Friday, August 27, 2010

Confirming the covenant?

Looking at the news today, it's hard not to see the beginning of the process of "confirming" the covenant in the Middle East.

"US wants agreement now, peace later"

This article contains a few gems:

White House document reveals American preparations for Israeli-Palestinian talks: President Obama to visit Jerusalem and Ramallah, call for painful concessions

Hmm....Painful? Who will these concessions be painful for? Historically, there has been little-no painful concessions for the so-called "Palestinians" - in fact I can't think of any concessions that have been required for the Palestinians, as we have watched the Israeli borders shrink over the years. We'll see, but I am not holding out any hope that the Palestinians will be asked for ANY concessions. Why? Because they have never been asked to give any meaningful concessions. That is Israel's job. The article continues...

The Obama administration plans to present Israel and the Palestinian Authority with a new outline aimed at ending the Middle East conflict.

The Yedioth Ahronoth daily has learned that the Americans will pressure the parties to sign a framework agreement for a permanent settlement within one year, but that the agreement itself would be implemented within 10 years.

Hmmmm again. I wonder if we'll be seeing a 7-year plan produced for this "implementation" period? Perhaps "confirming the covenant" would be another way to put this?

This time, Obama plans to get into the thick of things himself. Daniel Shapiro, the National Security Council's top Middle East expert, told the leaders of the American Jewish organizations that the president planned to visit Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the coming year.

According to the American plan, the Israeli and Palestinian negotiation teams would hold hectic talks in a bid to reach a framework agreement within a year. The intensive talks would be held in isolated sites, so as to allow the teams to calmly discuss the core issues of the permanent agreement: Jerusalem's future, the borders, the settlements and the refugees.

Now we may see a glimpse of the huge "concessions" which will be asked of the Palestinians.

If the talks reach a deadlock, American officials would intervene and attempt to bridge between the sides. In addition, the US would try to convince the Arab states to offer goodwill gestures to Israel and influence the Palestinians to compromise.

Ahhhhh. Thats it. The Palestinians may be asked to "offer goodwill gestures" to Israel.

Meanwhile while Israel will be asked to:

- Give up at least 1/2 and perhaps all of Jerusalem
- Give up the West Bank
- Divide their country with a "land bridge" between the West Bank and Gaza.
- Continue a "settlement freeze"

Yea, that's really balanced isn't it?

The framework agreement aimed at ending the conflict would be signed within a year. From that moment on, the agreement would be implemented gradually over a period of several years.

It will be fascinating to see if a 7-year time frame is mentioned. We shall see.

But there is more. The Palestinians are being asked for some vague symbolic gestures, while Israel would continue to give away massive amounts of their land - but thats not enough. Now we see further Palestinian "demands", and guess what these involve? Anyone?

The Palestinians, on their part, have already clarified their demands ahead of the direct talks, the first one being the establishment of a Palestinian state with east Jerusalem as its capital

There is is again. JERUSALEM.

As we watch this process, beginning on September 2, just watch for these issues:

- Jerusalem and just how much of Jerusalem Israel will be asked to give up
- Length of the "peace plan"
- ANY real concessions that will be required by the Palestinians, as part of the process (Hint: little to nothing)
- How much land Israel will have to give up
- Genesis 12:3

Every time in the past that serious "peace talks" have progressed, major violence has broken out in the region - violence that has been instigated by Hamas and Hezbollah (as directed by Iran), because these groups have never sanctioned any kind of peace agreement. They only want one thing, and that is the complete destruction of Israel.

We will see how this all plays out, and it's a guarantee that the coming weeks will be fascinating to watch. At least for a prophecy watcher.


hartdawg said...

i doubt very seriously that this will be the covanant but i feel the need to say 2 things 1)pray for netanyahu and call others to pray (i`m praying these talks dont even take place somehow) and 2)prepare for a major disaster, hurricane, flood, twister or terrorist attack. (i`m praying God limits his judgement to the leaders cuz i dont have the means to prepare) Gods judgement will come so be ready and warn others.

Expected Imminently said...

Hello Scott

While visiting Alan Franklins site, I saw this news about the BBC that has me ‘spitting chips’. What an appalling excuse for journalism from a once prestigious company once lovingly known as ‘Auntie’. More like Anti these days.
Prime time BBC documentary on Jerusalem: An anatomy of bias and distortion

Scott said...

Hart - I actually agree with that, in fact I almost made a comment about it...Only the AC will confirm the covenant - but what we are seeing are two important things:

- The push for peace in the M-E is at an all time high. There is intense pressure from the Quartet and the ROW.

- Because of the above, we are seeing stage-setting. Preparations - the ground work is being laid IMO

- I think the basic agreements will be laid out for the AC to later come and confirm.

Fir instance, we could see a deal put in place and even signed - but we know as soon as that happens violence ensues (and this could lead to Gog-MaGog).
It would be awaiting "confirmation", and I have always believed that the confirming involves peace-keeping forces which is the only way any covenant can be confirmed. But thats just my theory which can't be proven scripturally - FWIW

Scott said...

Is the BBC that lib these days?

hartdawg said...

good point, the drawback i see however is that i dont see isreal being any smaller. on the contrary, i agree with bill salus that during Gog/magog isreal is enlarged. but still...the treaty could involve "peace keeping" troops. time will tell.

hartdawg said...

i dont know whether you should comment on preparing for judgement, but to call people to pray for netanyahu would be appropiate and even commanded by scriptures.

Scott said...


Agreed. Also - I don't see any of the covenants intended to divide Israel as happening either - I think violence will ensue first.

Also believe that Gog-MaGog leads into the peace deal, after epic destruction of the surrounding Islamic elements - in this case, Israel will be in a position of incredible strength (something the AC will capitalize on)

hartdawg said...

what i`m gonna say is agreed by alot of scholars that its an almost obvious statement but here it is: i think the covanent be be tied very closely to Gog/magog. after that battle the main superpowers will be isreal and roman empire (e.u.?) the pact seems to come onthe heels of this battle so there`s some connection. perhaps the pact is over who takes over the power vacuum? maybe "rome" gets the nations (consolidated into 10) and isreal gets the "inner moslem ring" and the temple???

hartdawg said...

all i know (think) is this pact appears to be connected to Gog/magog, europe somehow is reshaped into 10 nations and isreal gets a temple.