Saturday, March 28, 2015

Birth Pains And Genesis 12:3





We are definitely going through another birth pain. Right now there is so many pertinent news stories it is hard to keep up, which is always a sign if you follow these stories on a daily basis. In fact with almost every update there are numerous stories of interest that don't get posted in order to maintain the central message of that day, or to just not overwhelm the reader. The pace seems to have picked up as well as current events continue to align with biblical prophecy. Joel Rosenberg has an interesting and timely update which involves the U.S. treatment of Israel and the realization of Genesis 12:







Once, it would have been almost preposterous even to ask such a question. Today, however, it feels like it’s a matter of “when,” not “if” Mr. Obama will formally abandon American support for the Jewish State. And the situation is rapidly going from bad to worse.


Readers of this blog may recall that I posted this column on January 14, 2015: “Will President Obama abandon or fully turn against Israel in last two years in office, amidst ISIS & Iran threats? Exclusive poll results.” According an exclusive poll I commissioned late last year, a remarkable 47.4% of Americans fear the President will turn against Israel soon given that he won’t ever face the voters again. I suspect the number would be much higher today


As I traveled through the U.S. in January and February on The Third Target book tour speaking to Christian audiences and meeting with Evangelical leaders, I found many who are becoming deeply concerned that an historic and disastrous break is coming. Speaking at the National Religious Broadcasters Convention recently, I raised this question: “What if America is not simply entering a season of strained relations with Israel, but we are heading towards total American abandonment of the Jewish State?” 


For an American President, or Congress, or the American people to turn against Israel and the Jewish people would be more than bad policy or unfortunate politics. According to Bible prophecy, such moves would pose an existential threat to the future of the United States.



  • In Genesis 12:1-3, the Lord God vows that He will bless those who bless Israel and the Jewish people, and curse those who curse them.
  • In Joel 3:2, the Lord God warns that He will bring into judgment “all the nations” who “divide My land,” the Land of Israel.
  • In Ezekiel 38-39, the Lord God warns that a group of nations led by Russia (Magog) and Iran (Persia) will form an alliance and attack Israel in the “last days,” andthat no nation will come to Israel’s defense — indeed, Israel will be abandoned by all of its friends and allies when this terrible moment occurs.
  • What’s more, in Zechariah 12:2-3, the Lord God warns that the nations will become intoxicated and start “reeling” with the desire to conquer and control Jerusalem and that “it will come about in that day that I will make Jerusalem a heavy stone for all the peoples; all who lift it will be severely injured. And all the nations of the earth will be gathered against it.”
  • In Zechariah 14:1-2, the Lord God warns that “a day is coming” when “I will gather all the nations against Jerusalem to battle” and “then the Lord will go forth and fight against those nations.”
  • Also in Revelation 16, the Lord God warns that all nations will not simply abandon Israel but will eventually actively turn violent towards Israel and attack Israel and the Jewish people in the End of Days (the Battle of Har Meggido, the Mountain of Meggido, also known as the Battle of Armageddon).

As noted at the NRB Convention, “the Bible teaches us that all nations will turn against Israel in the last days — and all nations will face judgment for it — but woe into us if it happens on our watch.”
Have we come to that fateful moment? Not quite yet, but we are getting dangerously close. Even though 70% of Americans see Israel favorably and support Israel, we are watching the President:

  • negotiate an incredibly dangerous nuclear deal with Iran
  • refuse to share the precise details of this deal with Israel, America’s most faithful and trusted ally in the region
  • treat the Israeli Prime Minister nearly as persona non grata
  • send the VP and Secretary of State out of country to avoid seeing the Prime Minister
  • send his political strategists and operatives to defeat the Prime Minister and his party in Israel’s recent elections
  • seem to threaten revenge because the PM won reelection
  • threaten to abandon Israel at the UN and allow anti-Israel resolutions to pass without an American veto
  • threaten to force Israel to divide Jerusalem and roll back to her pre-1967 borders or face severe international consequences
  • and now declassify details of Israel’s top secret nuclear program in what is being described as an “unprecedented move”

This is the most dangerous moment in the 67-year history of the U.S.-Israel relationship. What do the next two years hold? I cannot say for sure. I’m praying for the President and his top advisors to back off, turn from this dangerous path and find common ground with Israel, despite policy and personality differences. The Bible has many stories of the God of Israel changing the hearts of lost or confused or proud or rebellious leaders, including leaders of Israel. Will you join me in praying for healing in this relationship between the President and the leaders and people of Israel?
But this much I know: on top of all America’s national challenges and sins, including 58 million abortions, we dare not also abandon or turn against Israel and the Jewish people. If we do, we will seal our fate and face the judgment of God.




As Iran hailed “massive progress” toward a deal on its nuclear program, an Israeli official described the terms of the looming agreement as “incomprehensibly” bad and rejected the Obama administration’s contention that it would keep the regime a year away from accumulating enough fissile material for a bomb.
Estimating that a framework deal would indeed be signed soon, and that a full agreement would follow in June, the official lamented the US-led negotiators’ apparent readiness to remove sanctions without Iran being required to halt its global terrorist activities, and listed a host of areas in which Tehran was working against American, Israeli and moderate Arab interests without being made to pay a price.
His comments underlined immense Israeli opposition to the emerging deal that saw Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu lobby against it in Congress earlier this month to the abiding anger of the Obama Administration. Charged with forming a new government on Wednesday after winning the March 17 elections, Netanyahu vowed to patch up ties with the US, but insisted Israel would do everything to thwart the emerging Iranian nuclear deal, which he said was “an agreement that endangers us, our neighbors and the world.”
Speaking to the Times of Israel, the Israeli official, who insisted on anonymity, protested that “Iran will retain core capabilities,” under the emerging accord. While the Obama Administration “claims that the Iranians will remain a year away from enough fissile material for a bomb,” he added, “we don’t agree with this determination. It will be less time.”
The official stressed, however, that Israel’s opposition and dismay related to the entire nature of the international negotiation and engagement with the regime in Tehran. “The more important question is, why allow them to be in this situation at all (with core nuclear capabilities intact)?” he asked. “The Iranians are not being required to reveal their secret military projects, their missile stocks are not being discussed, and nor is the terrorism they initiate.”

“Has anyone wondered why the Iranians need centrifuges at all?” the official demanded. “Or why they are not being ordered to stop their support for Islamic Jihad in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon?”
“So yes,” he added, “for Israel, this is a bad deal.. The deal is bad because of its readiness to remove sanctions without any American demand from Iran to stop the terror. I estimate that we will have a framework deal soon, and after that a full agreement in June. This is incomprehensible.”
The official noted that “Iran is working today against American-Arab-Israeli interests without paying a price… They are in control in Baghdad, Beirut, Sana’a and Damascus. They toppled a pro-American ruler in Yemen, and are engaged in battles against Sunnis in Tikrit.”
Despite all this, the Israeli official protested, “the White House sees them as a solution and not as a problem. The administration’s weakness is broadcast across the entire region.



US Secretary of State John Kerry telephoned Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Thursday and again on Friday to update him on progress in negotiations with Iran on its nuclear program, as an Israeli official castigated the emerging deal as “incomprehensibly” bad.
According to an unnamed senior American official quoted by Haaretz Friday night, the secretary’s calls to Netanyahu came amid indications that the negotiations in Lausanne, Switzerland, are making progress and that an agreement could be finalized by Sunday.



President Obama is "blowing up our alliances to secure a deal that paves Iran’s way to a bomb,"according to European sources close to the negotiations, and as Washington Free Beacon reportsefforts by the Obama administration to stem criticism of its diplomacy with Iran have included threats to nations involved in the talks, including U.S. allies. France has borne the brunt of Obama's wrath as one source in Europe close to the ongoing diplomacy said the US has begun to adopt a “harsh” stance toward its allies in Paris because "the clarifications expose just how weak the Americans’ deal is shaping up to be."


A series of conversations between top American and French officials, including between President Obama and French President Francois Hollande, have seen Americans engage in behavior described as bullying by sources who spoke to the Washington Free Beacon.

The disagreement over France’s cautious position in regard to Iran threatens to erode U.S. relations with Paris, sources said.

Tension between Washington and Paris comes amid frustration by other U.S. allies, such as Saudi Arabia and Israel. The White House responded to this criticism by engaging in public campaigns analysts worry will endanger American interests.

Western policy analysts who spoke to the Free Beacon, including some with close ties to the French political establishment, were dismayed over what they saw as the White House’s willingness to sacrifice its relationship with Paris as talks with Iran reach their final stages.

A recent phone call between Obama and Hollande was reported as tense as the leaders disagreed over the White House’s accommodation of Iranian red lines.

...
“The French want a deal, but they see no rush and repeat that Iranians need a deal more than we do, and that we shouldn’t fix artificial deadlines that put more pressure on us than Iran.”

One source in Europe close to the ongoing diplomacy said the United States has begun to adopt a “harsh” stance toward its allies in Paris.

“There have been very harsh expressions of displeasure by the Americans toward French officials for raising substantive concerns about key elements of what the White House and State Department negotiators are willing to concede to Iran,” said the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “That is because the clarifications expose just how weak the Americans’ deal is shaping up to be.”


Another Western source familiar with the talks said the White House is sacrificing longstanding alliances to cement a contentious deal with Iran before Obama’s term in office ends.

“The President could be hammering out the best deal in the history of diplomacy, and it still wouldn’t be worth sacrificing our alliances with France, Israel, and Saudi Arabia—key partners in Europe, the eastern Mediterranean, and the Gulf,” the source said. “But he’s blowing up our alliances to secure a deal that paves Iran’s way to a bomb.”

A State Department spokesperson declined to comment on the issue.




As airstrikes in Yemen intensified on their second day Friday, Egypt and Saudi Arabia were considering an intervention on the ground, aimed at giving the president a secure foothold to return to the country, while backing Sunni tribesmen to fight against Shiite rebels and their allies, military officials said.
A likely entry point for troops from the Saudi-led Arab coalition was the southern port of Aden, the Yemeni and Egyptian military officials told The Associated Press. But that could be a tough prospect: The city is already a battleground, and on Friday forces loyal to the rebels’ top ally, former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, were advancing toward it.
The officials’ comments to the AP draw broad outlines for the likely strategy for the ambitious campaign launched Thursday, led by Saudi Arabia with a major role by its ally Egypt. The aim, they said, was to carve out enough room for President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi, who was forced to flee the country from Aden, to return. Longer-term, the campaign aims to wear down the Shiite rebels, known as Houthis, and Saleh’s forces, enough to reach a power-sharing accord. The officials spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss the plans.
Also Friday, Saudi and Egyptian warships deployed to Bab al-Mandab, the strategic strait off Yemen at the entrance of the Red Sea, Egyptian military officials said. The strait gives the only access to Egypt’s Suez Canal from the Arabian Sea and is a vital passage for shipping between Europe and Asia.
On his party website, Saleh proposed a ceasefire by the coalition, Hadi’s forces and the Houthis — without mentioning his own — and a return to UN-sponsored negotiations.
But all sides appeared to be moving to confrontation in the south. “We are used to long wars,” Houthi spokesman Mohammed Abdel-Salam said. “The situation in the south is much better than before … There is full readiness.”



The Saudi ambassador to the United States would not rule out the possibility of the Saudis creating their own nuclear bomb to counterbalance a nuclear-armed Iran in an interview with CNN’s Wolf Blitzer on Thursday.
“This is not something we would discuss publicly,” Ambassador Adel Al-Jubeir said on “The Situation Room.” Later, when pressed, he said, “This is not something that I can comment on, nor would I comment on.”
“But the kingdom of Saudi Arabia will take whatever measures are necessary in order to protect its security,” he added. “There are two things over which we do not negotiate: Our faith and our security.”









No comments: