Monday, December 22, 2008
I don’t know why it was brushed off, maybe people just thought he was exaggerating or that it was just one of another little peace deals that didn’t mean much anyway. I took notice of the story and wondered about it and then left it there without too much in depth thought about it. However now another story has come out that might be a link back to this story and could have serious consequences and possibly point to something significant in the end times timeline.
Yesterday that was a story about how the Israel government had decided to launch a major operation in Gaza. This really didn’t catch my eye at first because Israel has been in and out of Gaza with several major operations over the last year or two. The article however quoted Israeli Foreign minister Tzipi Livni and opposition leader Bemjamin Netanyahu (one of who will likely be the next prime minister) as saying they see it as necessary to topple the Hamas government from Gaza. However while neither of them are currently Prime Minister of Israel, one of them is likely to be soon. But the article seemed to indicate that Prime Minister Olmert’s government was about to take such action. Today however, defense minister Ehud Barrack came out strongly against such a plan.
So is or isn’t Israel about to launch a major operation into Gaza and if so what does it mean? If such an operation is under way it could be one of the last peaces to be put into place for a peace agreement to be reached between Israel and the Palestinian government. The reason for this is because currently Hamas has been democratically elected as the government in the Gaza strip and as such the Fatah party which Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas controls can not make a real peace agreement. Fatah and Abbas don’t really have the power or the mandate to remove the Hamas government but if Israel would do it for them that just might be all that is needed for a secret peace agreement to be signed and become not so secret.
Then the biggest question is, is this a seven-year peace agreement? If it is we all know that this would be a definitive step in marking the beginning of the tribulation period. I am not saying that these things will definitely happen but this could be the first step towards such a possibility. Even if Prime Minister Olmert is reluctant to launch such an operation, the two front-runners to replace him in the February election seem eager to take that step. Once the elections happen and the new government is in place and if Hamas hasn’t been removed already, it will be time to find out if Livni and Netanyahu were just speaking to get votes.
Thursday, December 11, 2008
Purely from an anecdotal point it has been my impression that those who believe in reformed theology came to it from a background of not having a lot of thought put into theology. It seems like the average believer in reformed theology says something like “I used to believe x but then I was told about reformed theology and I couldn’t believe no one had ever told me about this before”. It seems like they think some one should have told them everything to believe. While it is important to understand all of God’s Word, the basics of salvation come first and the rest usually takes some study and reading of the Bible on the part of the Christian. We need to seek the truth, even beyond salvation. The next part goes something like this, “those people preaching non reformed theology why are they not telling the truth of reformed theology?” Not that they necessarily think others are lying, they are just incredulous that not everyone believes reformed theology. Then when it comes to eschatology they say things like, the rapture and the tribulation are new ideas.
Let me explain the problem with this viewpoint. Working my way backwards, “new” ideas are not bad if they are Biblical, in which case they are not really new, just not understood by modern day Christians. The original reforms of Martin Luther were not new ideas but the Roman Catholic Church had gotten away from the truth. The other main issue is that not every truth of the Bible has necessarily been completely understood. God’s word is filled with so much that it is nearly impossible for us to have complete understanding of it all. While many important truths for salvation and daily living are clear and not really disputable, the Bible has so much to offer, mankind will likely never fully grasp all of what God has said to us in his Word until we are in His presence. The other issue I have is that because not everything can simply be told to you, we must read the Bible on our own and study it. God can and does reveal truth to us in a personal way when we read His word. God’s word is complete in that there is no new scripture but we can come to understand scripture more clearly, especially concerning prophecy.
I am bothered when I read reformed teaching that says there is no place in the Bible that talks about the rapture or the tribulation either in word or in concept. Not only do I see the words but I clearly see the concepts there. If these ideas weren’t there, then they would be just that, someone’s ideas that aren’t Biblical. And indeed that’s how the reformed minded person sees them. But the end times theology of the rapture and the tribulation are clearly present all throughout the Bible in many places.
We can debate when the rapture is, pre, mid or post and we can talk about whether or not the tribulation is literally seven years long but to say such things are non existent makes no sense. These issues and concepts are in the Bible, it is up to interpretation as to what they mean. Everything in the Bible is important though not everything is central to salvation. We should be careful not to throw up our hands and say, “it will all pan out in the end”. Studying of eschatology should be done but not become an obsession.
I have one last important note for studying eschatology. When you or someone else ascribes a passage to have already taken place in the past,, read carefully to see if all of the events have completely taken place or just parts. A prophecy not completely filled is not a prophecy fulfilled. Many times it seems there is a rule of double fulfillment, where part of a prophecy has come true but not all of it, it seems to be a foreshadow of what will come when the prophecy is completely fulfilled.
Monday, November 17, 2008
Russia and Iran among others were likely able to afford new military spending sprees with the increased revenue. Did they help facilitate the unnatural rise in oil prices toward that end? Possibly, but it’s hard to know considering wall street speculators had a lot to do with it. Could the speculators have been pushed by outside forces? Again the answer is possibly. Currently the outlook on the economy, together with the US being driven to actually buy less gas, has made gas prices fall back to what would have been very high prices four years but what seem like really good prices today.
Is Iran now trying to push oil prices back up so they can finish their military goals? I think it’s a good possibility. This market downturn may be costing a lot of jobs and doing a lot of real damage but if it helps weaken the forces of Iran and other enemies of peace it may have bought the world more time before a larger war will start. At best its only likely to have bought time not cancelled the situation. And the current scenario might even push those bent on war and destruction into a faster pace as they rush to finish what they started or because they feel war will increase oil prices and help them get to their goals.
It’s all speculation but it’s something to ponder.
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
The first two answers make me think that too many people who study the "end times" are too stuck to their or someone elses interpretation. Even if one of those interpretations is correct, it's too dangerous to say this person or that person isn't the antichrist because they don't fit what we expected. Many people missed Jesus coming because they expected something else. We should only follow what the Bible says concerning the identity of the antichrist, but be careful to understand what the Bible says and what are our intepretations.
The last reason, is also a really bad reason. When people say too many people think someone is the antichrist so they can't be, that almost makes a more convincing argument that they may be the antichrist. If everyone is saying he can't be the antichrist for whatever reason, that makes the candidate all the more possible that he could be the antichrist.
I don't believe the Bible says the antichrist will be a surprise and no one will see him coming. It does say many will be fooled by the antichrist, and even the elect would have been if it were possible (meaning they wouldn't be). But some of the elect may be fooled in the begining stages. Obama may not be the antichrist but if he were to keep doing more and more things that make him look the antichrist, how many prophecy experts will say he's not the antichrist even if he were to setup the obomination of desolation?
I don't think Obama is necessarily the antichrist, but it is possible. It will become more apparent over time whether he is or isn't and if he isn't when the antichrist does come on the scene, if the church is still here it will become more and more apparent.
Thursday, November 6, 2008
The world will continue to marvel at Obama even while the world collapses. My only question is, will it continue to collapse under Obama until some other world ruler comes on the scene and looks like the antichrist by being a man of peace, or will Obama magically fix everything himself having more people wonder if he is in fact the antichrist?
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Michael O'Brien Newsletter Regarding Barack Obama and the Question of the Anti-Christ
All Saints Day, 1 November 2008
From just north of the border, we Canadians, like other people throughout the world, are observing and praying for the coming federal election in the United States of America. I would prefer to keep private my counsel about political choices, because it is not my country. However, I am receiving letters from American subscribers and visitors to my studio website asking me some rather surprising questions about Barack Obama, related to one of my novels.
During the past year I have read a number of his pronouncements, and saw the smoke and mirrors beneath the rhetoric, but couldn't understand why everyone south of the border (the other south of the border, the 49th parallel) was getting so excited about him, both pro and con. Then a few weeks ago a German friend called me immediately after Obama's speech in Berlin, to say that the presidential candidate had mesmerized the crowds, and that a commentator on German television had said: "We have just heard the next President of the United States...and the future President of the World." My friend felt that Obama bore an uncanny resemblance to the fictional character of the President in my novel Father Elijah. I have received several other letters saying the same thing and asking what I thought about it.
From my own reading of Obama's declarations and stated positions, I knew he was an ultra-liberal, a social revolutionary with visionary pretensions. But the Antichrist? No, not possible, I thought. I felt that he was too shallow a man to be the Son of Perdition, the Man of Sin, the Beast of the Book of Revelation. And I still think so. Obama is a crowd-pleaser with just the right ethos of idealistic crusader. That the crusade and the banners under which it marches are evil does not automatically prove that he is the Antichrist.
But now that I have seen the video of the Berlin speech I think there is more here than meets the eye. He is indeed a powerful manipulator of crowds, even as he appears ever so humble and wholesomely charming. I doubt that he is the long-prophesied ruler of the world, but I also believe that he is a carrier of a deadly moral virus, indeed a kind of anti-apostle spreading concepts and agendas that are not only anti-Christ but anti-human as well. In this sense he is of the spirit of Antichrist (perhaps without knowing it), and probably is one of several key figures in the world who (knowingly or unknowingly) will be instrumental in ushering in the time of great trial for the Church under its last and worst persecution, amidst the numerous other tribulations prophesied in the books of Daniel and Revelation, and letters of St Paul, St. John, and St. Peter.
Of course the mystique that has grown up around him is endlessly reinforced by the liberal media, which presents him to us as a high-minded humanist, a kind of secular messiah (see the Catechism of the Catholic Church, n. 675). Yet when all the rhetoric is boiled down to its substance, the man is advocating unlimited state-sanctioned murder, and compounds it by indulging in habitual falsehood. He is well accustomed to playing loose with the truth whenever it is expedient for him to do so; or else he is the victim of the largest memory lapses in recorded history; or perhaps he is just not careful about how he expresses things——a blurring or selectivity regarding facts for the purpose of aggrandizing his public image. There is a controversy currently raging in the (admittedly unreliable) forum of the internet, prompted by an African-American talk show host in Los Angeles who listed 39 significant details that Barack Obama claimed were facts about himself, but on further investigation were proved to be simply untrue. There has been some wild-fire debunking of the debunking, and then more counter-debunking, but it remains obvious that forthrightness and clarity are not major concerns in the Obama camp.
What are we to make of a man who has appeared out of semi-obscurity and become, nearly overnight, so very much an idol of the popular imagination? That he intends to become the most effective advocate of murder of the unborn ever seen in America should give us pause. Murder and lies are as old as the lands east of Eden, of course, but when they are charmingly packaged, proposed as reasonable and just policies (with a smile, a resonant voice, and an appealing flash of the eyes), one begins to wonder just what is afoot in the modern age. It brings to mind a passage from the first Act of Shakespeare's Hamlet:
"That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain..."
The line is from a scene where prince Hamlet has just encountered the ghost of his father, who informs his son that he was poisoned by his own brother Claudius (the "smiling, damned villain"), who after murdering him, seized the king's crown and his queen.
Barack Obama is an image-maker, creating his own myth as he goes along. This would be a sad defect in any human being, but it takes on ominous proportions in a person who may become, after November 4th, one of the most powerful figures in the world. How is it possible that such a tragic turn of events may come about, if indeed a majority of Americans choose to believe the smile and the myth? Why is it that so many people have come to believe that a mirage is reality, even destiny? Do pro-Obama voters hanker for a world figure who would heal old divisions between races and religions, thus heralding a new age for mankind? During this time of near intolerable tensions, does he appear to be the one who can reconcile Islam and Christianity, Africa and America, occident and orient, black and white, rich and poor? Do they see his racial origins as a symbolic victory over the history of racial oppression? Do they see in him the good-hearted "under-dog", the gutsy street fighter who agitates for the rights of the "little guy," whose meteoric rise to a position of maximum influence represents themselves enthroned at last in the high seat of power? Is this why they ignore his every grave fault and hungrily consume his vague idealist platitudes as if these were a kind of new gospel for the third millennium? Our hero. Our visionary. Our Great Friend and spokesman in the forum of the world?
Clearly, contemporary man needs heroes. But why not choose a genuine one, why not look a little deeper and work a little harder to find a man of courage and principle, and if it helps in the historical healing process, why not a very different kind of black man, say a person like Alan Keyes, a scholar, former ambassador, experienced in different levels of government, and (it might be added) an African-American married to a woman from India. Moreover, he is a devout Catholic who believes in moral absolutes and has amply proved that he will stand firm to defend them regardless of the cost to his own career. He knows that kings and presidents cannot usurp the natural law, the moral order of the universe, without bringing down judgment upon their nations. But it need not be Keyes. It might be any number of other men and women of clear thought and clear principle. Surely there are "Ten Just Men" still out there somewhere in America. So why Obama? And why does he rise and rise as his mouth smiles and smiles, exuding sincerity as he speaks lies and death?
And why, most horribly, most shamefully, are so many Christians of malformed or unformed conscience supporting him? Is it because they have never been clearly instructed in the truth, never understood the foundation upon which the moral cosmos is built? Is morality for them merely another system of abstract "values" in a crowded playing field of such systems, from which one may pick and choose? In the case of Catholics, for example, have they been blinded by a diet of theological nuances and deadly little loopholes offered to them by the committees of national episcopal conferences — committees that have absolutely no authority over Catholics, yet which are widely revered as a kind of alternative Magisterium? Have they been deadened by a habitual dismissing or dissembling of the solid teaching given to them by the universal Church under Peter? Have they grown accustomed to listening to opinion shapers who tell them that certain excellent apostolic Bishops in America who teach the truth without compromise are merely hidebound reactionaries, moralistic extremists, contemporary manifestations of those old boogymen who still haunt the American psyche — the Chillingworths and Dimmesdales and the judges in The Scarlet Letter? And so it goes, this over-reaction to Puritanism played out over centuries, an over-reaction that breeds tragedies a thousand times worse than Salem's. Lies compounding on lies, and it all floats on an ocean of spilled innocent blood. And who can gaze at that ocean (or be splashed by it) without coming to a radical choice: One either turns away into a deeper state of denial, or one turns heart and mind toward the splendor of Truth, and changes one's life accordingly.
Is this why many of our Catholic people have become impulse-driven impressionists? Of course, the blindness is not due to the failure of pastors alone. The Ministry of Disinformation (by which I mean most modern media) has played a major role. There is also the erosion of truth in the education systems, combined with the gradual confusion and weakening of conscience through our addiction to the "soma" drugs supplied by the entertainment industry. Other factors may be the war in Iraq, or Republican economics, or the Bush administration, or the structure of Capitalism itself, or any number of prudential questions in the sociopolitical order, all of which are presently tangled nests of moral dilemma. But why do they not see that these questions are secondary to the fundamental issue of life itself? Why would they replace one reigning oligarchy with another kind of oligarchy — moreover, one that would kill vast numbers of its own citizens?
"I call on heaven and earth today to witness against you: I have set before you life or death, blessing or curse. Choose life, then, so that you and your descendants may live...." (Deuteronomy 30:19)
May God bless and guide you,
in Jesus our Saviour,
with prayers and fasting,
Monday, November 3, 2008
Obama has also called for a national civilian defense force that is as strong as and as well funded as the military.
There are news stories of Egypt and Syria building up troops along the border with Israel. Iran has been threatening that Israel is going to be wiped off the map. Iran is also enriching uranium, which they say is for nuclear power but that many fear is for a nuclear weapon. Last weekend there was an earthquake in Iran that an Iranian scientist said was a nuclear test.
Is the world about to change?
Monday, October 27, 2008
I will not rehash all of the reasons that I think we may or may not be in the end times. However let us take a look around with some perspective. What is happening in the world may indicate some serious challenges that may lead to prophetic fulfillment, but let us pay attention to what is happening with caution.
That being said let me talk about the current events and try to discern the days we are living in, at least as much as humanly possible without direct divine direction. Everyone in the United States and many around the world it seems are focusing on the upcoming presidential elections. This is not just because the US may elect its first black president. It may be partly because we may elect our first president with a Muslim background. It does have much to do with the fact that Obama like Kerry before him wants to take the country in a direction that would favor those outside of the country to a level never before done. Obama seems to have plans to sit down and make nice with our enemies and to conform our government to that of socialist and progressive countries around the world.
Liberals on the Supreme Court have been using international law to direct their rulings for several years now, despite the fact that it is their job to uphold the constitution not foreign law. Obama has made it clear that he thinks the constitution has fundamental flaws that cannot be fixed and that he plans to use the courts (a judicial body) to legislate changes that he thinks are needed. If Obama were elected president he would likely appoint at least one or two Supreme Court justices. Obama would also appoint many lower court justices where the constitution is also being destroyed.
It seems as if Obama had his preferences, the United States would mirror most European countries that have socialistic governments. Maybe he would want the US to be like Germany, which has outlawed home schooling. He would like the US to allow Gay marriage such as in the Netherlands. He seems to have voted so much in favor of abortion (and death) that he would probably like the US to be like Belgium where euthanasia is legal. No doubt Obama wants the US to be the abortion capital of the world where abortion on demand is and will be allowed through the entire nine months of the baby’s life in the womb and in some cases outside of the womb. Though Obama claims to be a Christian I have no doubt he would also do more to remove God from the public square and label it tolerance and fairness.
Another very important thing to consider is that Israel will likely also undergo elections soon. The government there over the past several years has been more and more willing to give up it’s own land to appease terrorists and the Prime Minister has said that Israel was tired of being brave and tired of winning. An election could finally turn the country around to one that would hold onto it’s own land and not give in to terrorists. Or an election there could continue to make things worse and give the new Prime Minister a mandate to sell out even further. One thing seems likely, the weeks and months ahead for Israel are key to its short term and possibly long term future. The same is also true for the US.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
On a daily basis people are hit with spam, adware and viruses that go from commercial and harmless to outright viscous attacks. Why are there smart people out there creating such havoc for seemingly no logical reason sometimes? There are of course financial and other nefarious reasons sometimes but many viruses are just downright destructive with only malice as the goal. Of course the technical problems I’m talking about are eclipsed by the violence and murder and other wickedness in the world. But our world seems to be almost completely corrupt at times.
There is a news story about banks across the country receiving threatening letters with white powder in them. So far the powder has proved harmless but this reminds everyone of the 2001 Anthrax attacks that happened after 9/11. So my first thought is, is this another dry run test attack or some guy who got made at the bank because they foreclosed on his house? It could be either,
Bin Laden seems to put out a tape every now and then threatening the United States and the West. The most recent includes a threat of forest fires. People wonder if this is just talk because no attack has happened in the US since 9/11. Is this all just part of the terrorists plans to scare us? It could be, especially since we weren’t sent any warning about airplanes before September 11th. But the threat is real and we could be attacked by Bin Laden or radical Muslims in ways that we haven’t even thought of yet at any time.
As we face this coming election we must consider the evil that we face. If Barrack Obama is elected will the terrorists find the United States weakened by socialist domestic and ignorant foreign policy? Will they then attack us or wait for us to be eroded from within?
We must vote to protect the unborn and to protect our country from all attackers foreign and domestic. Regardless of the outcome we must be prepared. Our first priority is to be prepared spiritually but now is the time to be prepared as much as we can in other ways. We can’t store up treasures here that we may not ever get to use but now is the time to simplify your life and learn to get by with less. Now is also the time to do what you can to keep yourself protected from the coming evil.
Monday, October 13, 2008
How could this be happening? Have you ever heard about a company or seen a politician announce some program that already seems to be underway? It happens because these things have been worked on behind the scenes before they were announced. Now with the world being ravaged by the current financial mess, governments in the next few months and years may be eager to avoid such a problem in the future. With this in mind it is conceivable that they would plan to create a world market to help stabilize the situation. Bush’s meeting with world leaders looking for a fix to the problem was already pointed to as a positive sign that we would work with the world rather than isolate ourselves, which they say caused more problems during the great depression.
Though a one-world currency may be far off for now the building blocks of such a thing have likely already started and will now probably grow at a more rapid rate.
Monday, September 29, 2008
However I was being short sighted in some ways. One of the reasons I believed there might be a peace treaty between Israel and the Palestinians is because Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seemed bound to have “peace in our time” at almost any price. In the past Olmert had said that Israel was tired of fighting and tired of being brave. This obviously can only lead to weakness and loosing when you say you are tired of winning. This is especially true when your enemy doesn’t believe in compromise and only wants to win.
So why should the Palestinians give up now and take less than what they feel they can get? The answer is they won’t likely give up for peace while they are in a position of strength. Peace is never dictated by the party that is weaker.
But when will it come? What are the Palestinians waiting for? Even though Olmert was willing to give up virtually everything he could give up, it wasn’t enough. Will they make peace after another war from Hezbollah weakens Israel even more? Are they waiting for Iran to nuke Israel and take what’s left?
We know that in the end Israel won’t be wiped off the map. And no matter how much the Palestinians are offered it will never be enough because there demands always include things that will spell certain destruction for Israel. Even when Israel first became a nation and took up far less space than it does now, her enemies were not satisfied and tried to destroy Israel. They have not given up and the so called Palestinians are just part of another front in the war to remove Israel.
But at some point we know there will be a peace treaty between Israel and her neighbors. But how will this happen? Could it be that Israel will finally do something to show that she is in the stronger position? Or will it be when a charismatic Arab leader arises and gets the Palestinians to give into a peace treaty with the plan that the treaty is just a step towards Israel’s destruction? It may be either one of these or something else. Right now I wonder what would happen if Israel were to take out Iran or do something else to put themselves in such a position of power that they could dictate a peace treaty?
Monday, September 22, 2008
So they don't really dislike her so much as they dislike what she represents (not that they like her). It is truly awful that anyone would be so venomous against someone just for political gain. So they dig up everything they can and try to make Palin seem like a religious nut or a political nut or they call her and her family names. To her credit though she is largely ignoring these people and these games and in so doing continues to draw big crowds and supporters.
The one thing that stands out in these attacks is how liberals and those in the media try to tell us she's not conservative enough. It's funny because people who know nothing about conservatism try to tell conservatives what is and isn't conservative. I hear the same kind of stuff on my ChristianPolitics blog, people trying to tell me what "my" religion is really all about. When they can't really talk about something or someone on the merits, they either try to get you to doubt yourself or just call you names, it really shows how unskilled they are at debating.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Monday, August 25, 2008
It seems that Barrack Obama's once given victory in November now looks much more like a challenge and that he will have to start making up ground he has lost. I suggested earlier in the summer that I thought Barrack Obama would very likely win the presidency in November. Even though this looks less likely now I still think it may very well happen. Even though there is not much that's new, we are often surprised by events that happen because we don't expect them. I can't really make predictions because I don't know the future beyond what God's Word provides. I can't say what will happen in the future, the most I can do is suggest what I think may happen. That's just my forecast of a possibility though, I could be and have been wrong before. That being said, many things happen not because something builds up over time and happens as expected but because "surprises" happen and change the scene as we know it. This can be especially true in politics.
I think it is entirely plausible that John McCain may start doing very well in the polls and then "something" will happen that will cause people to change their view and want to vote for Barrack Obama. I don't know what kind of event would do that if it were to happen at all. But bombing Iran by either the US or Israel may change people's views. Don't ask me how that would play out, but something of that level could change how people see the future.
Are we in the end times? I don't know. We could be and I think we may be, but I don't know. Things look like they are falling in place for the world to be prepared for the final events of the end times but all of this looked like it might happen before because there is not much new that happens in the world or to put it another way history tends to repeat itself. The only thing that we can really point to as new, is that Israel is again a nation after not being one for almost two thousand years.
The one thing that many scholars and Bible teachers think would be the next big prophetic event to take place is a seven year peace treaty involving Israel, that will be confirmed by the Antichrist. Some think that the next big event may be the war of Gog and Magog. I don't know which one is right and in fact they may both be wrong.
Nations, leaders, individuals and groups have long pushed for some kind of peace plan in the middle-east and always fallen short. Many presidents have in the waning years of their presidency tried to get a peace plan into place as a lasting legacy and all have failed. President Clinton tried very hard to push Israel to give up more than ever to the Palestinians and still Yasser Arafat rejected it. In the last few months President Bush has done so much to get a peace plan between Israel and the Palestinaians and even said that he thought it could happen by the end of this year. Now it seems increasingly unlikely as Israel's Prime Minister offered in talks with the Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas as much as he could for a Palestinian territory and other concessions that go beyond what many Israel's would accept and still he was rejected as not making a serious offer.
Whether it's this year or some other year, I think that it may be a "surprise" that leads to a seven year peace treaty. We may see indications in the news of some things that are building and certainly we can and should be watchers of what is happening around us and around the world but be cautious because the biggest changes may come by "surprise." I put surprise in quotes because if you watch closely, these events may not be a surprise, only their exact timing and details. Russia invading Georgia was one such surprise. No one saw it coming, but Russia had been provoking Georgia for months and preparing for it for quite a while. Though we may not know how it all works out, God surely does know.
Saturday, August 16, 2008
Meanwhile the US shows just how much of a paper tiger it really is. The President says things, like “You better get out or we’ll talk tough some more.” Meanwhile Russia sees right through our empty threats and ignores them. Russia has seen first hand that the US will do nothing in Iran and will do nothing in Georgia or anywhere else. In fact we won’t even give Israel the go ahead to defend itself against Iran because it will hurt our economic interests. The US seems to be really confused over who its allies really are. At this point Canada could invade and we’d say something like “You better go back or we’ll stop trading bacon with you.”
Don’t worry, I’m sure it will all work out, Russia probably just needs a little breathing room. Oh and Iran may need some too.
Monday, August 11, 2008
I don’t think this conflict will totally end anytime soon but regardless of how it plays out I think Russia has moved a key piece on the chess board and if the rest of the world is not paying attention it will be blindsided and put in check very soon.
I don’t know the answer to this next question, but the Olympics are taking place in China, and China is putting a lot of resources into the games. I have to wonder what the ulterior motive is for China. What I mean is, China has been putting a lot of money and effort into the Olympics. They aren’t doing it to make money because it seems they will not really get out of the Olympics what they put into them, at least not financially. I think a lot of it has to do with presenting an image to the world. China wants the west to believe that China is a nice modern country and that we should not be worried about them. But I have to wonder why? Are they planning something they don’t want us to pay attention to? Probably. But I wonder if there is more to why they are putting so much into the Olympics. Yes there is national pride but I don’t think that is the whole story. No matter what the truth is, we should be paying very close attention to China, Russia and Iran.
Monday, August 4, 2008
I have long worried about President Bush not doing enough to stop Iran but reading the following article (Pakistan, Iran and Bush’s Last Months) made me realize what should be obvious. Bush is afraid to attack Iran and other countries that harbor terrorists, despite his tough talk several years ago. If we really need to go after all the countries that harbor terrorists we would need to do some serious work in Pakistan and probably several other countries. America can barely stomach the extent of the war on terror that we’re fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan let alone opening several more fronts. But people need to realize this is all one war and not several wars. But for America to go after Iran, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan and others, it would really be world war 3 and America would find itself mostly fighting the war by itself.
The alternative is to finish Iraq, try to apply what we learned in Iraq and hope to succeed in Afghanistan. Then to hope Iran won’t really do anything and that we’ll eventually get other terrorists in countries like Pakistan with the help of the government. The first problem is that we would only be dealing with the terrorists that we know of while leaving training camps and infrastructure in place. This will leave room for terrorists to continue to operate, terrorists that we don’t know enough about. Also hoping Iran isn’t really dumb enough to attack Israel isn’t a realistic approach. Iran may or may not attack Israel but for sure they are up to something that will not be small and will have repercussions for the entire world.
I believe Iran will eventually do something and possibly with the help of other countries and that this may well lead to world war 3 but with America very much on the defensive. Some people might think this is OK but the cost we will pay could be very heavy and one not worth paying so that we can just hope everything works out while we see the storm clouds on the horizon.
I can understand being afraid and not wanting to start world war 3 and go it alone. However doing nothing but appeasing or hoping sanctions will work may lead to a far worse situation. While we hope for the best we continue to give the enemy time to strengthen and plan.
On Another note I’m astonished again how things that Joel Rosenberg wrote about in the Ezekiel Option seem to be coming true, at least in a way that foreshadows what may come. I read an article where a Professor suggests that they way to peace is for Israel to give up it’s nuclear arsenal and then Iran will do the same and to entice Israel to give up its weapons the EU and others will promise to protect her. This is right out of Rosenberg’s book where the UN eventually passes a resolution to get Israel to get rid of it’s nuclear weapons because Iran has promised to do so. America’s response to the UN resolution was not to veto it but to abstain and instead ask Israel to give up its nukes in return from promises from America and NATO to protect her.
Be on the watch and share the love of Jesus, the times we are in are indeed troubling.
Wednesday, July 30, 2008
Now this morning I read a few stories in the news and I realize that it’s not that Rosenberg is so much a weak writer in some places as he is accurately writing about weak characters who are all too real.
If you read this story below you will see how the world is all too ready to believe that Iran’s president really wants peace and prosperity and wants to end the double standard in the U.N. that favors the United States and it’s allies. This is right out of Rosenberg’s book in some eerie ways.
Iran on the UN Security Council
I had always thought that when the Antichrist comes that he will fool almost everyone completely except for the Christians because he will be very smart about hiding who he really is. But now I think it may be that many will see this evil leader for who he is, but many more will be fooled by his slick words because they want to believe those words.
So I can’t help but wonder, is the world really doing appeasement all over again with countries like Iran, North Korea and radical Islam, or is the world just sticking it’s collective head in the sand. Either way we need to be really worried.
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Let me explain. First lets start with radical Islam. That phrase alone is a problem. While I’m sure there are plenty of Muslims who follow the Koran as well as some of those who profess Christianity follow the Bible. What I mean by this is that they really don’t believe in or at least follow through with what the Bible teaches. So there are Muslims who don’t completely follow the Koran. However no one has hijacked Islam, there is not a radical side of Islam, Islam itself is radical. The people who we refer to as radical Islamists are basically Islamic fundamentalists who follow though with what Islam teaches. But many people including President Bush insist on the narrative that is Islam is a peace loving religion. President Bush either is being political or naïve. Most of western society is however the latter.
Next lets look at Iran. Most of the antiwar crowd thinks that we can just talk to Iran and the problem will be resolved. Even the leaders seem to think that talk and sanctions will work when they have obviously not. They are confused because they think that everyone is like them and thinks like them and surely under the right conditions or pressure that Iran will do what they want because if they were in that situation they would just do what seemed to be logical and negotiate a peaceful resolution. This is both dangerous and just plane foolish. There are many people in the Islamic world and the world in general who are willing to die for a cause. There are even those who would let thousands dies even thousands of their own people die. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and the mullahs in Iran are these type of people. They can’t be deterred by the threat of death for them or their citizens nor the threat of loosing power. That is what we fear, not what they fear.
Time and time again we can see from history that there is more in this world than we understand. Yet we refuse to believe it could happen again. In the movies when a bad guy has a hostage but the good guy has a gun, the bad guy always says “put your gun down or I’ll kill the hostage.” The good guy tells the bad guy to let the hostage go and they go back and forth until the good guy drops his gun. The good guy thinks the bad guy will act in good faith and let the hostage go, but in fact the bad guy often kills the hostage anyway and then attempts to kill the unarmed good guy. In the movies though the good guy finds a way out, but that’s not reality. Why does the good guy always seem to give in and think the bad guy will be reasonable? This makes no sense. Yes you want to save the hostage but if you leave no deterrent for the bad guy than both the hostage and the good guy are exposed and will likely be killed or at least the bad guy will attempt to kill them both. Yes that’s just the movies but is art imitating life or life imitating art? I think both may be true and either way we miss the point. The bad guy usually does not think the way we do, that’s why they are the bad guy. It’s not just a misunderstanding or a misunderstood character. Yes we should want God’s best for every human being that he created. God wants that none should parish. But that is not always possible and we must do what is right. In a shoot out you shouldn’t really want to kill the bad guy but you may have to, to save the lives of others. In this case there is not even a deterrent though. The only way to stop Iran is to disarm them.
Let me leave you with this thought. It seems we are living in a world full of Neville chamberlains. Even though many say we can’t have a nuclear-armed Iran they seem willing to let it happen because they don’t believe Iran will attack Israel and they really don’t think Iran will attack the US. Why they don’t believe this, I don’t know. Not only have the Iranians said what they want to do, they are currently even doing it. Iran is attacking the US in Iraq. Iran calls us the great Satan and it’s more than just playground name calling.
If someone told you they were a super agent spy would you believe them? Probably not that kind of stuff only happens in the movies right? While it seems overly dramatic it can very well be true. In this world there are thousands or probably hundreds of thousands or millions who are in fact spies. The CIA does exist, as well as many other agencies in this country and other countries that do employ spies. If someone told you that the mafia was out to get them, you might think that something was wrong but it was probably their overactive imagination. Why? Organized crime surely exists in this country and many others, just ask the FBI.
Hitler told us he wanted to rule the world and get of the Jews. But we didn’t believe him. No that was crazy talk, he really couldn’t have meant that. The president of Iran wants us to imagine a world without Israel or the US. But that’s just crazy talk right?
Read Ahmadinejad's Speech from the World Without Zionism conference.
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Over the last few months there have been four key factors that I think may lead to some serious problems and that relate to the end times. What I'm about to write about is not a prediction or prophecy of any kind, just four things I think should be watched carefully. I wasn't originally sure what exactly would happen with these four issues. I'm not even sure exactly what will happen now but I have an idea of what I think may happen. If these things do happen the future could be very difficult.
1) Iran. Iran is the most obvious and has been all over the news but I didn't know how this would play out. I think the United States or Israel probably need to bomb Iran's nuclear facilities to stop them from developing a nuclear bomb. Financial and all other sanctions seem to have done little to the political will of Iran to keep enriching uranium. Enrichment of uranium can play a key role in developing a nuclear bomb. However bad the repercussions would be for the US or Israel for bombing Iran, letting Iran get a nuclear bomb will likely be a much worse situation. Iran does not have to nuke Israel for the worst to be realized, though they may try. If Iran gets nuclear weapons they will start proliferation in the middle east and really make that area a powder keg. In fact we have seen Saudi Arabia, Syria and other nations now become interested in nuclear capabilities also. Also Iran will be able to control the Middle East more than it already does just because it has a nuclear bomb to back them up. Iran will start telling the US what to do and we will start listening carefully and complying with their wishes. What I think will most likely happen is that neither the US or Israel will bomb Iran anytime soon. I think not bombing them will either bring about some of these very serious problems or we will bomb Iran but very late ion the game and Iran will have already built a nuclear weapon to use or to pass on to radical Islamist terrorists.
2) Iraq. My worst fear for Iraq is that they will start to become very independent. This doesn't sound bad, but what I mean is that they will become a very independent Muslim Sharia state that is not a friend of the United States. With the current headlines stating that Iraq wants a timetable for the US to leave it looks like things may be heading this way.
3) The Israel peace process. I think everyone knows that if Israel signs some kind of peace treaty with the Palestinians for seven years that this will have huge implications and likely fulfill a major prophecy. At the moment it looks like the Israel PM will do anything to get peace with the Palestinians including ignoring serious problems with the process.
4) Obama. I know many people do not think the US has anything to do with end time prophecy. However I think the US and other players can have a direct role on things that will be part of prophecy even if the US itself is not listed in prophecy. I think it is very likely that Barrack Obama will become the next president and that he will make some disastrous decisions and mistakes in foreign policy that will have serious and long-term repercussions.
I could be wrong and everything I think might happen will not happen at all. I hope I am wrong, but I do not believe so. Time will tell.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Saturday, March 15, 2008
Now the question left is will Israel or the United States attack Iran? We will obviously not attack Iran with ground troops because of the many problems with such an attack so lets look at the feasibility of bombing Iran. Regardless of the headlines of the NIE not being true and even some authors trying to back out of it Bush seems to have lost the political capital that he believes he needs to do anything. Israel has said in the past that we will act alone if necessary. Recently Israel has been saying that Iran is not just an Israeli problem. This is true but it seems they are really pushing hard to get others to help them strike Iran. The Israeli president Shimon Perez (who has little authority) has said that Israel will not act alone, but when asked if Prime Minister Olmert was in agreement with that statement he avoided the question. I think this means that Bush has made it clear that we will probably not strike Iran unless they commit a very major provocation, and that Israel is trying to change his mind. So I think the U.S. attacking Iran is not likely.Israel has proven that they will defend themselves and that will attack first if they thing they must. The biggest question is, does Israel have the capability to strike Iran? It is known that we have sold them bunker busting missiles that will be needed to attack the underground nuclear facilities. The U.S. has proven that it will provide Israel with some means of missile defense either by selling them to them or by having our warships with the aegis class missile defense system nearby. This would be needed when Iran, Hezbollah or others respond to the attack with missiles. The biggest question though is, can Israel manage such a long-range mission? Israel’s jets can not fly the distance to Iran and back without refueling. A paper written by a two doctoral candidates at MIT entitled “Osirak Redux” details all of the technical details on the feasibility of an Israeli attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Their conclusion was that it could be reasonably done. Israel can do it it’s just a matter of do they think it’s necessary? I think they do, but on the other hand I would not be surprised if they don’t and Iran becomes a nuclear nation. If this happens Iran may not announce it but it will be known.
Monday, March 3, 2008
In October 2005 Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmdinejad said Israel must be wiped off the map. Now some have said this is a bad translation but he said this at “The World Without Zionism” conference. In January of 2007 Ahmadinejad said that the United States and Israel will soon come to an end. And in the past few days the Iranian president called Israel a dirty microbe.
In February of this year the commander of Iran’s revolutionary guards predicted that Hezbollah would soon destroy Israel by radiation therapy. Syria recently said they would have revenge for the assassination of Imad Mughniyah for which they believe Israel was responsble.
Iran continues to enrich uranium for a nuclear program which it says is for peacefull purposes even though they have no apparent need for nuclear energy. It makes me wonder what they mean when they say peacefull purposes. Iran has said they expect an attack on their nuclear facilities. And Israel and the US have said they would not allow Iran to go nuclear. Israel has a history of backing up their word when it comes to this. Israel has attacked nuclear facilities in Iraq and Syria. Iran said if there nuclear facilities were attacked they would respond more decisively.
These are just pieces of the puzzle but at face value it appears that we can expect a larger war with Israel and her allies against Iran and her allies and proxies
Monday, February 25, 2008
Iran keeps saying and doing things that will make Israel feel as if it must strike first. This is what Iran wants, believe it or not. Then Iran will prove that they have no nuclear weapons (or try really hard to prove this) and build a force to hit back against Israel. They will lead with the argument that Israel attacked them with no valid reason. They will say surely Israel knew it didn't have these weapons and attacked anyway. This may convince other Arab nations in the region that they need to work to eliminate Israel in all out war. This would fulfill what they are saying now that "Israel will be destroyed in the next war." I think they could be trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy.
This may not be the exact scenario or it may not be the case at all, but you have to wonder why Iran keeps making outrageous statements about Israel. I think Hitler made the same type of statements and no one believed he would do anything to support his views. We need to be careful we don't allow Ahmadinejad to do the same thing. But we also need to be careful not to rush in because Iran today is not Germany in the 1930's. Iran's president does not run the country but Ayatollah Khomeini has final say on everything. I really hope the United States and Israel has the intelligence to discern what Iran is really planning. Either way this is a very dangerous game that Iran is engaged in and I don’t think that it will just go away.
Sunday, February 24, 2008
If you do a search on the topic you will find people somewhat jokingly referring to obama as the Antichrist or people defending him and saying that those who say such things are right wing nuts. It's a question worth considering for a moment. While I don't believe Obama is THE Antichrist, he may be one in a way. Besides the Antichrist who will come there are many smaller forms and Jesus said the spirit of Antichrist was already at work.
The thing that should scare you is how quickly this media creation came to prominence and suddenly so many are following his good sounding but empty message of hope. Many are looking for some kind of change and what I really think is that they are looking for peace both internationally and personally. Barack Obama can not bring peace on either of these fronts but the Antichrist will be one who comes promising peace.
Mostly Obama is a media creation who touts the same liberal ideas as other democrats, if not more so. But the difference is, he's good looking, a good speaker and he avoids talking about his actual opinions on issues. I hate to say it but because he is black that plays a part into why people follow him too. While there are just as many good looking nice sounding black men as there are white men, for reasons that I won't go into here, they are not as often portrayed in the media as much and definitely not in politics. So Obama fits the role of what the democrats wanted and now he's a superstar.
Is it now so hard to imagine a charismatic leader who speaks out of both sides of his mouth, promising everything to everyone, coming to power nationally or internationally? I think the time is ripe for the Antichrist to come to power and when he does people will scoff at the idea of that person being the Antichrist, just as they scoff at the idea of Mr. Obama being the Antichrist. Barack Obama may not be the Antichrist but his campaign for president should be a wake up call of the Antichrist who is to come.