Please note that you can navigate to different sections of this newsletter by clicking on the links at the right, or at the bottom of this page.
Israel is the major topic of Bible prophecy, mentioned more than 2,900 times, nearly twice as many times as her Messiah. Without Israel there would be no Messiah and no salvation for anyone, Jew or Gentile. The first mention of His coming is in God's rebuke of the guilty parties involved in man's fall in Eden: the serpent (an identity that Satan retains from Genesis to Revelation) and Adam and Eve. The Bible account is not myth but history. In many places around the world, archaeologists continue to find ancient representations of three figures appearing together: a woman, a serpent, and a tree.
God foretells a long conflict between the serpent and the Messiah and the latter's ultimate triumph that would occur in a way Satan could never have imagined. An old hymn tells it beautifully:
In weakness like defeat,
He won the victor's crown;
Trod all our foes beneath His feet
By being trodden down.
He Satan's power laid low;
Made sin, He sin o'er threw;
Bowed to the grave, destroyed it so,
And death, by dying, slew.
God's declaration to the three guilty parties is simple and to the point. To the serpent He said, "I will put enmity between thee [serpent] and the woman, and between thy seed and her seed [the Messiah]; it [the woman's seed] shall bruise thy head [a death blow], and thou shalt bruise his heel" (Gn 3:15).
The fact that God does not say "thy seed and Adam's" must indicate that no man would be involved. From that moment, Satan was eagerly awaiting this virgin birth in order to kill the babe. Watching closely as events unfold, Satan learns that the Messiah will be of the seed of Abraham. Ishmael (father of the Arabs) is Abraham's firstborn, but by Hagar, Sarah's maid (Gn 16). Finally, Abraham is given a second son by his wife. He is Isaac, "the son of promise." It seems a miraculous birth because for 90 years Sarah had been barren though not a virgin. Satan watches and waits.
Both Ishmael and Isaac were born "in the land of Canaan" among Canaanites who had lived there for centuries (Gn 11:31; 12:5-6; 13:7, etc.). There was no such place as "Palestine" nor any people called "Palestinians." No Arabs would live in so-called Palestine until the savage Islamic conquest of the world began in the seventh century, and they would not claim descent from "the original Palestinians" until the 1950s. Anyone making such a claim via descent from Ishmael is deluded by tradition. Ishmael's father (Abraham) was a Chaldean (Gn 11:31; 15:7) and his mother (Hagar) was an Egyptian (16:1).
President Obama continues to apply pressure upon Israel to deal justly with the "Palestinians." He asks these misnamed people to cease their violence against Israel. He must know that this is like pleading with a hurricane for mercy. Since long before the days of Arafat and his partner, Mahmoud Abbas, the PLO Charter's call for Israel's annihilation has been the sworn purpose of every Islamic government in obedience to Muhammad and has been reiterated hundreds of times throughout the Muslim world.
As Mortimer Zuckerman, in his U.S. News and World Report editorial of June 9, 2009, recently reminded world leaders demanding that Israel make "peace" with the Palestinians, the latter's violence is fueled by "the incessant spewing of hatred against Israel in schools, mosques, and the media, especially TV. This poisoning of the mind of the next generation is not just the stock in trade of Hamas and Hezbollah but also of the schools and media controlled by Fatah and reporting directly to Abbas."
In spite of the facts, political and church leaders persist in avoiding any mention of Islam or Muslims when referring to their violence. That is always blamed on "extremists." In fact, Muhammad himself began this trail of death, and his followers have obeyed, as supported by the Qur'an. The simple truth of history is brushed aside by the UN and almost the entire world, including the church and, sadly, our own president.
Being repeatedly condemned by the world for trying to defend itself against suicide bomber attacks that were costing the lives of hundreds of Israelis, including women and children, Israel's only alternative was to build a barrier that would cut off the attackers from entering her homeland. World opinion expressed outrage. The World Court ruled 14-1 that construction must cease immediately and everything be dismantled, with compensation to the Palestinians. The United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution on July 20, 2004, 150-6, calling on Israel to respect the World Court ruling. Only the United States, Israel, Australia, Micronesia, the Marshall Islands, and Palau voted against the resolution. Israel rejected world opinion and, from necessity, has proceeded with construction. Though the barrier has not been completed as of this date, it has already almost totally cut off the infiltration of terrorists.
Israel subsequently "gave back" Gaza, which historically belonged to her. She generously left operative the huge greenhouses that had fed Israel and much of Europe with fresh vegetables and could have done the same for the new "owners." Instead, these new owners tore the structures apart, and the mob carried off the materials for their individual use, thereby losing the potential income from exports that Israel had derived as well as the ability to feed themselves.
Going back to history, in 135 A.D., the Romans destroyed 1,000 Jewish villages, killed 500,000 Jews, and enslaved thousands. Furious that they'd been forced to bring in more legions to quell the rebellion, the Romans angrily renamed what had for more than 1,500 years been known as Israel. They called it Provincia Palestina after the Philistines, Israel's ancient enemies. Those living there became known as Palestinians. Who lived there? Jews! So Jews, ironically were the first "Palestinians." This is what they were called (along with many derisive names that have followed them as they've been hunted from country to country). Only in the 1950s did the Arabs begin to call themselves "Palestinians" in order to gain worldwide sympathy for their acts of terrorism even as UN pressure squeezed Israel into an ever-smaller corner in order to facilitate her destruction. (We document all of this and much more in Judgment Day.)
Since 1948, Israel has been arming herself and fighting back. Her vow of "never again" will be fulfilled but not before Jewry worldwide suffers the worst horror of her history. Under attack by all of the world's armies (Zec 12:3; 14:2; Jl 3:2, Ezk 38:8,9 etc.), Israel will call upon the Messiah, and He will rescue her. It is all declared plainly by the ancient prophets of Israel in the Old Testament (the Tenach).
It has taken the Lord many years and many circumstances to open my eyes to these prophecies. It was all there in His Word, but I didn't understand. How blind I was!
In 1966-67, my wife and I, with our four young children, were living on the third floor of a small seventeenth-century castle in Switzerland. That year was to have been an intensive time of ministry to university students, but God had something far different in mind. Suddenly, an overwhelming urgency to pray for Israel came upon me toward the end of 1966. Even when giving thanks to God at mealtime, I was compelled to include this prayer, "O Lord, I pray that you will defeat, confound, confuse, and frustrate all those who plot the destruction of Israel; turn their counsel into foolishness and protect your ancient people from their evil designs. In Jesus' name, Amen!"
I didn't understand that prayer at the time, but my naiveté was soon dispelled. In Cairo, Egypt, I went into a travel agency and asked, "How can I get to Israel?" The man waiting on me took me aside and whispered, "If you mention that [expletive] word again in this country they'll kill you!" I was shocked. I knew the Bible well but had never realized the significance of Psalm 83: "...thine enemies...that hate thee...have taken crafty counsel against thy people, [saying] let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance." This destruction has been the determined goal of Islam since it was founded by Muhammad.
Muslims are fighting against the God who calls Himself the "God of Israel" 203 times in the Bible. What an embarrassment it would be if Israel could be destroyed! It could never happen, for that act would destroy "the God of Israel" as well. He will not allow it.
Interacting with the very friendly people our family met as we drove the length and breadth of Egypt in our VW minibus in late May 1967, we repeatedly heard the words, "The 19-year war." What war was this? It took a while for that cryptic phrase to sink into our dull understanding. From the so-called 1948 cessation of hostilities until 1967 was 19 years. Even as they professed peace, but inspired by Egypt's dictator, Gamal Abdul Nasser, the 40 million Muslims surrounding Israel had been arming nonstop to achieve her destruction. Nasser had sworn to lead the Arab world to a glorious victory. The humiliating defeat of the Arab armies in "The Six Day War" of 1967 ended Nasser's bombastic boast that he would destroy Israel. He subsequently had a nervous breakdown from which he never recovered.
In May 1948, Israel had declared its independence and was instantly attacked by the combined might of 40 million Arab/Muslims surrounding her. This tiny nation of 600,000, with its hastily assembled, hurriedly trained, and poorly equipped army of 60,000, with weapons smuggled in from Czechoslovakia (France, Britain, America, et al., would sell them nothing) fought for its survival against an enemy that had sworn its utter annihilation. They "crushed 600,000 soldiers of four Arab armies, well trained and heavily armed [with tanks and planes, of which Israel had none], reinforced by units from seven additional Arab countries, not to mention the active help of the British." This quote is part of the lengthy endorsement of Judgment Day by a retired Israeli General.
Three times God calls Israel the "apple of his eye" and warns: "He that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye" (Zec 2:8; Dt 32:10; Lam 2:18). The statements that Barack Obama continually makes in favor of Islam are not only alarming for his own sake and the sake of the United States but are a slap in the face of the God of Israel. I can only warn him with what God himself told Abraham regarding the subsequent mistreatment of his descendants: "I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed" (Gn 12:3).
In a hotel room in Tyre, Lebanon, the evening of June 3, 1967, our family prayed for direction from God. We had visas to drive through Syria into Jordan and then return by the same route. The newspapers the next morning gave the answer clearly. We immediately headed north through Syria and had, by God's grace, barely gotten across the border into Turkey when the war broke out.
In spite of hundreds of very clear declarations by Jewish prophets and the promises that God has given to His people, about 30 percent of today's Israelis claim to be atheists. He wants to bless them and protect them, but how can He, when they continue to reject Him? The following is just a sample of what God has repeatedly said to His people: "I should soon have subdued their enemies, and turned my hand against their adversaries...fed them also with the finest of the wheat: and with honey out of the rock should I have satisfied thee.... But my people would not hearken to my voice; and Israel would [have] none of me"
(Ps 81:11-16).
Israel is both under God's judgment because of its continual rejection of the God of Israel, but at the same time, He has not abandoned her, and woe to those who take God's judgment into their own hands!
In the meantime, the nations of the world continue to become a party to Islam's deception by attempting to force Israel into what can only be a false "peace." What Islam has in mind is not what the peacemakers naively intend. It's called a hudna, the "peace" that Muhammad made with the Meccans for ten years. Long before then, under a pretense, Muslims attacked and took over that "holy" city, which had so long been the goal of the hajj (long practiced before Muhammad's birth by most Arab tribes). Of course, this ancient custom, along with others, such as the feast of Ramadan, have been taken over by Muslims. Thus, history is perverted to make it seem that these had always been Islamic practices.
Ramadan had for centuries been agreed upon by warring Arab tribes to be 30 days of peace. At just the right time to allow him to attack a passing caravan, Muhammad received a "new revelation" that Muslims could fight during this time. Ramadan has become a time of the deadliest attacks of Shiites against Sunnis (does this demonstrate to the world that "Islam is peace?")
These prophecies are so important for the strengthening of our own faith, but what about those whom we want to bring into the faith of the God of Israel? We need to provide to everyone with whom we speak (as I often do for those with whom the Lord puts me in contact everywhere, but especially on airplanes) first of all, proof of God's existence. How better to do this than to take the approach of Zinzendorf with the King of Sweden, as we mentioned in Part I of this article, using biblical prophecies about Israel?
We can talk to others about God and Jesus Christ, but when we say "God," what do we mean? A "higher power" of some kind? We have to be sure that those whom we want to introduce to the God of Israel understand who He is, why we believe in Him, and why we think the most intelligent decision they could make is to believe in Him as well. TBC
God has called every Christian to a holy life. There are no exceptions to this call. It is not a call only to pastors, missionaries, and a few dedicated Sunday School teachers. Every Christian of every nation, whether rich or poor, learned or unlearned, influential or totally unknown, is called to be holy. The Christian plumber and the Christian banker, the unsung housewife and the powerful head of state are all alike called to be holy.
This call to a holy life is based on the fact that God Himself is holy. Because God is holy, He requires that we be holy. Many Christians have what we call a "cultural holiness." They adapt to the character and behavior pattern of Christians around them. As the Christian culture around them is more or less holy, so these Christians are more or less holy. But God has not called us to be like those around us. He has called us to be like Himself. Holiness is nothing less than conformity to the character of God.
Jerry Bridges, The Pursuit of Holiness
Question: President Obama has recently stated, "If you actually took the number of Muslim Americans, we'd be one of the largest Muslim countries in the world." He also seems to be apologizing for America's cultural "arrogance" and no longer refers to the "war on terror." Instead, he speaks about the need to learn about Islam and repeated a statement he made in Turkey in April 2009. "In Ankara, I made clear that America is not--and never will be--at war with Islam." At the same time, we have seen the shooting of two U.S. soldiers outside a recruiting office by a convert to Islam. What do you think?
Response: Whether or not we acknowledge it, we are indeed at war with those promoting the core beliefs of Islam. Some people were shocked with the release of a report in 2008 showing "Nearly one third of Muslim students believe it can be acceptable to kill in the name of religion, according to a survey published [July 27, 2008]. It also found that 40 percent want to see the introduction of Islamic sharia law in Britain, 40 percent think it wrong for Muslim men and women to mix freely together, and 33 percent want to see a worldwide Islamic government based on sharia law." ("One third of British Muslim students say it's acceptable to kill for Islam," This is London, July 28, 2008). It must be borne in mind that these are not recent immigrants but many who had been raised and educated in English schools and who have long interacted with English culture.
Their attitudes really should not be surprising, as jihad is something openly advocated by Islam: "Allah's Apostle was asked, 'What is the best deed?' He replied, 'To believe in Allah and His Apostle (Muhammad).' The questioner then asked, 'What is the next (in goodness)?' He replied, 'To participate in Jihad [religious war] in Allah's Cause'" (The Hadith, Volume 1, Book 2, Number 25).
In what has been described as Obama's sugarcoating of "the pathologies of the Islamic
world," the president glossed over the tyranny of its various regimes, its very vocal hatred of Jews, and the institutionalized intolerance in its societies. It must be remembered that Islamic eschatology demands the complete and utter destruction of every Jew from the face of the earth. The pronouncements in the hadith and other writings have not been hidden but are often quoted by their religious teachers: "...Allah's Apostle said, 'The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say, "O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him"'" (Volume 4, Book 52, Number 177). "The Hour" being "established" means, "the last day [the day of resurrection] will not come" until the last Jew hiding is located and killed. (One must profess belief in the "last day" to be a Muslim.)
To be fair, the president did say (regarding the inhabitants of Gaza and the West Bank), "They have to deal with incitement issues. There's still a tendency, even within --among Palestinians who say they are interested in peace with Israel, to engage in statements that are--that incite a hatred of Israel or are not constructive to the peace process. Now I think, to his credit, President Abbas has made progress on this issue--but not enough" (Remarks by U.S. President Barack Obama [June 5] at a press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel at Dresden Castle, Germany). It is disappointing, however, that these same remarks were not emphasized more during the speech in Cairo to those who needed most to hear them. Further, the PLO has never removed the clause.
Although no one would disagree that the Arabs of Gaza must abandon their plans for the destruction of Israel (something still contained in the Palestinian Charter), how can the incitement "of hatred" cease, inasmuchas it is a core value of the religion taught by Muhammad?
Consider the case of the convert to Islam who recently shot two U.S. soldiers at a recruiting center in Arkansas. He was described as "the latest in a series of Muslim converts accused of planning or launching violent attacks in the U.S., part of what security experts call an alarming domestic trend" (Abrams, Fox News Online, 06/02/09: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,524799,00.html). After converting to Islam as a teenager and changing his name in March 2006 to Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the young man went to Yemen in 2007 to teach English. "There, 'he felt at peace with these people,' even marrying a Yemeni," and was reported to have "studied jihad with an Islamic scholar" (Ibid.), before ending up in a Yemeni prison, where it is alleged that he was tortured and brainwashed into becoming a jihadist for Islam.
He may have felt at peace "with these people," but he came back from Yemen with a plan to target others as he practiced jihad. Because of this, we do need to learn the real nature of Islam and avoid the popular, though fallacious, "understanding" promoted by the president and, unfortunately, past presidents.
The 1968 amended text of the Palestinian Charter contained a number of clauses calling for the destruction of Israel. Prior to the 1993 Oslo Accords, PLO Chairman Arafat agreed that those clauses would be removed from the document. The Palestine National Council voted on April 26, 1996, to nullify or amend all such clauses. President Clinton received a further letter from Arafat in 1998 listing the same clauses to be removed. Nevertheless, a new Charter with these clauses actually removed has never been produced. In 2002, PLO Foreign Minister Farouk Kaddoumi acknowledged that the PLO National Covenant (with its many clauses calling for violence and the destruction of Israel) has never been changed (http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29242).
Concerning his remarks that the United States is "one of the largest Muslim countries in the world," depending upon actual population data, there are 30-35 countries with a larger percentage and population of Muslims.
Question: I heard a pastor/teacher on the radio state that when Joseph refused Potiphar's wife's sexual advance, he was a godly man and honoring God. That makes sense, but he also said that if Joseph had given in to her it would not have been a sin, since this was prior to the Ten Commandments. Were killing, adultery, stealing, etc., not sinful prior to the Ten Commandments? God destroyed the earth with a flood because mankind was so wicked, or evil. Evil based on what?
Response:One might very well wonder why Joseph asked, "How then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?" (Gn 39:9). We are also reminded of Romans 5:14: "Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come."
"Death reigned from Adam to Moses." In other words, there was a standard by which one could judge what was sin and what was not.
It is instructive that even the most isolated tribal groups have distinct concepts of what is sin. In Romans 2:14-15 we read, "For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law to themselves: Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another." According to Scripture, there is a "law written in their hearts." This explains why there are universal prohibitions throughout the world. This is certainly not an assurance that men will fulfill that law, but in the mercy of God he has caused
His law and standards to be revealed to humanity.
Consequently, Joseph (before the law) stated, "How then can I do this great wickedness, and sin against God?" He knew very well that what Potiphar's wife proposed was sin, and if he yielded to the temptation, he would be sinning.
Question: In the archival Q&As that you selected for the April newsletter, I can't believe the lack of Scripture references in your response to those who believe there is a Gospel for the Jews and a "Gospel of Grace," as preached by Paul. Those teaching this have gained quite a following in our area. I suspect that you have probably been reading, listening, and watching these same people. Please! Some of these things need a bit more consideration.
Response:There is only one gospel. It is eternal and changeless. It is the gospel of the Kingdom, the only gospel that Jesus or His disciples or Paul preached, and the same gospel that we must preach today. Unfortunately, seldom is the gospel preached in the way Paul preached it in Acts 17:2-3, in Romans 1, etc. Romans 1, for example, reveals what must shock a Jew: that Christianity is not some new invention but the fulfillment of the same message the Hebrew prophets had proclaimed.
Though the prophets didn't fully understand it, Paul still called it "the gospel of God, which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures" (Rom 1:2). One of the most powerful arguments we have for Jews or anyone else is the fact that the entire gospel, from Christ's birth to His death and resurrection, was all foretold in detail in the Old Testament. We are simply preaching today what God has proclaimed in His Word for thousands of years!
Some have asked, "When did the gospel change from the preaching of the kingdom (Lk 9:2,6) to the preaching of the Cross (1 Cor 15:1-4)?" It didn't. The gospel doesn't change: The Messiah comes to us through Abraham and his descendants, Israel (Gn 12); God promised a land to Israel, and the Messiah will reign over that land, His people, and the whole world from Jerusalem. That is all part of the gospel and is an offer that was made through Jesus and His disciples to Israel, but they rejected and killed Him. Thus, Israel had something special to repent of, and Peter's remarks at Pentecost reflected that fact.
Yet Christ's rejection by His own and His death on the Cross for our sins were foretold in the Old Testament. That gospel (of the Cross) was, in effect, preached in Psalm 22, Isaiah 53, Daniel 9:26, etc. Though few understood, it was still there.
It isn't true that the preaching of the Cross began with Paul. John the Baptist hailed Christ as "the Lamb of God which taketh away the sin of the world," though he didn't understand what that meant. Jesus preached the gospel of the Cross to Nicodemus, and, although the disciples didn't understand that gospel before His resurrection, they surely did afterward and before Pentecost. In Luke 24:25-27, Jesus rebuked two disciples for not knowing from the Scriptures the gospel of the Cross; and in verses 44-48, He explained to the eleven the gospel of His death and resurrection--and it is this gospel that He sent them forth to preach to the whole world (v. 47).
We have this commission to "all the world," or "all nations," also in Matthew 28 and Mark 16. Jesus surely wouldn't have used that language if He knew that this "gospel of the Kingdom" was only temporary and for Israel alone. The gospel of the Kingdom concerns the reign of Christ over all creation, which begins in our hearts, has a special Israeli fulfillment in His Millennial reign--and its ultimate fulfillment in the New Creation. That the gospel of the Kingdom couldn't have been temporary and applicable only to the Millennium is obvious, for "flesh and blood" cannot inherit the Kingdom (1 Cor 15:50). One must be "born again" to be in it (Jn 3), and it is everlasting and without war (Is 9:6-7), but the Millennium ends, and in war.
Perilous Euphemisms, FrontPageMagazine.com 6/19/09 [Excerpts]: "Overseas contingency operation." "Man-caused disaster." "Anti-Islamic activity." These are the currently required terms by our government for "Global War on Terror," "Terrorism," and "Islamic terrorism."...The directive for using the "proper" terminology in official announcements was not a casual request but part of an official memo from...Janet Napolitano, our Secretary of Homeland Security....Many of her contradictory pronouncements invite comparisons to the manipulations of language in George Orwell's 1984. According to her recent comments on CNN, "Illegal immigration is not a crime." Of course, anything "illegal" is a crime by definition....
An official memo from the National Counterterrorism Communication Center directs the replacement of terrorists with vague words like "extremists or totalitarians." Officials are to "refrain from using so-called harsh words or Arabic words with Islamic consequence." Instead they are to use generic terms without specific emphasis. "Jihad" is used by the radicals themselves; why can't we use it? Going one step further, the government has drafted official guidelines in the publication, "Terminology to Define the Terrorists: Recommendations from American Muslims, a guide for U.S. Government Officials."...The government asked Muslims--many of whom may well adhere to the political ideology of submission under Islam and Shari'a Law--to assist with the publication.
Language is critical. It shapes our thinking and determines our action. The enemy's perilous intensions cannot be blurred. If we do not name them, we cannot confront them. If we do not properly describe them we cannot defeat them. These new expressions mislead the public and confuse our law enforcement officers....
A vast majority of imams preach Islam's goal: world domination. While we must not call all Muslims terrorists, violence is inherent in Islam, and the radicals cite the Qur'an as the foundation for their actions. Prominent imams preach that there will be no peace until everybody converts and Islam rules. Sheik Ibrahim Mudeiris declared in a sermon on PA TV on May 13, 2005, "We have ruled the world before, and by Allah, the day will come when we will rule the entire world again."
[TBC: If we don't speak the truth in love, we wittingly or unwittingly foster delusion.]
Dear Dave,
After a most challenging news week, wondering if God cared at all for little Israel, I opened up my mail to find your wonderful insightful article on Israel (6/09)! Thank you so much for standing in the gap....I am a Jewish believer and have received your mailings for decades and yet this article spoke to my heart. As we [see] the socio-political landscape changing right before our eyes, it is so comforting to read your words, to hear your heart, and to see how you encourage believers to stand for Israel. BM (GA)
Dear Berean Call,
As a Vietnam-era veteran, former pastor, and now a missionary to the elderly in nursing homes throughout northwestern PA and northeastern OH, I would like to commend you for printing Mark Dinsmore's article, "Would Paul Answer the Call to Christian Patriotism?" I found it extremely bold and helpful. Brother Dinsmore is not afraid to say what may be on the hearts of many who are afraid to state a biblical argument for the times we live in and what needs to be the response of patriotic Christians. It is simply a matter of where our treasure is, [there] our heart will be. If our treasure is on this earth and in the enjoyment of temporal liberties, then we will fight to keep them; but if our treasure is in Heaven, we will live accordingly on this earth. Thank you for printing this article. I passed it along to others. NA (PA)
Berean Call,
Mark Dinsmore's recent article (4/09) is a disgrace and an affront to the many patriots who have bled and died for the freedoms he enjoys. Could he have expressed himself in a Nazi regime or under a Pol Pot Cambodia? Surely God has given us the wisdom and ability to confront such earthly evils, along with fighting dominions and principalities. God has given us different stations in life, some to bring the word of God to the people, and others to bear arms against those who would oppress.We are called to be servants of God, not servants of a system that rejects Him and His principles. I will pray for Mr. Dinsmore, but he has insulted millions of patriots, both dead and alive, but I am incensed at his attitude and remarks. LG (email)
Dear TBC,
I love the radio show and what you do for the Lord....I have listened to and have been inspired by Dave since 1988 when I became a Christian at the age of 21 after watching one of his videos. Before that I was raised a skeptic/athiest from my family upbringing. So I am in debt to you all and to what you do. DM (email)
Dear Mr Hunt,
I just wanted to thank you for your ministry and the work and research you have put into your books. They have been very helpful, particularly on the topic of Calvinism, which seems to be gaining a big influence here in Australia. I also have your book In Defense of the Faith and have enjoyed being able to listen to the audio files on it. SW (Australia)
Dear Dave, Tom, and Staff,
I have been having mini-strokes and I have asked my daughter to notify you when I pass to Glory Land. The reason? So you will know why I no longer send [my] monthly gift with love and prayers for you all and your families.
I am close to 89 years--and I am assured where I shall spend eternity--Exciting! I am probably sounding silly, but the Berean Call family has been so instructive and has nurtured me over these many years--actually it is our Lord Jesus Christ working through you--and I thank you. HH (TX)
Dear Mr. Hunt,
I would like to...thank you for your many years of loyal service to my Lord. I know that great shall your reward be in heaven. But I do have to say that your newsletters lately have been a little off the mark. I don't mean to inveigh, for I respect you and have also learned much from your teachings, and for that I am grateful.
I know you are battling against atheism right now and you have your book coming...but didn't you say it yourself, "Religion, not atheism, is Satan's main weapon"? So why spend so much time in battling atheism when they just will not believe? Does not the Bible call them fools [and instruct] us to "speak not in the ears of a fool; for he will despise the wisdom of the words" (Proverbs 23:9)? Has Dawkins not despised "the wisdom of thy words"?
I know you're not giving up on him yet, but his pride has been his fall. Is it not time for you to "shake off the dust of your feet" (Mt 10:14) and move on to other matters? But who am I to question you on this matter. May it be our Lord's will that guides you, not [mine]. I just wanted to share this with you.... JM (prisoner, NM)
Dear Dave,
"Well done, my good and faithful servant." I know the Lord is going to say that to you, Dave, when you see Him. You have warned me of more dangers and errors than any other Bible teacher. Thank you! LB (TX)
Dear TBC,
Words cannot express how grateful I am for the Berean Call ministry. I am doing my best to be a witness of the truth to a world that is lost. The educational materials you guys provide have proved true, time and again. Thank you for all that you do and God bless. GT (AL)
Most people respond with joy when they receive a gift. If it's a gift that turns out to be something that is beyond what they could have imagined, their joy becomes exuberant.
Many believers are going through difficult times these days, so, as the opportunities arise, we need to be a temporal help and a herald of the eternal good news to them. I know of no greater encouragement than to remind them of what the Bible declares from Genesis to Revelation: God wants us to spend eternity with Him, and He has done all that is necessary to make that joyous reality available.
"The gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord" (Romans 6:23). Let the supreme joy of that indescribable gift blow away all our temporal fears and concerns.
Executive Director
T. A. McMahon
Many readers are undoubtedly familiar with the fun "sword drill" practice that many Sunday Schools and youth programs employ to encourage familiarity with God's Word (which is "sharper than any two-edged sword"). It's even fun for adults--would you like to give it a try? But instead of giving you chapter and verse to look up, let's make it a bit more challenging. I'll quote a commonly cited proverb, and then you find the location in Scripture. Are you ready?
Quick! Give me chapter and verse for "Cleanliness is next to godliness!" While some of you look for that passage, the rest of you locate the verse, "God helps those who help themselves!" Oh, wait. I forgot we're dealing with Bereans here (and probably a few homeschoolers) who are already on to my game. Well, let's try one more. Ready? Grab your Bibles and find, "Resistance to tyranny is obedience to God." Go!
What? It's not there? Please check again.... After all, it's the battle cry of the American Revolution--symbolized by the bright yellow banner, emblazoned with a coiled rattlesnake declaring, "Don't Tread On Me!" The clear implication, of course, is that government oppression will be met with force. Today, this rallying cry is being heard again among many conservatives--including Christian leaders and even pastors--who strongly identify with National Patriotism. In a recent column, one such writer sounded off:
I'm not sure how many of the American people realize that it was the attempted confiscation of the colonialists' cache of arms in Concord, Massachusetts, that started America's War for Independence. Yes, my friends, it was attempted gun confiscation that triggered (pun intended) the "shot heard 'round the world.... And now it would appear that, once again, a central government is on the verge of trying to deny the American people their right to keep and bear arms.... This leads to a very serious question: how many of America's gun owners would allow their government to deny them gun ownership? Further, how many would passively sit back and allow their guns to be confiscated?
From all that I've seen and read, this writer is a commendable, admirable, God-fearing man, and I imagine we would share a majority of non-negotiable Bible doctrines. However, his column proves the point stated in the April 2009 TBC Extra: "Christian Patriot. These two words are inextricably linked in the minds of most [Christians]." This inability to separate Americanism from God's will and His prophetic word is made abundantly clear with this declaration by the same author: "As humbly and meekly as I know how to say it: as for me and my house, gun confiscation is the one act of tyranny that crosses the line; debate, discourse, discussion, and peaceful dissent cease and desist at that point. I say again, it is getting very serious now (emphasis added)." So, the line in the sand has been drawn. Undoubtedly, thousands of Christian Patriots and Second Amendment supporters would agree, on Constitutional grounds. My question remains, however: Is forceful rebellion--to the point of resistance with weapons--against one's government (however tyrannical) biblically defensible?
Now, before anyone else accuses me of being "traitorous," I will restate that my heart is not anti-Patriot. It is not anti-Constitution. It is not anti-Second Amendment. It is not anti-defense. My sole purpose is to encourage believers in Christ, who claim to revere and adhere to the Bible as God's Word (by which our Creator "hath given unto us all things that pertain unto life and godliness" (2 Pt 1:3), to distinguish between what is politically or legally motivated and what is biblically or spiritually mandated.
Interestingly enough, it was an earlier column by the same writer that sparked my five-page response (whittled down to a single page for space), which became a bit of a firestarter itself--the April TBC Extra, "Would the Apostle Paul Answer the Call to Christian Patriotism?" The statement to which I initially replied was this: "A real Christian patriot would never allow his country to be taken over by a gaggle of elitist goons bent on stealing his liberties." Although reader response was, overall, humblingly positive, I did receive a few calls and letters by some who were angered, confused, or who even felt betrayed. Let me make this abundantly clear: If someone holds a personal conviction to "resist tyranny" with force based on their Constitutional right to do so, then by all legal means, get ready to "lock and load." However, if anyone uses God's name and His Word to support the cause, he's got an entirely different fight on his hands.
Israel had godly kings and wicked kings. In like manner, America has had good presidents and bad--including some whose public personae have undoubtedly obscured traitorous backroom dealings and personal depravity of which it is genuinely best that we not know (Eph 5:12). But anti-American usurper or not, our current president is God's "chosen instrument" --whom we are not to curse, but pray for (Mt 5:44, 1 Tm 2:1-2).
The Scriptures command us to "earnestly contend for the faith...once delivered to the saints." However, the saints did not rise up with armaments to "contend," because Christ's kingdom "is not of this world," and we "wrestle not against flesh and blood." In fact, to our shame and to their credit, many of these saints died without any malice toward those who martyred them. Contrast their praiseworthy humility and meekness with the prevailing tone of anger and hatred that many believers are now exhibiting (understandably so, in the flesh) toward what is unquestionably an anti-Christian, anti-Israel, pro-Muslim, pro-Marxist Novus Ordo Seclorum.
Such a prevailing attitude illustrates my point: many Christian Patriots are tragically misusing Scripture to support their cause. In the case of the columnist I've mentioned, this is evident in his unbiblical melding of Scripture with his personal conviction: "As for me and my house, gun confiscation is the one act of tyranny that crosses the line...." By quoting Joshua 24:15, "As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord," the writer makes a grave mistake by equating "gun ownership" with "serving God."
Tragically, such a statement elevates Second Amendment rights above the right to pray, the right to worship, the right to preach, teach, or even to read God's Word. He considers "gun confiscation the one act of tyranny that crosses the line." Surely, the other "rights" I've just mentioned are far more precious to a minister of the gospel! But does that writer (and all those who have similarly pledged to "kill or be killed" over what they believe is their "sacred" right to keep and bear arms) wish to stand before Christ and explain how they "pulled the trigger" to protect the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution? Perhaps some believers would rather wind up in prison instead--and, perhaps God would use this opportunity, as He did through the Apostle Paul, for the furtherance of the gospel. As I stated in my original "Extra:"
We are in a spiritual battle, but we must choose on which hill we are willing to die. Dying for Nationalistic Pride or even for our "Rights" is not the same as dying for the cause of Christ. Far better for godly men to survive in a pagan nation and submit to rule of law (which God ordains) and to subsist by His Word--unless (or until) we are asked to bow down and worship a false god. [But] such an affront would still not be cause to take up arms...Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah did not go into the flames as "National Patriots," willing to die for their "Bill of Rights," nor did they offer any physical resistance to their captors.
Nor did they organize the Hebrew captives to rebel against the Babylonian government (that had just destroyed Jerusalem!) and appoint Daniel as their "Spartacus" to lead this insurrection. Some rightly point out that the Second Amendment protects the First. However, while the encroaching world government can (and at some point, will) take whatever material goods and property it wants from its "global citizens," and while it can (and will) censor free speech in the press and in the public square, it cannot silence our hearts and minds and conscience before God, nor can it silence our lips in whatever "diverse trials" we may face.
I fully and gratefully acknowledge our "Christian Heritage." I daily lament the sale of our freedoms, which spiral like punched-out ticker tape to the floor. I am angered that our way of life and quality of life is literally being "changed" forever before our very eyes. But then I remember: time is short, the earth is not my home, and our eternal hope is not in the flag of the United States. There is only one Banner to which I pledge allegiance--not to "Stars and Stripes Forever," nor to a coiled serpent on a field of gold, but to the Cross of Jesus Christ.
There are those who've asked me sarcastically, "Well, what then, do we just roll over and die?" After much prayer and reflection, my answer is "Yes." The Bride of Christ does need to die--to its dreams of "kingdom now" restoration. American Christians, in particular, need to die to their idolatry of nationalism, materialism, and the "pursuit of happiness."
"If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me" (Mt 16:24). We read these words; we hear these words, but how many of us actually do these words? (Mt 1:23-25). Truly, the church in America seems accurately depicted in Christ's rebuke to the Laodicean church: "Because thou sayest, I am rich, and increased with goods, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and naked" (Rv 3:17).
Yes, Christian Patriots, we need to die.... Not for this nation, but to it. (See Mk 10:21). As the faithful hymn exhorts, "Turn your eyes upon Jesus, look full in his wonderful face; and the things of earth will grow strangely dim, in the light of his glory and grace" (Helen H. Lemmel, 1922).