spain, the kingdom of Naples (embracing southern Italy) and Sicily and the growing Spanish dominions in the recently discovered New World. And the Habsburg family inheritance included Austria and other districts, as well as the imperial crown of Germany. Such was the colossal empire that Charles possessed when, at the age of twenty, he was crowned Holy Roman Emperor in … [But] when the Pope was intriguing… against Charles, his… troops sacked Rome and imprisoned the Pope…”
What this shows is that the relationship between the Catholic Church and the State was not always without problems, since both sides wanted to have dominion over the other party. In Charles’ case, “peace” was established again between Church and State. The afore-mentioned book continues:
“The advancing Turks (who had captured Constantinople in 1453) were a growing menace… Taking the field in person, he drove the Moslems back in Hungary and in 1535 [he] was acclaimed as the shining champion of Christendom when he captured Tunis in North Africa… After forty years of sovereignty… [he] abdicated the imperial throne in favour of his brother Ferdinand and retired to a Spanish monastery where, in 1558, he died. Ferdinand… received the Habsburg Austrian inheritance; Charles’s son Philipp II got the rest. So the great Habsburg empire fell into two parts, the Austrian and the Spanish…”
The collaboration between the pope and Charles V is also seen in the following example, as stated in the above-mentioned work, when dealing with the Reformation:
“In the sixteenth century, Western Europe, despite all its political and religious quarrels, had been united for a thousand years on a fundamental matter… the West was a single Christian community acknowledging the spiritual authority of the Pope… in 1520, the Pope issued a bull, or decree, of excommunication against [Martin Luther]. Luther’s reply was to burn it. Next year the pope called on Charles V to suppress him. Luther, refusing to retract his words, was outlawed.”
Here we see how in the past, the Church would excommunicate someone or call him “anathema”, and the State would come in to prosecute or outlaw such a person. Similar events are going to happen in the near future.
The book, “Kingdoms of Europe,” adds the following:
“In 1556 Charles V divided his realms with his son, Philip II of Spain, and his younger brother, Ferdinand, who succeeded him as Holy Roman emperor in 1558. Until the dissolution in 1806 of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, as the loose German confederation came to be called, the Austrian Habsburgs were concerned with internal German affairs and with the problems raised by the Reformation, the rising power of France, the almost constant Turkish threat, and the necessity for reorganizing and developing an administrative system for their territories. Austria itself was merely a headquarters for their activities. Usually a Habsburg was chosen Holy Roman emperor by the electors of the empire.”
However, the Habsburg empire after Charles V was in name only a continuance of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. For all practical purposes, its power diminished constantly after Charles V, until it only had a shadowy existence.
The above-mentioned work continues:
“The Habsburgs opposed the Reformation and made every attempt to destroy it; in the territory of Austria they were almost completely successful in preventing the new movement from gaining a foothold… Internally… the Habsburgs consolidated their rule and reestablished the supremacy of the Roman Catholic church…”
Even though the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation endured officially until 1806 when the last Habsburg emperor abdicated, it had long before ceased to exist as the seventh revival of the ancient Roman Empire. Another revival was to occur instead—the eighth revival under Napoleon Bonaparte.
The Eighth Revival under Napoleon
Many believe erroneously that Napoleon was French. However, this was really not the case.
In “Living World of History,” we read:
“It was only by chance that France’s greatest military genius was a Frenchman at all. Corsica, where he was born in 1769, had only been acquired by France from Genoa the year before. Actually Napoleon was the second son of a poor Corsican lawyer of noble and, probably, Italian decent… [Napoleon’s] whole career was to blaze him forth as a superman… He could work or ride for hours on end. Food and sleep seemed unnecessary to him. His ambitions, like his vanity and selfishness, were boundless. No moral scruples restrained him. No man must stand in his way… In 1804… Napoleon attained the glory of being crowned Emperor of the French.”
The work, “Kingdoms of Europe,” elaborates:
“… on December 2, 1804, he was crowned in Notre Dame in great splendor. The pope was present, but Bonaparte placed the crown on his own head [apparently with the prior consent of the pope, according to P.M. History]… and he gave his soldiers eagle standards, in memory of the old Roman Empire… [Subsequently] Napoleon’s desire was fulfilled, His new wife presented him with a little son to perpetuate his imperial line, and the boy was promptly crowned king of Rome… in 1814… the French Senate, which Napoleon himself had created merely to register the laws, sent notice to him that it had deposed him from the rank as emperor.”
In their tongue-in-cheek article, “Good that there was Napoleon,” PM wrote:
“In 1804 he crowned himself in the presence of the Roman pope as emperor of the French… by the grace of God and the will of the nation, out of his own will as Caesar, and anointed by the church as Charlemagne… He appeased the Catholics with a concordat… not only the French, but also more and more Europeans saw the empire of Napoleon I as the continuation of the Roman Empire such as the Empire of the Franks had been. Even and especially Germans supported and accepted the French Emperor (who deposed the German Emperor), including Karl Theodor von Dalberg of Mainz, the arch chancellor of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation… Soon, the new empire reached until the river Elbe—as had been the case under Charlemagne.”
P.M. History states that Napoleon believed to be Charlemagne—perhaps his reincarnation. He wrote in 1806: “Je suis Charlemagne” (“I am Charlemagne”). The magazine also states that three months before his coronation as Emperor, Napoleon travelled to Aachen to visit Charlemagne’s tomb and to pay homage to him.
Will and Ariel Durant, “The Story of Civilization—The Age of Napoleon,” point out the following:
“But he also thought, and often spoke, of Charlemagne, who, in a reign of forty-six years (768-814), had brought order and prosperity… and had won—or commanded—consecration by a Pope; had not he, Napoleon, done all these things? Had he not restored in France the religion that was checking the pagan riot let loose by the Revolution? Did he not, like Charlemagne, deserve the crown for life?…
“By 1801, it was generally agreed that the Holy Roman Empire, as Voltaire had said, was neither holy nor Roman nor an empire; that no important state recognized its authority, or the authority of the pope; that some new form of order and cooperation amid the chaos would have to be devised, accepted, or imposed. Napoleon accepted the challenge…
“On August 6  Francis officially declared the Holy Roman Empire dissolved, and renounced the Imperial title, remaining emperor of Austria. The glory of the Hapsburgs faded, and a new Charlemagne, ruling from France, assumed authority over western Germany” (pp. 193, 588, 590).
The following is stated in “The History of Europe and the Church” (Worldwide Church of God, ed. 1984):
“In 1799 the young hero returns from an expedition against the English in Egypt. He seizes power in a bold move, setting up a new government of three members. Borrowing a title from ancient Rome, he calls them consuls. He himself is First Consul—a virtual dictator at age 30… He dreams of being another Caesar… Napoleon dreams of a resurrected Roman-European civilization dominated by France… ‘ The influence of Rome is incalculable,’ he declares. ‘It was a serious error to break with this power’… In 1801 a concordat… is concluded between France and the Papacy.
“The Catholic Church again becomes the official church of France [His nephew, Napoleon III –some claim that he was Napoleon’s illegitimate son–would continue in the tradition of close collaboration between the French state and the pope, rescuing and assisting him against Italian revolutionists, such as Garibaldi.]… [After his coronation through the pope in 1804] Napoleon crowns himself again [in 1806], this time with the celebrated ‘iron crown’ of Lombardy. One of the great historic symbols of Europe, this crown had previously been worn by Charlemagne, Otto the Great and other European sovereigns…”
Historical books will tell you that the Holy Roman Empire ceased to exist in 1806. They fail to mention that this was just the shadowy existence of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, under the Habsburgs, but that in the meantime, Napoleon had already revived the Holy Roman Empire, but under French leadership.
The above-mentioned booklet explains:
“… it becomes clear that the Austrian-led Holy Roman Empire is dead. Napoleon… has usurped the Holy Roman Emperor’s primacy among European monarchs… On August 6, 1806, Holy Roman Emperor Francis II formally resigns his title and divests himself of the imperial crown… Technically, Napoleon has swept away the moribund Holy Roman Empire… but he perpetuates it, under a different name, for another eight years…
“In April 1810 Napoleon marries Archduchess Marie-Louise of Austria… [She] is a Habsburg princess, the eldest daughter of the last Holy Roman emperor… In March 1811 she bears Napoleon a long-desired son, who is given the title ‘King of Rome.’ … With the fall of Napoleon in 1814, the time-honored system of Roman-inspired government first resurrected by Justinian in A.D. 554 comes to an end after 1,260 years.”
The empire of Napoleon constituted indeed another revival of the ancient Roman Empire—in size and also in tradition. As mentioned, Napoleon wanted to be another Charlemagne and apparently believed that he was (the reincarnation of ) Charlemagne. (As we will see, Hitler seemed to have believed something similar). But Napoleon’s empire fell apart in 1814. Another revival was to occur in due time.
(To Be Continued)
Lead Writer: Norbert Link
Preaching the Gospel and Feeding the Flock
New StandingWatch programs along with one for AufPostenStehen have been recorded by Evangelist Norbert Link–here are titles and summaries:
“America and Germany in Prophecy“: What are the signs for Christ’s return? Are the developments in America and the Middle East, as well as in Germany and Europe, of any biblical importance? What did President Obama’s visit in the Middle East really show, and why should we take great note of the events pertaining to Cyprus? Will you be unprepared when terrible events strike the earth?
“Deutschland und Amerika in der Prophezeiung” is the title of the German language version of this program available for viewing at.
“Margaret Thatcher’s Unique Legacy”: Margaret Thatcher died on April 8, 2013. She was the greatest British leader since Winston Churchill. She was able to restore Britain to temporary greatness. But after her resignation as Prime Minister, Britain returned to its path of steady decline, and no leader has risen since then who would have been able to reverse the trend… nor will there be any such leader prior to Christ’s return. What DOES the Bible say about the future of the UK?
“Jesus Christus, der Menschensohn!,” is the title of a new German sermon, which deals with Christ’s first coming as the Son of man. “Jesus Christ, the Son of Man!,” is the English translation, and this is part of a series. The next installment will discuss Jesus as the Son of God and also address the false doctrine of the Trinity.
A new English sermon from last week’s Sabbath services has been posted, titled, “Vengeance and Revenge.”
The yearly conference of the Church of the Eternal God, Global Church of God (Great Britain) and Church of God a Christian Fellowship (Canada) will be conducted starting April 12 and continuing through April 16. Meetings and activities will be held in Fort Collins, Colorado.
How This Work is Financed
This Update is an official publication by the ministry of the Church of the Eternal God in the United States of America; the Church of God, a Christian Fellowship in Canada; and the Global Church of God in the United Kingdom.
Editorial Team: Norbert Link, Dave Harris, Rene Messier, Brian Gale, Margaret Adair, Johanna Link, Eric Rank, Michael Link, Anna Link, Kalon Mitchell, Manuela Mitchell, Dawn Thompson
Technical Team: Eric Rank, Shana Rank
Our activities and literature, including booklets, weekly updates, sermons on CD, and video and audio broadcasts, are provided free of charge. They are made possible by the tithes, offerings and contributions of Church members and others who have elected to support this Work.
While we do not solicit the general public for funds, contributions are gratefully welcomed and are tax-deductible in the U.S. and Canada.
Donations should be sent to the following addresses:
United States: Church of the Eternal God, P.O. Box 270519, San Diego, CA 92198
Canada: Church of God, ACF, Box 1480, Summerland, B.C. V0H 1Z0
United Kingdom: Global Church of God, PO Box 44, MABLETHORPE, LN12 9AN, United Kingdom