Will Israel save the world a third time?

Mudar Zahran

Reblogged from Israel Hayom. As a Jordanian-Palestinian politician, I and many other Arab politicians and decision-makers have come to learn that Israel is vital for our own existence. In fact, Israel has saved us, and the world, from two global disasters. The first time Israel saved us all was at the beginning of the 1980s, when Iraqi President Saddam Hussein was one of the West's strongest Arab allies. He was against the Islamic Republic of Iran and was viewed as a necessary asset for Western governments and as a regional balance against Iran's might. The West was in love with Saddam to the point of allowing him a nuclear program, which he obtained with France's help.    Just as Iran does today, Saddam said his nuclear program was for "peaceful and civilian use." Saddam's nuclear reactor was built with the approval of the United States. Israel, however, did not buy Saddam's claims, and in 1981 sent its pilots on a mission -- which they were unlikely to return from -- to destroy Saddam's nuclear reactor. As reports confirmed, then-Vice President George H.W. Bush was enraged by Israel's actions while President Ronald Reagan's first reaction to the news was, "Boys will be boys." Arab and Western governments condemned Israel's strike and some even spoke of action at the U.N. Unsurprisingly, Western media outlets grilled Israel. Just nine years later, Saddam occupied Kuwait, threatened the entire Gulf region, and openly spoke of controlling "the Arabs' oil wealth," which could have brought the West to its knees. The U.S. and many Western states had to risk blood and money to get Saddam out of Kuwait, but they did not fear a nuclear attack from him or that he might use dirty bombs. Therefore Operation Desert Storm went smoothly. Had Saddam still had his nuclear program, the entire situation and its outcome could have been different. In fact, Saddam might have stayed in power until today were it not for Israel taking the risk of destroying his nuclear program. In short, Israel saved the world from a power freak who came close to getting nuclear weapons. That was not the only time Israel saved the world. Another Arab dictator, Bashar Assad, had a secret nuclear program and built a reactor with the help of North Korea. While many governments were still not sure the program even existed, Israel did not waste any time. Israeli jets reportedly bombed Assad's reactor in 2007, reducing it to rubble. There were also reports that some North Korean and Iranian nuclear scientists were killed in the attack. While the world did not exactly condemn the move, many saw it as uncalled for because Assad was closely cooperating with the U.S. on fighting al-Qaida in Iraq and had caught several terrorists and handed them over to U.S. forces. Many Western governments viewed Assad as an ally, just has they did Saddam. Barely four years later, a civil war erupted in Syria and the country quickly turned into an Islamist stronghold, with territory split between the Islamists -- mainly the Islamic State group and the Nusra Front -- and Assad. Both Assad and the Islamists butcher civilians. Assad used chemical weapons to kill Syrian civilians in 2013.  Let's think: Assad butchers his own people, including women and children. Would he have been reluctant to threaten the world with nuclear weapons had his nuclear program not been destroyed? Also, given Syria's large area, would Assad have hesitated to use a nuclear weapon on one or two Syrian cities to silence the rebels? Basically, Israel saved the world and the Syrian people from a bloodthirsty dictator. What is most interesting is the fact that Assad's nuclear reactor was in Deir el-Zour, in northeastern Syria, which fell in the hands of the Islamists quickly after the civil war began. Can we imagine what those Islamists could have done with a nuclear reactor? They would have threatened the rest of Syria, neighboring countries (including Turkey), and the West with at least dirty bombs, if not something more advanced. Today, the U.S. has reached a deal with Iran about its nuclear program. On paper and in theory, the deal could pass with many observers as acceptable and even fair to all parties. Such observers do not understand what Israel understands very well: Not only is Iran ruled by Shiite Islamist radicals who will not keep their word, but if Iran gets the bomb, it will be the only nuclear power that would not fear the consequences of launching a nuclear attack on any country, even the U.S. If Iran attacks any country with nuclear weapons, and that country responds in kind, Iran could not care less; its leaders want to die as martyrs, go to heaven, and meet the virgins. While North Korea's dictator is ruthless, inhumane and even crazy, he won't launch nuclear attacks on a whim because he knows there would be counterattacks. He does not want to die or lose the country he rules. On the other hand, a collective martyrdom of the entire Iranian nation might be exactly what Iran's mullah leaders are looking for. Therefore, they will press the button at the right time. Iran's leaders might even seek the end of the entire planet through using nuclear weapons to fulfill their vision of the "returning Shiite Messiah, al-Mahdi, who would return only after a global disaster." This is what Israel knows about Iran's ideology and most others do not.  Will Israel take the initiative to save the world a third time, possibly by destroying Iran's nuclear program? We cannot tell nor even suggest that should happen. Nonetheless, if Israel does not do anything and Iran begins threatening the world with nuclear weapons someday, those demonizing Israel, boycotting it and labeling it as an evil state today will wish they had supported it instead. Very difficult times are ahead, and Israel is embodying the Palestinian Arab proverb, "What good does your mind do you if everyone around you has gone mad?"  Mudar Zahran is a Jordanian-Palestinian who resides in the U.K.

New Nationality for Christians: Aramaean - Inside Israel - News - Arutz Sheva

New Nationality for Christians: Aramaean - Inside Israel - News - Arutz Sheva
Reblogged from www.israelnationalnews.com

130,000 of Israel's 160,000 Christians, hitherto registered as Arabs, are expected to re-register as Aramaeans; their leaders are ecstatic.

By Ido Ben Porat

First Publish: 9/17/2014, 2:36 PM

Father Gabriel Nadaf - flash90

Flash 90

Interior Minister Gideon Saar has instructed the Population, Immigration and Border Authority (PIBA) to allow the registration of a new nationality – Aramaean – in the identity cards of Christian citizens who were registered as Arabs until now.

In a letter to PIBA Director Amnon Ben-Ami, Saar wrote that he has “received three opinions according to which the existence of the Aramaean nationality is clear and obvious, as required by the Supreme Court's ruling.”

"The conditions required by the ruling for proving the existence of the nationality are present – including historical heritage, religion, culture, descent and language," he determined.

Saar wrote that “the registration clerks must be instructed in accordance with the Population Registry Law that a resident who first registers in the Population Registry, and who requests to be registered as an Aramaean in the nationality detail, will be able to register thus.”

Saar's decision applies to most of the Christians currently living in Israel, or about 130,000 out of a total of 160,000. They applied as a group to the Interior Ministry in 2010 and will now finally be allowed to register as Aramaean. Read More: 

Hear, O Israel

Reblogged from Prophecy in The News

By Gary Stearman on March 27, 2014

In this season, we contemplate the amazing series of events given in the narrative of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus. The dramatic story of His crucifixion began in the dark of night, when He was arrested and tried. A strange occurrence is mentioned in connection with this incident. Taken by itself, it seems almost superfluous. But its message is laden with deep meaning. It is the confrontation between Peter and Malchus, servant of the High Priest.

Deuteronomy 6:4 is a pivotal verse in the life and history of Israel: “Hear, O Israel: the Lord our God is one Lord.” This command to “hear” signifies the hearing of the heart, not merely that of the ears. This verse is deemed so important that it is affixed to the doorposts of the Jewish faithful.

Jews refer to this verse as the “Shema,” from its first Hebrew word: “Shema Israel,” meaning “Hear, O Israel…” These strong words are a direct command to the twelve tribes to listen carefully to the message that follows them. They are a constant reminder to Israel that it must never forget the proclamations of the Lord, even to the point of attaching them to their doorposts and wearing them on their bodies, in the form of tefillin.

On the right side of the main entrance to a home or building, a few of the key verses from this section of Scripture are attached in place. They are rolled up as a miniature scroll and inserted into a small case called a “mezuzah,” which happens to be the Hebrew word for “doorpost.” Thus, they are upheld as one of the most important parts of the Torah. When passing through such a doorway, Jews pay respect to the presence of the Word of God by lightly kissing their fingers, then touching the mezuzah. Its presence there is considered to be a blessing to the household. But its key Scriptural admonition is for those who live there to “hear,” that is, to remember and understand.

God requires the faithful to “hear” Him, but hearing requires more than mere exposure to the Word. The interpretive power of the Holy Spirit must be present in the believer before the full meaning of the Word becomes clear.

Jesus illustrated this to His disciples following His rejection by the leaders of national Israel, as told in Matthew 12. There, we find the narrative of the Pharisees attributing the power of Jesus’ work to Satan, rather than the Holy Spirit. In the chapter which follows — Matthew 13 — He began to speak of the Kingdom in parables. His disciples wondered why He did this, instead of speaking plainly. His answer is quite clear in its implications:
“11 He answered and said unto them, Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given. 12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath. 13 Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand” (Matt. 13:11-13).

Jesus here announces that He has acted judicially against the House of David — in effect cutting off their hearing because of their unbelief. In fact, Scripture is full of pictures of the hearing of faith versus the deafness and blindness of unbelief.

The Ear Is Cut Off

Later in the book of Matthew, a remarkable event takes place. It illustrates not only the principle of spiritual hearing, but may also present a prophetic picture of Israel’s spiritual future.
The event in question comes as Jesus is betrayed by Judas in the Garden of Gethsemane. As Judas approaches with an assorted band of soldiers and Temple officials, he comes before Jesus and greets Him with the infamous kiss of betrayal.
Making no resistance, Jesus announces His identity to the crowd, uttering His authoritative, “I am.” But one of His disciples, in a burst of zeal, draws his sword and lunges at the servant of the high priest. This is first mentioned in Matthew 26:51:
“51 And behold, one of them which were with Jesus stretched out his hand, and drew his sword, and struck a servant of the high priest’s, and smote off his ear.”
Virtually the same account is given in Mark 14:47. Here, however, the swordsman is described simply as a bystander:
“47 And one of them that stood by drew a sword, and smote a servant of the high priest, and cut off his ear.”

Again in Luke 22:50 and 51, the brief narrative of this event is given. This time, however, even more new detail is added:
“50 And one of them smote the servant of the high priest, and cut off his right ear. 51 And Jesus answered and said, suffer ye thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.”
Now we see that after the ear is cut off, Jesus, in some miraculous way, restores it fully — in the end, it is completely healed. Again, in the book of John, the record of this event is given, now in its most complete form. Here, we find Simon Peter named as the swordsman and Malchus identified as the servant of the High Priest. It tells us, “10 Then Simon Peter having a sword, drew it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.
11 Then said Jesus unto Peter, Put up thy sword into the sheath: the cup which my Father hath given me, shall I not drink it” (Jn. 18:10, 11).
Jesus clearly states that His mission is not to make war against the political and religious system of the world, but to do the will of His heavenly Father. This is but one of many times that Christ must rebuke Peter, who is both quick to hear and quick to forget. But the event is a beautiful prophetic foretelling of the healing of Israel that will come in the Kingdom Age.

Add caption

As he had often done before, Peter impulsively lunged forth to do what he thought was right at the moment. No doubt, he felt that attacking the High Priest’s representative would give him the best chance at forestalling Jesus’ arrest. Since he attacked with a sword, he probably meant to leave Malchus with a mortal wound.
But Peter was a fisherman, not a trained swordsman. Malchus must have dodged at the last moment. Instead of his throat or chest, Peter took only an ear. Significantly, however, it was the ear of the servant of the High Priest.

Spiritual Hearing

Here, it is important to make a connection between an action and a word. Simon Peter’s first name comes from the Hebrew, shamah, meaning “hearing.” Scripturally, the name is applied to the gift of spiritual hearing, as given by the Holy Spirit. His role, as one chosen by Jesus as a founding father of the church, is centered on the fact that he has spiritual ears to hear.
In the Old Testament, the same name appears as “Simeon,” who was Jacob’s second son through Leah. At his birth she names him on the basis that God had heard of her plight:
“And she conceived again, and bare a son; and said, Because the Lord hath heard that I was hated, he hath therefore given me this son also: and she called his name Simeon” (Genesis 29:33).

Simeon was named for the hearing of the Lord. In the New Testament, Simon Peter lives up to the meaning of his name. In Matthew 16:15 Jesus asks Simon, “But whom say ye that I am?” Of course, he then identifies Jesus as Messiah, the Son of God. The 17th verse then characterizes Simon’s spiritual hearing:
“And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona; for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven.”
Here, Jesus acknowledges that Simon has ears to hear the revelation about Christ, which has come from heaven. Though he still has many tests ahead of him, Jesus takes this opportunity to surname him as Peter (meaning “rock”) signifying that he would become an immovable stone in the foundational structure of the church.
“And I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it” (Matthew 16:18).

The Prophetic Picture

To complete the prophetic picture, we now come to the High Priest’s servant. His name—Malchus—is a linguistic variant of the Hebrew word melech meaning “king.” By the time this event took place, the leaders of national Israel had already rejected Jesus. The Jewish priesthood was under judgement. They were about to fully act out that judgment by wounding their true King. As Isaiah 53:5 says, “He was wounded for our transgressions …” But He was healed of those wounds, rising again to restore a world that sinned against Him.
Ultimately, He will even heal national Israel, itself. In their own land, He will bring the Jews a Kingdom under His leadership, and their hearing will be restored so that they may once again serve a righteous priesthood. In a way, the wounding of Malchus (king) is a picture of the wounding of the true King, Jesus.

But more than that. The wounding of Malchus’ ear is curiously symbolic of the people of Israel. As a servant of the High Priest, Malchus depicts Israel’s role. Like him, Israel served a corrupt priesthood. They listened to the wrong voices and would soon call for the death of their Messiah. Their hearing had been cut off.
But Jesus healed the ear of Malchus. In so doing, He was prophetically acting out that future day when He would heal the hearing of Israel. In that day, they will serve Jesus as their true High Priest.

Peter correctly believed that Jesus was the Messiah and that He would bring the Kingdom to earth in the very near future. In the flesh, he acted on that belief, attempting to protect his King, even if it meant giving up his own life. Of course, he was wrong.
Once before, shortly after publicly proclaiming Jesus as Messiah, Peter had acted in the flesh. This incident is recounted in Matthew, where we read, “21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day. 22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee. 23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. (Matt. 16:21-23).
Jesus severely reprimanded Peter, even accusing him of acting in the spirit of Satan, rather than God. He knew that he must “suffer many things” in order to complete the plan of the ages.

Centuries before, Moses had spoken to his people about the power of the coming Messiah who would, in the end, avenge them for all that they would suffer at the hands of their enemies. In Deuteronomy 32, the Song of Moses opens with a ringing command: “Give ear, O ye heavens, and I will speak; and hear. O earth, the words of my mouth.”
The context of Moses’ prophecy concludes with the judgment of the nations gathered against Israel during the Tribulation. In verse 44, it concludes with these telling words: “And Moses came and spake all the words of this song in the ears of the people….”
Once again, there is a clear linkage made between prophetic utterance and the ear. The ear of Malchus was once healed and made complete. We are never told what happened to him after that.
It is possible that, having experienced the loving touch of the Savior, he went on to become a Messianic believer. In that future day when Israel’s hearing is healed, that is precisely what they will become.

Paul and the Gospel

This theme is carried out in many New Testament writings, but becomes especially clear in the life of Paul. During his first Roman imprisonment, at the end of the Book of Acts, we see the principle of spiritual hearing with absolute clarity:
“23 And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening. 24 And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not. 25 And when they agreed not among themselves, they departed, after that Paul had spoken one word, Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers, 26 Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive: 27 For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. 28 Be it known therefore unto you, that the salvation of God is sent unto the Gentiles, and that they will hear it” (Acts 28:23-28).

In many of his epistles, Paul asks his listeners whether they can fully hear what he has to say: Gal. 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

Over and over again, Paul asks this basic question, based upon the premise so firmly enunciated by Jesus, that faith is a matter of spiritual hearing. Perhaps one of his most oft-repeated statements comes from the letter to the Romans:
“17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God” (Rom. 10:17).

In this season, as we remember the trial and crucifixion of Jesus, we ponder the amazing fact that His own people couldn’t hear what He had to say. We should always remember that this is the perennial issue when we present the Gospel.
And we should always keep in mind that even the smallest details in the life of Christ are freighted with deep meaning.

Breitbart's Ben Shapiro Crashes UCLA Hearing, Anti-Israel Divestment Fails

 Reblogged from: www.breitbart.com 

by William Bigelow

Tuesday night, the UCL A Undergraduate Students Association Council (USAC) considered a resolution calling for the university to divest from businesses that supposedly “profit from the Israeli occupation of Gaza and the West Bank.”

Braving hundreds of anti-Israel speakers and protesters, Breitbart Senior Editor-at-Large Ben Shapiro, a UCLA alumnus, took the microphone and delivered a fiery lecture to the student council and the protesters, exposing the true motive of the so-called Boycott, Divest, Sanctions (BDS) movement: Jew-hatred.
Here is the transcript of his two-minute remarks:

CONTINUE READING transcript and view video.

Column One: Israel and the new Munich

By CAROLINE B. GLICK

The Iranians have given no indication that they would be willing to suspend all uranium enrichment.

 

Catherine Ashton, Saeed Jalili during before talks Photo: REUTERS/Tolga Adanali/Pool

Speaking to the Knesset’s Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Wednesday, Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz explained Israel’s concerns about the nuclear negotiations with Iran in Geneva. “We’re worried Geneva 2013 will end up like Munich 1938.”

Well, the time for worrying has passed. The statements from the Obama administration and the EU following the closing of the first round of talks all made clear that Geneva 2013 is Munich 1938.

The White House was unable to restrain its excitement at the prospect of a deal with the genocidal, nuclear weapons-developing mullocracy.

White House spokesman Jay Carney said, “The Iranian proposal was a new proposal with a level of seriousness and substance that we had not seen before.”

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton, who led the six-power delegation that faced the Iranians, said that the talks were “the most detailed we have ever had, by a long way.”

Ashton also said that she is committed to making concessions to Iran as quickly as possible. In her words, “When we have been talking and in our discussions in these last days we know that we have to look for a first step, a confidencebuilding step, and we know we have to be clear about the last steps and to do that in the context of the objective overall.”

The stunning talks even included a one-on-one discussion between the chief US negotiator Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman and the Iranians.

The only problem with all these exciting developments is that all the “serious Iranian proposals” would result in the same outcome: a nuclear-armed Iran. There was nothing in the Iranian proposals that could give anyone any reason whatsoever to believe that Iran is serious about stopping its nuclear weapons development program. Indeed, the only thing we learned this week is that like the Allied powers in 1938, the Obama administration and the Europeans have no stomach for a confrontation and are willing to dress up appeasement of a dangerous foe as “peace” and “progress.”

The Iranians have given no indication that they would be willing to suspend all uranium enrichment.

In his press conference after the current round of talks ended, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif insisted that Iran has the right to continue enriching uranium. The Iranian offer appears to involve suspending its 20 percent uranium enrichment activities and sufficing with enriching uranium to 3.5%.

As everyone from US Sen. Mark Kirk to the Washington Post editorial board to US President Barack Obama’s former chief pointman on Iran’s nuclear program Gary Samore have stated over the past several days, given Iran’s current enrichment capabilities, Iran’s offer is meaningless.

Over the past year, Iran has installed a thousand sophisticated centrifuges at its nuclear installation at Natanz. These new centrifuges allow Iran to transform 3.5% enriched uranium to bomb-grade material (enriched to 90%) as quickly as its old centrifuges were capable of transforming 20% enriched uranium to weapons-grade levels. So today, 3.5% enrichment is as comfortable a jumping-off point for the Iranian weapons program as 20% enrichment was a few years ago. Iran’s “serious proposal” is a joke.

As Samore told The New York Times, “Ending production of 20% enriched uranium is not sufficient to prevent breakout, because Iran can produce nuclear weapons using low-enriched uranium and a large number of centrifuge machines.”

In a conference call with the Israel Project Wednesday, Samore explained, “What they’re offering is really no different than what we’ve heard from the previous government, from [Mahmoud] Ahmadinejad’s government for the last couple of years.... They continue to reject any physical limits on their enrichment capacity – meaning the number and type of centrifuge machines, the stockpile of enriched material that they have in country. And as far as I can tell, they have continued to reject closing any of their nuclear facilities... I haven’t heard of any agreement to halt work or to modify the heavy water research reactor that they’re building, and which may be close to operational.”

So the Iranians offered nothing this week that they didn’t offer in the past. And as a senior administration official told the Times, the Iranian program is already so advanced that for there to be time to negotiate a comprehensive agreement, Iran needs to first take steps to halt or even reverse its nuclear program.

And as Samore explained, none of the reports on the conclusion of this week’s round of talks indicated any Iranian willingness to take such actions.

The negotiations in Geneva bear an unsettling resemblance to the negotiations the West held with North Korea as it developed nuclear weapons. There, too, Western negotiators bragged about new, serious and unprecedented North Korean “concessions.”

Pyongyang used the talks to undermine Western resolve to block its nuclear progress.

Just as happened with North Korea, so with Iran, the appeasement-crazed press will bring us endless stories about new, serious negotiations documents that will “ensure the peace.”

The last of the stories will be published the day Iran tests its first atomic bomb.

Since the Iranians are making the same unserious offers they have been making for years, why are the Americans and the Europeans hailing the talks as a new beginning? Why is Ashton talking about confidence-building measures? Why are American commentators and senators talking about various steps the US could take to appease Iran? By midweek, talk was rife in Washington about the prospect of unfreezing some of the $50 billion Iranian funds that have been held in escrow in Western banks. Doing so, we were told, would reward the Iranians for being so “serious,” but it wouldn’t involve directly unraveling the sanctions regime.

All of this is happening because the American and Europeans have changed their game. The only serious development of this week is the revelation of their new game.

The Iranians remain committed to developing nuclear weapons. But the US and Europe have stopped even paying lip service to stopping them. Instead, the US and Europe aim to destroy domestic Western opposition to Iran’s nuclear program. This is the new American/European game plan. This is what stands behind all the nonsensical talk of “serious” Iranian proposals.

Before his reelection, Obama felt constrained to pretend that he was serious about preventing Iran from developing nuclear weapons. He opposed but then grudgingly signed comprehensive sanctions passed overwhelmingly by both houses of Congress. He told AIPAC that he had Israel’s back.

But now that he’s no longer facing reelection, the jig is up. Obama’s new goal, which is enthusiastically supported by Ashton and her comrades in Brussels, is to use the new negotiations with Iran’s phony baloney “moderate” new president to give himself political cover to open the door to Iran acquiring nuclear bombs. Obama doesn’t want to prevent Iran from getting the bomb. He wants to insulate himself from criticism when it gets the bomb.

Not only do the White House’s lies about Iran’s new “level of seriousness” give Obama the maneuver room to pretend he’s acting responsibly, they trap Israel into inaction. After all, how could Israel possibly bomb Iran’s nuclear installations when Iran is negotiating so seriously, and is “this close” to making a groundbreaking agreement?

We shouldn’t be surprised by this state of affairs. Obama has never acted in good faith with Israel.

Take the latest news on Turkey, for example.

On Thursday, Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reported that last year NATO member Turkey gave Iranian intelligence the identities of up to 10 Iranian agents working for the Mossad after they met with their Israeli case officers in Turkey. Turkey’s action was a shocking betrayal of what was supposed to be a goal it shared with Israel and the US – preventing Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. Turkey willfully harmed Israeli efforts to achieve this goal by turning in 10 Israeli agents.

Rather than taking action against Turkey, or simply acknowledging that the actions of Prime Minister Recep Erdogan represented a fundamental shift in Turkey’s strategic outlook, Obama shrugged off Turkey’s betrayal. The US didn’t even protest Turkey’s despicable deed. Instead, as Ignatius noted, “Turkish-American relations continued warming last year to the point that Erdogan was among Obama’s key confidants.”

A few months after Turkey colluded with Iran against Israel, Obama coerced Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu into apologizing to Erdogan for Israel’s lawful maritime interdiction of the Mavi Marmara as it unlawfully sought to breach Israel’s blockade of the Hamas-controlled Gaza coastline.

No doubt, in making this concession Netanyahu believed that he would win Obama’s goodwill. In a similar fashion, in the hope of appeasing Obama, Netanyahu has made concession after concession to the Palestinians – from drastically downgrading Jewish property rights in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem to releasing Palestinian murderers from prison.

Yet in all of these cases, Obama has pocketed Israel’s concessions and demanded more concessions.

In all these cases, Obama’s allies have used the concessions to present a picture of Israel as both an ungrateful and unhelpful ally, and as a weakling. And in the meantime, Obama has facilitated EU sanctions against Israel. He has leaked top secret Israeli intelligence operations to the media. He has repeatedly threatened to abandon Israel at the UN Security Council. He has supported the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.

And now he is involved in negotiations with Iran that will necessarily lead to Iran’s emergence as a nuclear power.

From Netanyahu’s repeated declarations that Israel will not allow Iran to acquire nuclear weapons, it is unclear whether he realizes what is going on. More than anything else, those statements represent an attempt to negotiate with Obama. Netanyahu is still trying to win Obama over.

If there was ever an argument to be made in favor of Netanyahu’s pleading, their time is long past. In nothing else, the obscene diplomatic theater in Geneva this week made that clear.

Israel is alone. We have no diplomatic option.

No matter what Israel says, no matter what it does, neither the US nor any other Western power is ever going to be convinced to take the only step that would set back Iran’s nuclear program – bombing its nuclear installations. No matter what, neither Obama nor any European leader will ever support an Israeli military strike on Iran’s nuclear installations.

Israel’s back is to the wall. That is the meaning of the talks in Geneva. If we aren’t prepared to live with a nuclear-armed Iran, we have to stop talking and start acting. And we need to prepare for the diplomatic hell that will break loose thereafter.

"They Don't Care About Syria, They Won't Care About Us"

Reblogged from  www.israelnationalnews.com  

Rabbi Avihai Ronsky, former IDF Chief Rabbi, says world inaction over Syria could be a harbinger of things to come for Israel.

By David Lev

First Publish: 8/22/2013, 4:01 PM

Rabbi Ronsky (left), during his time as IDF Chief Rabbi

Flash 90

 

Rabbi Avihai Ronsky, former IDF Chief Rabbi and current head of the Itamar Yeshiva (religious academy), said Thursday that Israelis needed to be especially concerned about the events in Syria – because they portend a possible future scenario for Israelis.

On his Facebook page, Rabbi Ronsky wrote that the hundreds killed by the Syrian army in a chemical weapons attack Wednesday sent a grim message to Israelis. Hundreds die, he said, “and the world remains silent. Hundreds of people – supposedly born in the image of G-d – die before us from chemical poisoning, and the world remains silent.”

One day soon, he said, those chemical weapons could be aimed at Israel, too. “And the world will remain silent – very silent – when those weapons are aimed at us,” he wrote.
Rabbi Ronsky quoted Rabbi Yosef Soloveitchik, who wrote that “we cannot rely on the sense of justice of the liberal world. They live abroad, far away from us,” Rabbi Rontzky wrote.
“They will not lose even one night's sleep if they witnessed such things happening to us. They will act exactly as they did when Jews were slaughtered in Europe.”

The only solution, he said, was to “prepare ourselves, our families, our communities, and our nation for an ongoing struggle against our enemies, without expecting any help from the international community. They will 'investigate' the tragedy, but inside they will be happy over what befalls us.”
Preparations, he said, need to be taken militarily, of course, but also on a personal basis.

“We must understand the situation and accept it, dealing with it without the visual bribery of mirages of 'peace talks' to distract us.” Such talks, he said, “make our leaders 'sleepy,' blinding them to what is really happening.”

And although Syrian President Bashar al-Assad seems to be attacking his opponents, said Rabbi Ronsky, the use of chemical weapons “may just be a 'war exercise' that Assad is undertaking” to see how well the weapons work, in preparation for their use against Israel. “That's something for us to think about,” he added.

The Return Of The Kings Of The North And South

This Week’s Feature Article by Jack Kelley

“At the time of the end the king of the South will engage him in battle, and the king of the North will storm out against him with chariots and cavalry and a great fleet of ships” (Daniel 11:40)

Several times over the last few years I’ve made mention of my belief that two powerful and opposing forces of Biblical times were in the process of re-emerging to become part of the increasingly complex situation in the Middle East. These two adversaries are called the King of the North and the King of the South in Daniel 11 and recent events show they’ve both taken a giant step toward fulfilling their prophetic destiny.


My most recent study on this subject is not quite two years old and appears under the title “The Three Kings Of Daniel 11”. It’s named that way because in their end times appearance, the Kings of the North and South will not only oppose each other, they will both oppose the anti-Christ, who is called “the King who exalts himself” in Daniel 11:36.

Daniel 11:5-35 is a summary of the historical times of these two kings as they battled each other for control of what we now call the Middle East through several generations. They finally disappeared as the Romans were coming into prominence. It’s amazing to consider that Daniel wrote about all of them before any of them were born, squeezing over 100 historically documented prophecies into the first 35 verses of Daniel 11.

Daniel 11:36-45 are still future to us and require the re-emergence of these kings to be fulfilled. I believe in our current headlines we’re seeing signs that they’re preparing to rise and take their positions on the end times stage.

What Makes You Say That?

In my Mid East Update I reported that Saudi Arabia gave the Egyptian Army substantial assistance in its successful overthrow of the government. We now know that the United Arab Emirates and Kuwaitt were also involved. I mentioned that this concerns the US because of the possibility that these countries are banding together into a Sunni Muslim confederacy to oppose Iran. There’s a likelihood that they will support and even assist Israel in destroying Iran’s nuclear program. (The US is not opposed to a Sunni confederacy, but has been trying to build one around Turkey and the Muslim Brotherhood in a revival of The Ottoman Empire. Saudi Arabia and Egypt have become too independent for American tastes.)

Now, several Middle Eastern news services are reporting that Iran is working to build a Shiite Muslim block to counter this move by the Sunnis. It appears that this block will consist of Iran, Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon. This helps to explain why Iran is so heavily invested in Syria and Hizballah. Iran has sent billions of dollars in advanced weaponry to both and has thousands of soldiers stationed in Syria as well.

And just this week the Syrian state news agency SANA reported that an agreement was signed in Tehran by the Iranian and Syrian central banks, granting Syria a credit line worth $3.6 billion for oil. Damascus will repay Tehran by providing the Iranians “investment opportunities of various kinds” in Syria. According to the mideast intelligence service DEBKAfile, Iran is moving step by step to control the Syrian economy and advance its scheme for drawing Syria, Iraq and eventually Hizballah-dominated Lebanon into a Shiite economic bloc.

Some sources go even farther, claiming that Iran already controls Lebanon through its “wholly owned subsidiary” Hizballah. And recently a senior Iranian cleric boldly stated, “Syria is the 35th province [of Iran] and a strategic province for us.”

A recent article in Commentary magazine confirmed that “Iran is not only arming and training President Bashar Assad’s forces, both regular and irregular, but it has also sent Hizballah, Iranian-backed Iraqi militias, and units of its own Revolutionary Guards Corps to join his fight against the Sunni rebels. Add in the billions of dollars it has given Assad to prop up his regime, and it’s clear that if he survives, Syria will be another wholly-owned Iranian subsidiary.

“Whether Assad stays or goes is becoming irrelevant,” a diplomat in the region told Khaled Yacoub Oweis of Reuters. “The conflict is now bigger than him, and it will continue without him. Iran is calling the shots.”

And finally, the on-line magazine “Iran Focus” confirmed that Assad is not the issue. “Iran is primarily concerned with maintaining the Shiite crescent — which includes Shiites from Iran, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria.”

History Repeating Itself

It can’t be a coincidence that these Shiite nations occupy the same territory formerly controlled by the King of the North, just as the Sunni Muslim block occupies territory formerly held by the King of the South.

While there are sub-groups on both sides, Sunnis make up about 80% of the world’s Muslim population with Shiites comprising the remaining 20%. Many people who aren’t familiar with Islam don’t realize that the relationship between the two groups has not always been friendly, even when they would appear to have common goals. For example, after the 2006 Lebanon war, when much of the Arab world was claiming victory, Osama bin Laden (Sunni) publically criticized Hizballah (Shiite) for “jumping the gun” and attacking Israel before the time was right.

Current examples of sectarian strife can be seen in the fact that according to Gulf News, Hamas (Sunni) has lost the financial support of Iran (Shiite) for backing the rebels in Syria against the Assad government and has been told to switch sides if they want their aid restored.

Also, in the US there’s a fear that 10 years of “progress” in Iraq is being undone by Sunni/Shiite violence. Iraq has a Shiite majority being governed by a Sunni minority. The American advisors have never successfully addressed that issue and are now concerned that Iraq may soon erupt in civil war. Most observers see a not so subtle Iranian influence at work behind this.

The rivalry between these two sects of Islam goes back to the death of Mohammed when there was a battle over the right to succeed him and continues to this day. Most of their beliefs are identical but there are some differences. For example, they both believe in al Mahdi, but they don’t agree on who he will be or what he will do. Shiites believe he’s the 12th Imam, who will appear at a time of great crisis in the world to establish the Islamic Caliphate, or Kingdom, and enforce world wide conversion to Islam. Sunnis believe he will revive the faith, but will not necessarily be connected with the end of the world.

What Does That Mean?

A growing number of observers believe this rivalry could easily escalate into an all out Islamic war for control of the Middle East in a repeat of the rivalry between the original kings of the North and South.  Even though both sects have the capture of Jerusalem as their ultimate goal, each one wants to be the group that does it, and they’re apparently willing to fight each other for the privilege. The Bedouin saying, “I against my brother, my brothers and I against my cousins, then my cousins and I against strangers” comes to mind.

Of course, anyone familiar with the years of Catholic vs. Protestant strife in Northern Ireland knows that sectarian violence is not unique to Islam. But what would cause both Sunnis and Shiites to attack the anti-Christ as Daniel clearly prophesied (Daniel 11:40)? Especially if, as I believe, Islam will be the end times religion and alMahdi will likely turn out to be the anti-Christ?

We could understand their difference of opinion over who al Mahdi will be to cause one or the other to oppose him, but what could cause both to do so?
I think the Bible gives us the answer.

“He will oppose and will exalt himself over everything that is called God or is worshiped, so that he sets himself up in God’s temple, proclaiming himself to be God” (2 Thes. 2:4)
“The beast and the ten horns you saw will hate the prostitute. They will bring her to ruin and leave her naked; they will eat her flesh and burn her with fire” (Rev. 17:16)

Satan has always used used man’s need for a religion to help him achieve his goal of world dominance, but eventually he will have to make himself the only object of worship, unencumbered by any religious system. And just like the Jews were incited to murder when Jesus claimed to be God, so these Islamic kings will be outraged when the one they thought was the promised servant of Allah makes the claim that he actually is Allah.
In Islam there’s a saying, “Allah was not begotten nor does he beget.” When the anti-Christ proclaims himself to be God he will be committing blasphemy against both Allah and God. And when he and his 10 kings move to destroy Islam (Rev. 17:16), it’s easy to see how the kings of the North and South, with massive armies under their command, could forget their differences and unite against him.

Students of Biblical history will recognize in this a strategy frequently employed by God, that of turning his enemies against each other. You can find examples in Judges 7:22, 1 Sam 14:20, 2 Chron. 20:23, Ezek. 38:21, and Zech. 14:13.

Of course there’s a lot of ground to cover between where we are now and the fulfillment of Daniel 11:40. Thankfully, the Church won’t be here for most of the journey. My purpose is to alert us to the possibility that one more sign of the times could be in the early stages of fulfillment. Because every sign of the times we see strengthens our conviction that we’re living in the times of the signs. You can almost hear the footsteps of the Messiah. 08-03-13

The Great Pause

Reblogged from http://gracethrufaith.com/popular-posts-from-the-past/the-great-pause/ A Bible Study by Jack Kelley

Surely you have heard about the administration (dispensation) of God’s grace that was given to me for you, that is, the mystery made known to me by revelation, as I have already written briefly. (Ephesians 3:2-3)

One of the most difficult things for someone unfamiliar with dispensational theology to understand is why Israel needs to exist at all in the last days, let alone rebuild their Temple. A recent discussion with a theology professor from a well known West Coast Christian school made this clear.


We were talking about our respective views of the End Times. When I mentioned the coming Temple and Israel’s re-awakening into their Old Covenant relationship, he looked at me like I was from another planet. He graduated from one of the main line denominational seminaries where he had been immersed in liberal theology, so what little he knows about the end times is all allegorical. He had never been taught anything like what I was saying.

Why on Earth, he asked, would God bring Israel back when the Church has replaced Israel in His eyes? And even if He did, why would He bring them into an Old Covenant relationship when He’s told the Church that since the cross the Old Covenant no longer applies?

Good Questions

Most Christians can’t answer these questions, and even among those who take the Bible literally, many can only say , “Because the Bible says so.” They can’t explain why it says so.

It’s only when you understand that the Age of Grace didn’t end the Age of Law, but only interrupted it seven years short of its allotted time, that it all becomes clear. The Church Age was not intended to be God’s next step in His progressive revelation to man.  It was a complete departure, unlike anything He had done before before.  It began when the Church was born and will end at the rapture, never to be repeated.  Here’s what happened.

Near the end of the Babylonian captivity the Angel Gabriel told Daniel that Israel was being given 490 years to complete 6 tasks.
“Seventy ‘sevens’ (490 years) are decreed for your people and your holy city to finish transgression, to put an end to sin, to atone for wickedness, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up vision and prophecy and to anoint the most holy (place). (Daniel 9:24)

When the Lord was crucified, 483 of those years had past. Remember, that’s why the disciples were astonished when He told them the Temple would soon be destroyed (Matt. 24:2). It’s also why, 40 days after the Resurrection, they asked if He was was going to restore the Kingdom to Israel now. (Acts 1:6) They thought they were only 7 years away from the Kingdom Age. Ten days later, on Pentecost, the indeterminate Age of the Church began, with the Age of Law still 7 years short of its prophesied end.

After 20 years had passed, the Lord’s half-brother James, who was the head of the Church in Jerusalem at the time, explained that Israel had been set aside while the Lord took from among the Gentiles a people for Himself (the Church). After that he would turn again to Israel and pick up where He had left off (Acts 15:13-18). About 18 years after that the Temple was destroyed and has never been rebuilt. In 135 AD the nation ceased to exist in any form. The Roman Emperor Hadrian destroyed what was left of Jerusalem, built a new city called Aelia Capitolina on its ruins, and forbade any Jew from entering it. 

But the Lord’s promise still stands. As soon as He has taken the Church, He’ll turn again to Israel to complete the last 7 years of the Age of Law, also known as Daniel’s 70th Week.
These facts from both the Bible and history completely undermine any arguments for the validity of replacement theology. They explain why Israel has to exist in the End Times and why the Jews will need a Temple.

The Great Pause

While Pentecost was the official beginning of the Age of Grace, it didn’t signal the end of the Age of Law, as so many in the Church wrongly assume. The Age of Grace is only a Great Pause while the Lord pursues His Church, something He intended to do all along, but had only divulged in a general way in the past.

Speaking to His Messiah, the Lord had said, “It is too small a thing for you to be my servant to restore the tribes of Jacob and bring back those of Israel I have kept. I will also make you a light for the Gentiles, that you may bring my salvation to the ends of the earth.” (Isaiah 49:6)

When you understand the Great Pause, lots of other things fall into place. We’ve already discussed the re-birth of the Nation and the re-built Temple. Israel had to be re-born and will have to become a covenant people again in order to complete their final 7 years. This is what makes their re-birth such a powerful sign that the Great Pause is about to end. 

Israel has to exist again in order to complete the 7 years remaining in the Age of Law, and then receive the promised Kingdom.  It also explains the return to animal sacrifice during this time. This is the way things were before the Great Pause began, and the way they’ll have to be after it ends. Although people have always been saved by faith, during the Age of Law their faith has to be evidenced by obedience to the Law.

Understanding the Great Pause also helps us see why the Rapture of the Church has to precede the final 7 years. The purpose of the Great Pause is so the Lord can take from among the Gentiles a people for Himself. The Greek word translated “take” in Acts 15:14 is “lambano”. A look at the primary meanings of lambano reveals that the intent of the word is to describe one who takes something for the purpose of carrying it away. 

Once the church is complete the Lord will carry us away before turning again to Israel. This is consistent with Paul’s statement in Romans 11:25 that Israel has experienced a partial blindness until the full number of Gentiles has come in. The phrase “come in” means to arrive at one’s destination, as when a ship has “come in”. According to John 14:2-3 our destination is Heaven. Once the church has been carried away to its destination in Heaven the Great Pause will have ended.  The blinders will fall from Israel’s eyes, and Israel will complete its final seven years.

The Rapture has to happen before Daniel’s 70th Week can begin, because the 70th Week is all about Israel. It’s their final opportunity to be reconciled to God through the Messiah and prepare for the Kingdom He promised them so long ago. 2500 years before the fact, Zechariah prophesied that this would take place near the end of the 70th Week.
“And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for a firstborn son.” (Zech. 12:10)

Paul confirmed this and said it would happen after the rapture.
I do not want you to be ignorant of this mystery, brothers, so that you may not be conceited: Israel has experienced a hardening in part until the full number of the Gentiles has come in. And so all Israel will be saved, as it is written: “The deliverer will come from Zion; he will turn godlessness away from Jacob. And this is my covenant with them when I take away their sins.” (Romans 11:25-27)

And the Great Pause explains why post rapture salvation will be like it was in Old Testament times. The only difference is post rapture believers will be looking back to the cross whereas Old Testament believers looked forward to it. Speaking of the time when taking the mark of the beast will be required of everyone on Earth, the Lord said, “This calls for patient endurance on the part of the saints who obey God’s commandments and remain faithful to Jesus.” (Rev. 14:12) Again, people have always been saved by faith, but during the Age of Law their faith has to be evidenced by obedience to the Law.

It also explains why the 144,000 servants of God have to be sealed before undertaking their mission. (Rev. 7:3) If the church was still here they would be sealed just the way we are. But during the Age of Law believers were not, nor will they be, sealed with the Holy Spirit as a guarantee of their inheritance as we are (Ephes. 1:13-14). The 144,000 is the only group in the post rapture world that is described as being sealed. By the way, some scholars believe this means only the 144,000 will be supernaturally protected from the demonic locusts spoken of in Rev. 9.

I Can See Clearly Now

I could go on, but I think you get the idea. No other system of theology explains God’s overarching plan as succinctly as dispensationalism. None gives us such a clear understanding of the connection between events before Pentecost and those after the Rapture. No other one helps us see the “why” behind the “what” described in the Bible. None other so vividly demonstrates the absolutely unique nature of the church, while maintaining the integrity of God’s promises to Israel. And best of all it does so in a manner consistent with the literal, historical, grammatical interpretation of His Word. 06-27-09

What's going on in Turkey and how does it figure into prophecy?

Reblogged from Elizabeth Prata: the-end-time.blogspot.com

 

Can you believe the Arab Spring in Syria has been going on since January 2011 (or Dec 2010 depending on which source). For two and a half years, the Arab world has experienced unrest like it never has before. Dictators, Parliaments or Presidents fell in rapid succession. The civil war in Syria is taking a tens of thousands of lives and going on its third year. And now Turkey seems to be the latest victim of the unrest that now characterizes the region. The BBC reports on the latest nation's uprising,

"[T]housands of anti-government protesters have rallied again in Istanbul's Taksim Square. Earlier, Mr Erdogan vowed to press ahead with a controversial proposal to redevelop a park in Istanbul. A local protest against the plan turned into political unrest in Istanbul, Ankara and across Turkey. The original sit-in at Gezi Park last Friday mushroomed after police cracked down on activists defending the green space near Taksim Square from developers. For days, demonstrators in Istanbul, Ankara and other cities have called for the three-term prime minister to quit."

Turkey? The one nation that had seemed calm in the face of constant teargas, bullets, and fists in the air? Yes. And it was inevitable.
Recep Erdogan has been Prime Minister of Turkey since 2003. Initially he brought stability and a westernization to this country. He was part of the negotiations to enter the European Union. He was allied with Israel. He brought inflation under control. He ended internal conflict amongst factions. He stabilized the party and thus, Parliament. The west loved him.
However as time went on, "On his second and third terms in office, despite the improvements brought about as a result of the first term, the government mostly gave up on the European Union backed democratization process and became increasingly authoritarian on press freedom, [more journalists are in jail in Turkey than in China!] restrictive on Kurdish minority rights and dismissive and authoritative on formerly dominant political powers in Ankara. Democratic initiative on Kurdish minority rights, led by Erdoğan, stalled." (source).
After all, Erdogan "once called democracy a train from which you get off once you reach the station."
Like Hitler did?

Source

Of late, the nation's ranking for press freedom slipped. Erdogan began censoring internet access, he broke ties with Israel, and most recently, severely tightened restrictions on use and sale of alcohol due to religious reasons.
Erdogan is Sunni Muslim, remember.
In February 2013, Erdoğan called Zionism a "crime against humanity", comparing it to Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, and fascism.
Uh-oh.
And in June of 2013 for the first time in ten years in Turkey, an uprising occurred. "June 2013 saw protests against the perceived authoritarianism of Erdogan and his policies, starting from a small sit-in in Istanbul in defense of a city park. After the police's intense reaction with tear gas, the protests grew each day for the next seven days. Faced by the largest mass protest in a decade, Erdogan made this controversial remark in a televised speech: "The police were there yesterday, they are there today, and they will be there tomorrow. Taksim Square cannot be allowed to be a place where marginal groups can freely roam". (source)

Of these uprisings, The Economist explains in an article interestingly titled, Democrat or sultan? and he is illustrated as a sultan on a rug holding a modern teargas mask, "The protests are a sign of rising dissatisfaction with Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s most important leader since Ataturk. The rioting spread like wildfire across the country. Over 4,000 people have been hurt and over 900 were arrested; three have died."
Unlike the previously mentioned Arab Spring and the protests in Egypt, for example, the protests in Taksim Square in Istanbul have not been FOR Islamism in Turkey, they have been protests against Erdogan's (perceived) increasing Islamization of the nation. (source, source). Or, at least against his continued authoritarian constriction of previously enjoyed freedoms.
In a truly democratic nation, there is tolerance for dissent. What the world witnessed this past week was extreme intolerance and further, that the go-to position from its nation's duly elected leader is violence and heavy-handedness.
There is much debate among the world political watchdogs as to whether this is an Arab Spring for Turkey or not. Some say it the exact opposite- a Turkish Autumn, if you will. (source, source). Others

Source

say it is the first crack that will lead to a return of the Caliphate. But let's look at what prophecy says.
"The Arab Spring is the media term for the revolutionary wave of nonviolent and violent demonstrations, violent and nonviolent protests, riots, and civil wars in the Arab world that began on 18 December 2010. To date, rulers have been forced from power in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, and Yemen; civil uprisings have erupted in Bahrain and Syria; major protests have broken out in Algeria, Iraq, Jordan, Kuwait, Morocco, and Sudan; and minor protests have occurred in Mauritania, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Djibouti, and Western Sahara."
This Arab Spring occurred within a region known as the 10/40 window. The Joshua Project describes the importance of the 10/40 Window this way-
"The 10/40 Window has several important considerations: first, the historical and Biblical significance; second, the least evangelized countries; third, the unreached people groups and cities; fourth, the dominance of three religious blocs; fifth, the preponderance of the poor; sixth, the strongholds of Satan within the 10/40 Window."
Here is the 10/40 window on a map:

"The 10/40 Window is a term coined by Christian missionary strategist Luis Bush in 1990 to refer those regions of the eastern hemisphere, plus the European and African part of the western hemisphere, located between 10 and 40 degrees north of the equator, a general area that in 1990 was purported to have the highest level of socioeconomic challenges and least access to the Christian message and Christian resources on the planet." Wikipedia list of 10/40 nations is below.

What is interesting is that many of these nations participated in the Arab Spring, and are further predicted in prophecy to be part of the major wars of the coming Tribulation times (Psalm 83, Isaiah 19, Isaiah 17, Revelation 16:12, Obadiah 1:15-18, Ezekiel 38-39, etc). One huge exception to this is that Russia is not in the 10/40 window, but is a major player in Ezekiel 38-39's Gog Magog war.
Turkey is interesting not only because of her past part in history and her future part in history (more on these below) but her present condition as a perhaps-secretly Muslim nation with a Democratic overlay. Soon, I believe, this overlay will be ripped off as the nation's true position will be revealed.
Turkey's past is important to bible history and future prophecy. For example,
--Turkey was home to all seven of the churches Jesus had John write to in the book of Revelation.
--Turkey was home to half the Roman Empire. The eastern capital of the Roman Empire was Istanbul (renamed Constantinople in 330AD). Many scholars believe that because the Roman Empire was split into two halves, or two legs, that this is the reason for the imagery in Daniel 2 of the statue that represented kingdoms to come. (Daniel 2:32-35). This means that in all likelihood when the Roman Empire is revived it will carry with it the ancient eastern half, Turkey. (Daniel 2:40-41)
--Turkey was the home to the Ottoman Empire from 1453 to 1922. The Ottoman Caliphate was abolished on 3 March 1924 when the Empire collapsed and the Caliphate's authority and properties were transferred to the Grand National Assembly of Turkey. But Revelation speaks mysteriously of another empire, the seventh king who is also and eighth but belongs to the seventh (Revelation 17:9-11). In some way, it seems, the Ottoman Empire may be included, represented, or seen in the seven mountains and kings. (More here).
--Finally, the past Caliphate of Turkey is not to be overlooked.
"For the last 400 years of its existence, the Caliphate was claimed by the Turkish Sultans of the Ottoman Empire. Though the Ottomans actively used the title only sporadically, from 1517 onwards the Ottoman Sultan came to be viewed as the de facto leader and representative of the Islamic world. From Constantinople (now Istanbul), the Ottomans ruled over an empire that, at its peak, covered Anatolia, most of the Middle East, North Africa, the Caucasus, and extended deep into Eastern Europe." (source)
There are many calls to revive the Caliphate, even to this very week.

PA Arabs Fete 'New Mahdi," Establishment of Calpihate
"Thousands of PA Arabs participated in a mass rally in Ramallah earlier this week calling for the establishment of the Muslim Caliphate – the worldwide Islamist government that will “bring the coming of the Mahdi.” the Muslim messiah. The Caliphate is essentially a union of Muslim countries under the spiritual and political leadership of a single individual, the Caliph. It has been an Islamic concept since the days of Muhammad, when it was established by several of his disciples.

The last official Caliph was Abdülmecid II, who lost the office in the aftermath of the defeat of Ottoman Turkey in World War I. The best-known Caliph in the West was Suleiman the Great, an early Ottoman sultan who, in the 16th century, conquered most of the Middle East and the Persian Gulf, even conquering parts of Europe, until he was stopped at “the Gates of Vienna.” With many Muslim states politically and religiously divided, and dependent on the West for support, radical Islamists have been pushing for the reestablishment of the Caliphate – this time to be led by the all-powerful Mahdi, who will unite all Muslims and establish Islam as the dominant religion in the world, ruling for several years before the "Day of Judgment". Although the identity of the Mahdi is a secret, many Islamists believe that he is alive now..."

That Turkey is now folded into the world troubles is not a surprise. Turkey figures prominently in past and future history. Keep your eyes on Turkey, as as well as all developments in the Middle East, even as you also keep looking up. (Luke 21:28)

Share

3 comments: