by Rev. Fred Klett, Director of CHAIM Ministry to the Jewish People www.chaim.org

Can one be Covenantal in theology, that is, believe the New Covenant community is spiritually Israel and as such is already experiencing in this age the promises of the prophets to Israel, and yet still maintain in some way ethnic Israel is unique? Let us consider how the term "Israel" is used.

The word is used in many ways in the Scriptures, yet all the uses are interrelated. It means "He who has struggled with God". Ultimately, God is the one who has the right to answer the question as to who or what is Israel. He determines who or what is Israel, not man or men's traditions. Here is a provisional list of some of the uses of the word in the Scriptures.

1. The man Jacob Genesis 32:28

2. Jacob's Physical Descendants Gen. 46:8; 48:28; Ex.1:7 (The Jewish People)

3. All Old Testament Believers Ex. 12:38,47-49; Dt. 23:8 (Both Jews and Gentiles) Nu. 15:13-16; Ruth 1:16

4. The Land Josh. 11:16; Jud.19:29 1 Sam. 13:19; Mt.2:20

5. The Northern Kingdom Is.7:1, 9:12

6. Citizens of the North Is. 9:14; Jer. 3:11,17

7. The Spiritual Remnant among the Jewish People. Rom. 9:6, 11:26.

8. All Who are in the Messiah Eph. 2:11-19; Rom. 4:12-17; (A continuation of #3, that Rom. 9:6,7,8,24-26 is, all believers, the Church) Rom. 11:17; Gal.3:29, 4:21-31

9. Modern Ethnic or Political Israel Is. 19:24-25; Acts 1:6 (maybe?) (Jews and Gentiles!?) (Israel is certainly one of the nations of Rev. 7:9!)

10. The Messiah Himself Mt. 2:15; Is. 49:3-6; Gal. 3:16

There are then a number of possible Scriptural meanings of "Israel". But, is there a most ultimate meaning of the word Israel? There is -- it is the Messiah Himself (#10), for all the promises of God have their `yes' in Him (2 Cor. 1:20). Jesus is the ultimate seed of Abraham, (Gal. 3:16)

And if Messiah has the supreme right to the name Israel, then all who are in Him also have that right, since we are joint heirs with Him (Rom. 8:17) Indeed this is what Jesus gained in Redemption, "that the blessings given to Abraham might come to the Gentiles" (see Gal. 3:14). God can raise up sons of Abraham from the stones, if He wills. (Mt. 3:9) What else can Ephesians 2:11-22 mean? We are clearly told that Gentile Christians formerly had been excluded from citizenship in Israel (v. 12) and now, through the Messiah, are now fellow citizens (v. 19). If Gentile believers are no longer excluded from citizenship in Israel, that means they are included in citizenship in Israel. It's that simple. How can anyone deny that this is the clear and obvious meaning of the text?

But what of the Jewish people? If all who are in Jesus Christ are spiritually Israel, does that mean God has replaced the Jewish people with the Church and is finished with them? Of course not! There can be several meanings to the word "Israel" which can exist simultaneously, and there can be some overlapping of these meanings. The Church has a right to one of the connotations of the word "Israel". The Church has become an enlargement of and progression from "All Old Testament Believers" (#3), and it includes now, as it even included then, all who share in Israel's faith, both Jews and Gentiles. In essence then, the Church doesn't replace Israel, rather it expands Israel, that is the Believing Israel of #3 above.

Remember, Old Testament Israel (#3) included the physical descendants of Jacob (#2), but went beyond it and also included Gentiles (such as Ruth) who were willing to join themselves to the people of God. Today Gentiles who believe in Jesus, the Jewish Messiah, have in essence converted to New Testament Judaism. This is what Christianity really is, New Covenant Judaism. It is the same today, in a sense, as it was in the Old Testament. All who believe become, in a sense, part of Israel, the Holy Congregation of the people of God. Both Jews and Gentiles relate to God on the basis of the same New Covenant. (The denial of this truth leads to one of two errors: one which seeks to bind again Jewish believers to the particulars of Mosaic Law, rather than to the moral principals of the Law which bind all believers today and the second which sees a separate way of salvation for the Jewish people.)
We must see the unity of the purpose of God, to glorify the Son. I contend that the Jewish people, the Messianic Jewish believers, the Church, and perhaps even the Modern state of Israel too, (numbers 2,7,8, and 9) will all be brought together under the Messiah, together with the whole earth (Col. 1:20; 1 Cor. 15:24-28; Eph. 1:22; Isaiah 11:9). Until the Jewish people return to Messiah, there is yet a certain incompleteness to Spiritual Israel (#8), the Church. Therefore the Jewish people should be of great importance to the Church, as indeed should be the whole missionary enterprise. The mission of the church must always include the preaching of the gospel to the Jewish people, indeed it begins there.

Then what of the promises to the Jewish people? Does the Church take over the promises in such a way as to exclude the Jewish people from them? No! The promises of God are still valid for the Jewish people, yet only experienced by those who believe. The coming of the Messiah and the concomitant salvation he brings can only be received by faith. This is the most ultimate and most sacred Hope of Israel! Unbelief and rejection of God and His Covenant means forfeiture of the promises which are part of the Covenant. This was the case in the Old Testament, and this is still the same today. God does not change. The promises have been expanded to include the all in the Church, even Gentiles, but this does not mean they are no longer for the Jewish people. But the Jewish people must come to Messiah Jesus to have access to them, they must rejoin the faith community of Spiritual Israel.

What of the promise of the Land? This is a sticky issue. The land promises are also expanded to include all believers. Jesus promised that "the meek shall inherit the earth" (compare Ps. 37:11), and in doing so he expanded the promise that God's people would inherit the land of Israel. Paul says that the promise to Abraham should be understood as to inheriting "the earth" (Romans 4:13). Does this contradict the idea that the Jewish people should specifically inherit the land of Israel? God has changed the order of things and brought the fulfilment of the promises to Israel in a glorious expanded way. The Temple in Jerusalem is no longer the center of the worship of the true God in all the earth. And therefore Israel as a geopolitical-political entity is no longer the center of God's kingdom and blessing (John 4:21-24). Does this mean the Jewish people no longer have a right to the land? Does this aspect of the Abrahamic Covenant cease to be? The New Covenant promise is an expansion and fulfilment of the land promise, not a negation of it. Yet Israel is in the land in a state of unbelief, and belief and obedience were always the conditions for dwelling in the land. How can it be that the modern state of Israel exists, then? Perhaps God in His mercy has brought the people back in order to preserve them and also as a means of facilitating the hope of Romans 9-11 that the Jewish people should return to faith. The modern state of Israel can then be seen as part of the providential preservation of the Jewish people working toward the fulfillment of Romans 11. Certainly if the Jewish people are to be restored to faith as a people, one could argue that as a people they also need to dwell in a specific location.2 There are moral, historical, and political reasons arguing for Israel's right to exist, yet the Jewish people can in no way claim, while still in unbelief, any Biblical right to possession of the ancient borders. When they come to faith as a people again, so will the surrounding Gentile nations, and I believe in Messiah's peace all the current border issues can finally be settled. But most basically, the land promise is realized in the final state when all believers inherit the earth. If one fails to understand that the land Old Covenant land promises were the down payment on a renewed Earth, the restoration of Paradise lost, one is missing the most important meaning and purpose of the promised land. The ultimate experience of this promise certainly includes physical children of Abraham who believe, along with all other believers!

Is ethnic Israel still properly called Israel? Certainly no one would deny the name Israel to Jewish believers in Jesus. But what about those Jews who don't believe? Can they still truly be called Israel? Paul used this appellation of the Jewish people, even in unbelief. Romans 11:25 states, "Israel has experienced a hardening in part...", clearly using the name "Israel" to describe Jewish non-believers. Could it be that the continued existence of the Jewish people in spite of centuries of oppression and attempts at annihilation is a witness to God's faithfulness, sovereignty, and mercy?

We need to avoid errors in two extremes. Some would deny Gentile New Covenant believers the right given to Gentile Old Covenant believers (!), that is, the right to the name "Israel" and full and absolutely equal status as part of the people of God. These have claimed that the Church and Israel are two separate peoples of God and have nothing to do with each other. According to this view, God has two separate peoples and two separate plans.3 This view essentially denies full glory to Jesus and the gospel. In effect it says the salvation which has come in the Messiah is only a plan, not the plan and all who believe are not the recipients of all blessings, just some! (But see 1 Peter 1:3-12; Eph. 1:3!) Those of the other extreme have claimed that God is finished with the Jewish people as a people (though not as individuals) and say the Church has replaced the Jewish people and become the only true Israel.4  In such a theology the Jewish people themselves are denied any use of the name Israel!

Neither extreme is correct. The first extreme fails to see the centrality of Jesus in the meaning of Israel and the second fails to see the continuation of the Jewish people in the purpose of God as a people who are still heirs to the Covenants as taught by Romans 9:4 and 11:28-29. Good theology must be Biblical rather than a polemical overreaction to error.

We need to affirm the Biblical position that all believers are grafted in to the tree of Israel, whether they are natural or "wild" branches, and that God can, and will, graft in once again the natural branches, the Jewish people (Romans 11:11-24). Gentiles need to recognize that they have been grafted into Israel, and therefore have a certain kinship with the Jewish people. Jews are no less Jewish for believing in Jesus. Jews do not become Gentiles when they come to Jesus (quite the opposite!), rather all who trust in the Jewish Messiah and serve Him are part of that Spiritual tree rooted in the Patriarchs.

How do these "Israels" relate to one another? First, recognize there is a fundamental unity in the purpose of God. Spiritual Israel is the congregation of witness, the "Holy Priesthood and Royal Nation" (Compare Ex. 19:6 and 1 Peter 2:9) which brings the light of God and blessing of Abraham to the world. Those who follow the Messiah are part of this community, made up of both Jews and Gentiles. We must recognize that all glory goes to God and that all creation serves Him. This means that whatever our understanding of Israel, it must have the Glory of God at heart. Secondly, as the Rabbis have said, "the world was created for the sake of Messiah". Therefore Israel, too, is for the sake of Messiah. In the Messiah are found all who trust in Him, both in the Old and New Covenants (numbers 3, 7, and 8). The Israel of "All Believers" will only be fully realized when the fullness of both Jewish and Gentile believers comes and ethnic Israel is restored to faith. In order for God to be glorified the Messiah must be exalted. In order for Messiah to be exalted, His Body, All Believers, the Church, is being blessed and is prospering. In order for the church to fully prosper, the Jewish people must be restored to faith and join in the missionary enterprise (Romans 11:12). In order for them to be restored, they must, of course, be preserved. I would argue that in order for the Jewish people to be preserved, the Nation of Israel needed to be created and needs to exist. We must stand for the continued existence of the state of Israel and for a just expression of that existence.5

The fate of ethnic Israel and Spiritual Israel, the Church, are bound up together. The church is to make Jewish evangelism a priority and must stand by the Jewish people for the glory of God. We must look with hope and expectation for the glorious day when the natural branches are grafted in and "all Israel will be saved." In that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and the place of his rest will be glorious (Isaiah 11:10).

Endnotes:

1 This is a provisional statement written as part of a process of theological development. It is tentative in nature and subject to further revision.

2 See John Owen's commentary on Hebrews, Volume 1, 443-455 (2nd edition, 1812).

3 This is the essence of the Dispensational teaching regarding Israel and the church.

4. I would accuse some of those in the Covenantal camp of this position, though they rarely put it quite this way. Older reformed theologians
are much more positive towards ethnic Israel because they were not reacting against the errors of dispensationalism mentioned above! See our section quoting Calvin, Hodge, Murray, Vos, etc.

5 An additional reason for Christians to be concerned for the Jewish people is that Christians have an ethical duty to uphold the cause of oppressed peoples (Amos 2:7). Historically, few have been so oppressed as Jesus' own ethnic group, the Jews. The Palestinian Arabs have also suffered injustices. They have been mistreated by their own Arab brothers and are not always treated fairly in Israel. They have also committed injustices themselves. The Messiah is the ultimate solution to this conflict.

40+%  of Jews world-wide are agnostic or atheist, and this is especially true among Russian emigres. Here in Philadelphia with a Russian-speaking population of about 70,000, at least 70% of Russian speakers are Jews. Years ago Communist Russia taught something called "Scientific Atheism" based on the presumption that atheism was the foundation for empirical science and that religious faith was simply superstition. If you wanted to get anywhere in Russian academia or be "upwardly mobile" in the Party or the Institute or the factories, you kept your religion to yourself. Many of these US emigres are still atheist/agnostic because they've never had a dialog with a Christian who knew what he was talking about. But even among Americans in general,  agnosticism and atheism are widespread.

There are MANY fine books written on how to share your faith with "A&A" people. But in case you don't have time for a book, here are some basic rebuttals condensed into a few talking points.

1) Reasoning with Agnostics: If they object to taking a blind "leap of faith" (as they think you've done!), then tell them they've already taken that leap by concluding that no conclusion can be reached about God. The point you should make with them?  Their view itself is a religious faith commitment.
 
2) They assume agnosticism is open minded. Challenge that assumption on the basis of Romans 1:18-23. Ask them: "Wouldn't you be more inclined to be biased against faith in an all-powerful Judge of deeds and thoughts who brings mankind to a Day of Judgment? Ask: "How can you be sure that you wouldn't be prejudiced (and not open-minded) against such a conclusion, and therefore avoid giving it due consideration?"
 
3) Show them John 3:19 and following verses. Even if they discount your use of the Bible, certain verses contain "cut-to-the-heart" timeless truths that even the unchurched can see. For example: "Light is come into the world, but men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."

4) Ask them if they are open-minded or narrow-minded. Agnostics/atheists believe they've arrived at their views because they're open-minded. They aren't, but what you're doing here is getting a commitment from them to keep an open mind. Ask: "Are you willing to change your mind if I could show you that belief in the biblical God is not only possible logically, but is in fact essential for a civilized society? (In other words, "Are you willing to change your mind if it can be shown that atheism/agnosticism doesn't make logical sense?)  
 
5) Apart from there being a God (i.e., an ultimate Law-Giver),  there is no basis for any appeal to  morality, truth or ethics. Why? Because if ours is a world and universe of random-chance (as "A&A" people believe) then how can we appeal to a transcendent, permanent moral order, or use terms like "justice vs. injustice" or "evil vs. good", etc.? For example ... why is what ISIS doing to it's victims called "evil". Why isn't it simply called "painful" ? 

6) Listen for their use of words like "good/evil", "right/wrong" in their argument, then challenge them on that by asking: "How can you appeal to transcendent, ultimate moral law without presupposing an ultimate, transcendent Law-giver? If there isn't one, then there's only three reasons for morality: a) tradition b) survival of the fittest c) personal preference. (Give examples of where each of these leads.)
 
7) What if they say to you: "The existence of evil upon the innocent proves there is no God!"?  Answer this way: "If you don't presuppose God to begin with, then stop using the word "evil", because you have no grounds for appealing to a ultimate moral order in your agnostic/atheistic universe of random-chance." 
 
8) So then, if there is a God, what sort of God would permit evil upon the innocent? (Only three choices:) a) He's righteous but not all-powerful to stop it; b) He's all-powerful to stop it, but not righteous enough to do so; c)He's both, but you're not able to understand how he can be both.

9)  Ask this: "Will you assume with me that Jesus was an innocent man, subjected to unjust evil? If so, then hat explanation did He give for the existence of evil?  Would you like to see from Scripture?"
 

 

​ 
Between 30,000 and 70,000  Christians, "prisoners of conscience", exist day after day in the most extensive system of concentration camps on earth. Except for the use of gas chambers and ovens, these camps are as murderous as anything the Nazis invented.
 
But why does it take the threat of nuclear war to get Christians in America to pray for the situation in North Korea? Let's suppose Donald Trump's diplomatic posturing; his "carrot-and-stick" strategy with Kim Jung Un actually works? Then what? Suppose relationships normalize between North Korea and America?  What does "normalize" mean, in this context?

If all it means to you is that the Korean dictator stops playing "chicken" with his warheads, but that his internal regime stays the same, then please question the genuineness of your faith. "Remember the prisoners as if chained with them  -- those who are mistreated -- since you yourselves are in the body [of Christ] also," says the Divine Writer of Hebrews. (13:30)
 
 This regime of Kim Jong Un's is like nothing this earth has ever seen. More than a Communist dictatorship, it is an Orwellian nightmare that aims for total mind control, complete with its own religious ideology, called "Juche". Juche means "self-reliance".  On the surface, Juche aims to separate the North Korean people from manipulation and oppression from the capitalist West, especially the United States, through a state-controlled orchestration of thought and behavior modification. Under Juche, faith in God or personal prayer to God is a treasonable act, punishable by imprisonment in a labor camp. Citizens are instructed to literally worship Kim Jong Un, his father and his grandfather, and to publicly and privately thank the Kims for providing them their food, their homes and their lives. This worship is enforced by mandatory "self-criticism" meeting that the entire population attends weekly. Here, they sing from hymnbooks containing 600 songs of praise glorifying the Kim family, those both present and deceased. In private homes Kim photos are uses as religious icons and prayers are offered to them. The enormous Kim statues placed throughout the country are used as idols. North Koreans bow down to them and through them, literally worship the eternal spirits of the current dictator's father and grandfather. Clearly, this is something more than the Communism of Marx, Lenin, Stalin or Mao.
 
In order to enforce this religious ideology, the Kim regime uses a social system called "Songbun" (meaning "origin" and  "part of the whole"). Songbun is a caste system of reward/punishment based upon a citizen's ancestry as well as his/her personal level of loyalty to Kim. The first level is "core", second level is "wavering", third level is "hostile". All those suspected of being Christians are classed as "hostile", and they're only permitted $3-$5 per month. In other words, unless they steal or beg or barter illegally, they will starve to death eventually. If it can be proven that they have practiced their religion, even in private, they go to prison. 
 
Juche is also enforced by the civil and political police at every level of public life. The police employ a massive spy network of private citizens; ideally, members of one's own family, to report private acts of disloyalty of parents, spouses, and children. NOT to report an act of suspected disloyalty is itself an act of disloyalty. Consequently, the family structure and its circle of trust is compromised by the State. 
 
The third way Juche is enforced is by the labor camps. Loosely based upon Stalin's "gulag" system, prisoners are given massive workloads, starvation, isolation and daily sessions of sadistic physical torture by prison guards. This is designed to terrify the "hostile" and "wavering" populace outside the prison walls into obedience. 
 
Regardless of whether Mr. Trump can bring Kim Jong Il to heel through his carrot-and-stick letter-writing diplomacy, Christians in America need to be mindful, prayerful and aware of their brothers and sisters who live in this virtual hell-on-earth. 
 
Five Facts Western Christians Should Know About North Koreans
 
 
1) A Hard-Core Remnant Somehow Survives
 
Seoul USA https://issuu.com/seoulusa  , a non-profit NGO (non-governmental organization) in South Korea did an interview with a former North Korean couple, who must remain anonymous as  "Mr. and Mrs. Bae" on the condition of North Korean Christians in-country. What the Baes told Seoul USA is that despite the fact that most practicing Christians will eventually end up in concentration camps or prisons due to the regime's spy network, a small remnant continues to exist, and though this remnant is very small, the regime has been unable to stamp it out. According to the July 2017's edition of Persecution (International Christian Concern's monthly magazine: https://www.persecution.org)  this fact, along with the testimony of recent high-level defectors escaping the West, is a major frustration to Kim Jong Un, who, despite his recent actions and posturing, is surprisingly concerned about his nation's public image internationally.
 
[These Are the Generations, Mr. & Mrs. Bae, as told to Rev. Eric Foley, W. Publishing, Colorado Springs, CO, 2012]
 
 
2)  Scripture Knowledge is Limited, But They Cherish What They Know

Bibles are illegal in North Korea. Most North Koreans have never seen a Bible. If they've seen any Christian literature at all, it's been a tract or a pamphlet. Seminaries are illegal. House gatherings are illegal. Churches (except for a few "show" churches for Western visitors) are illegal. And the Internet is closely monitored by the political police. Unless a Korean has been to China and visited a church there (and few have), they have no experiential knowledge of church life. Consequently, their knowledge of what the Bible contains is so incomplete that it's a miracle there are Christians there at all! And yet, there are. But according to Mr. and Mrs. Bae (These Are the Generations) what little they do know is immensely cherished. The Baes' interviewer, Rev. Eric Foley, compares this stewardship to that of someone clutching a few pieces of a puzzle. He writes "What amazes and humbles me is the degree to which they have exhibited such costly and complete faithfulness despite having far fewer puzzle pieces that I, not to mention no picture-box lid by which to organize them. We [Christians in the West], may have all the puzzle pieces and even the puzzle box lid  but they, tightly clutching at time only a single-folded, faded puzzle piece inside a trembling yet reverently closed fist, know and worship and trust the Puzzle Maker in ways I have yet to, with my comparative wealth and power and freedom ..."
 
[These Are the Generations, p.14]
 
3)  Their Concept of Divine Guidance Pushes the Limits of Cessationism
 
In These Are the Generations, Mr. Bae [an alias name] gives the account of his devout Christian grandfather, Sung Do, being instructed by God to witness to hostile Japanese soldiers in Korea shortly before WWII (and before the rise of Communism there). His grandfather heard a loud and audible voice: " 'Sung Do! Sung Do! the voice thundered. 'The Japanese will not harm you. Get close to them.' " [p. 17] The soldiers came with sledgehammers and axes to destroy a Korean church. Sung Do calmly blocked the doorway with his body and called to them not to destroy the church. As he stood in their way, he explained to them the gospel and told them to repent. They were so stunned that they left him alone and did not destroy his church. And some of the Japanese became Christians that day. This kind of guidance flies in the face of how cessationism has typically been understood. 
 
"Cessationism" is the doctrine that spiritual gifts such as speaking in tongues, prophesy, and the gift of miraculous healing ceased with the end of the Apostolic Age and the completion of  Scripture's canon. The Holy Spirit then withdrew not only his miraculous gifts, but withdrew His direct guidance in the lives of Christians other than and outside of the written word of God. Pentecostals, Charismatics and "Word of Faith" people (Kenneth Copeland, Benny Hinn, etc., etc.) do not believe this. Neither do Christians in so-called "Apostolic" churches who teach that God continues to anoint modern-day apostles with an apostles' authority and infallible divine guidance; a kind of  Protestant version of the doctrine of papal infallibility.. Conservative, Reformed Presbyterians and Reformed Baptists are cessationists. The problem is, however, what happens when Christians under severe persecution have no Bible and no Biblical training. Does God guide them directly and supernaturally? According to Mr. and Mrs. Bae (aliases) and other North Korean Christians who've given testimony of such guidance, the answer is yes. This flies in the face of what most (but not all!) cessationists believe about divine guidance today.  
 
Prof. John Murray (deceased), a founder of Westminster Theological Seminary, gave a "flagship" statement of the hard-line cessationist view on divine guidance. His is a critique of those who think they are cessationists, but in his mind they are not. He writes:  "It is possible, however, to admit the validity and necessity of these foregoing premises and yet adopt a position which in reality undermines and defeats their implications. That is to say, we may still fall into the error of thinking that while the Holy Spirit does not provide us with special revelations in the form of words or visions or dreams, yet He may and does provide us with some direct feeling or impression or conviction which we are to regard as the Holy Spirit's intimation to us of what His mind and will is in a particular situation.  [ I maintain ] that this view  of the Holy Spirit's guidance amounts, in effect, to the same thing as to believe that the Holy Spirit gives special revelation." [Guidance of the Holy Spirit, John Murray, Chapter 26, p. 187] 
 
 But another Westminster Seminary cessationist, Prof. Vern Poythress, believes that divine guidance may indeed happen in just this way from time to time, as long as such guidance does not add new teaching to the completed Word of God and that it not be regarded as infallible or with apostolic authority. He gives examples of such in the lives of the Protestant Reformers in his "Modern Spiritual Gifts As Analogous to Apostolic Gifts: Affirming Extraordinary Works of the Spirit Within Cessationist Theology, The Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society, 39/1 (1996) 
 
According to Mr. and Mrs. Bae (aliases) and Christian refugees from North Korea who have little or no Christian training and certainly no Bible, God guides them in extraordinary ways, sometimes to safety and sometimes to witnessing opportunities. 
 
​
4) Their Concept of Fellowship and Personal Trust Has Been Stunted By Kim's Regime
 
This isn't just true for North Korean Christians; it's true for North Koreans in general. If Kim's regime is so pervasive and insidious that trust between family members is often in doubt, what does that say for it's effect on Christian fellowship? The strength of a church gathering is its trust; in God and in each other. Kim's regime has sought to interpose itself between every form of relationship and intimacy, and has largely succeeded. Yet the underground church in North Korea continues to exist, sometimes within the walls of a gulag, sometimes outside of its walls. 

5) We in the West Are Commanded to Pray for North Korean Saints, and Their Rulers
 
 This is what Hebrews 13:2 says: "Remember the prisoners as if chained with them -- those who are mistreated -- since you yourselves are in the body [of Christ] also." 
 
I Timothy 2:1 says to pray for rulers. Remember that St. Paul, who was inspired to write that, lived under the reign of emperors Caligula and Nero, two of the most sadistic rulers Rome ever had. We're told to pray for the restraining hand of God to be upon those who exercise earthly rule. And for those they rule, we are to pray. Gospel literature is indeed getting into North Korea. It comes in by small balloons, by drones, by sending it via the rivers, and even (though limited) through social media. Many defectors have reported how they were reached through these methods. 
 
Most especially, we're told to pray for them.
 

"The New Testament is full of Jew-hatred. From its negative depiction of the Pharisees to its charge of 'Christ-killing', it's been THE major cause anti-Semitism for 2000 years!" 
 
This is a view usually not stated openly, but is unfortunately, widely believed by many Jewish people. We at CHAIM Ministry (www.chaim.org) have heard this argument more than a few times. If someone said this to you and you were a Christian, how would you respond?
 
Your Jewish friend may like you as a person. He may even respect Christianity in general. But this view of the New Testament is still widespread: that the troubles between Church and Synagogue can largely be traced to the New Testament.
 
Now this isn't just a "Jewish" problem. This bias towards the New Testament and the gospel it contains is shared by many Muslims too. But we need not go too far afield, here: I even speak to a lot of Roman Catholics who assure me that their years in Catholic school have given them "all the religion they need" for the rest of their lives. But when I ask them what the gospel is, what comes out of their mouths is "duty", "obligation", "going to Mass", "church attendance", "being good Catholics." I talk to enough African-Americans (and Caucasians!);  of people who grew up in a gospel culture, and for plenty of them, when they tell me what the New Testament's gospel is, what they say is pretty much the Protestant version of what the Catholics say:  the need for works, performance, duty, "my good deeds outweigh my bad deeds". For well over half of them, what they say has nothing to do with the essential message of the New Testament: what Christ did on the Cross. Rather, what they say has everything to do with them and their religious performance (or lack of it): in essence, a definite negative presumption about the New Testament and the message it contains. Historically, Jews have harbored those negative presumptions too, and their history in Europe helps us to understand why.
 
The Promised Land, published in 1912, was an autobiographical sketch of author Mary Antin's childhood life in Czarist Russia and her subsequent coming to America during one of the worst pogroms in history. A "pogrom" (Russian: "to wreak havoc") was a government-initiated riot against Jews in lands under Czarist rule. One of the worst pogrom was in 1881, the year Antin and many thousands of other Jews emigrated to the United States. During the pogroms, both Britain and America issued formal protests to the Russian government. In Promised Land, Antin shares the terror she experienced as small girl, hiding with her parents in her own home while marauding bands of churchgoers marched through the streets, stirred up by government-sponsored priests of the Orthodox church against the "Killers of Christ" living in their midst. The mobs believed they were expressing their love of Jesus by their hatred of the Jews. What's significant here is that Czarist anti-Semitism was distinctly religious. Antin explains that Christmas and Easter were especial times of terror for the Jews in the Pale of Settlements: those areas especially designated for Jews to live. Consequently, these late 19th Century emigres passed on to their children and grand-children their experiences of what it was like when "Christians" left their Easter and Christmas church services in Czarist Russia.
 
No wonder the New Testament is not a favorite book among Jews today, not for what's actually written in it, but for what kind of people presumed to represent its message!  Roughly half of today's American Jews had grandparents and great-grandparents who left Czarist Russia during that time, a time in history popularized by the play and then the movie "Fiddler on the Roof."
 
The first Czarist pogrom is usually dated from 1821, but Russia wasn't the only country that had anti-Jewish riots in the name of Christianity. In neighboring Tisza, Hungary, (across the border) the district rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein (1824-1908) ministered to his congregation during the infamous "Tisza Eslar Affair", when leading Jews there were falsely accused of murdering a Christian girl and using her blood in a ritual. This baseless slander was eventually exposed due in part to the efforts of famed Bible scholar Prof. Franz Delitzsch of the University of Leipzig. (Keil and Delitzsch's Commentary on the Old Testament: 10 Volumes), but the resulting anti-Jewish rioting so vexed Rabbi Lichtenstein that he decided to read a New Testament in order to discover a basis for all this hatred. This was the same New Testament copy he had read in anger 40 years before and hurled into a corner of his study where it remained untouched until the day he read it again after this riot. But what he found in it was the opposite of what he thought he'd find. He writes ...
 
"I had thought the New Testament to be impure, a source of pride, of selfishness, of hatred, and of the worst kind of violence, but as I opened it, I felt myself peculiarly and wonderfully taken possession of. A sudden glory, a light flashed through my soul. I looked for thorns and found roses; I discovered pearls instead of pebbles; instead of hatred, love ..."

"From every line in the New Testament, from every word, the Jewish spirit streamed forth light, life, power, endurance, faith, hope, love, charity, limitless and indestructible faith in God ..."

Lichtenstein started using the New Testament in his synagogue preaching until three years later, he confessed to his congregation that he had been doing this, and that he'd become convinced that Jesus of Nazareth was Lord and Messiah. His conversion became known, to the astonishment of all the Jewish communities of Hungary. Lichtenstein published three pamphlets telling of his new-found faith. When he was called before the Chief Rabbi of Budapest to recant his views, he refused. His fellow-rabbis asked him to resign and be baptized but he refused, replying that he would not join a church or be baptized, but that he only desired to stay with his congregation. His congregation voted to have him stay as their "Christian" rabbi. Finally however, he did resign and continued a writing and visitation ministry across Europe, hounded by his fellow-rabbis but supported by several missionary organizations.
 
"When the roll is called up yonder" as the old hymn goes, there no doubt will be many obscure saints honored whom most of us have never heard of here on earth. Their fame will have to wait for that glorious day. And for that reason, Rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein is one of the "Honorable Menshen".
 
 ("Menshen": plural for "mensh", which is Yiddish for "a person deserving of honor".

[sources:]
1) Wikipedia
 2) The Promised Land, Mary Antin, 1912
3) The Anguish of the Jews, Edw. H. Flannery, Paulist Press
4) Famous Hebrew-Christians, Jacob Gartenhaus (as quoted by: Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus - Vol. 1, Michael L. Brown, Baker Books, 2001
 5) "The Story of Rabbi Isaac Lichtenstein", http://www.messianicassociation.org/bio-lichtenstein.htm
6) Answering Jewish Objections to Jesus - Vol. 1, Michael L. Brown, Baker Books, 2001

​
Bibi Netanyahu's May 1st comments about Iran touch upon a key point of the Muslim faith that few non-Muslims understand or even want to believe. According to Islam, Muslims don't have to tell non-Muslims the truth. They don't have to tell them the truth about anything that, in their view, threatens Islam. This concept is called "Taqqiya", and it's the "elephant in the room" that the Obama Administration refused to recognize when it, with the compliance of Sen. John McCain, Chair of the Senate Armed Services Committee, made that past deal with Iran.Loyalty oaths by Muslims in the American Armed Services or in the Diplomatic Corps need not be honored either, according to the Qu'ran. 
 
One of the key differences between the Christian faith and that of Islam is that, while Christians certainly have been known to lie just as Muslims do, their faith teaches them not do so. On the other hand, the Islamic faith permits it, when dealing with non-Muslims. This puts in jeopardy everything from loyalty oaths to oaths of office to international diplomatic guarantees between nations.
 
Click on this link. or paste into your browser.. (original was released May 1st) 
 
As you probably know, the iranian leaders are not ashamed to publicly express their desire to destroy Israel. But Iran is also lying to the world about its nuclear weapons program, which greatly compromises the nuclear deal. Here is the speech delivered by Netanyahu yesterday night, after an amazing operation when Mossad secretly retrieved iranian nuclear archives on a cold january night 3 months ago ! 
 
Wikipedia's sources are instructive for us, here, as it deals particularly with Shia Islam, the state religion of Iran. 
 
qiya (تقیة taqiyyah/taqīyah, literally "fear, caution")[1] is a form of Islamic dissimulation or a legal dispensation whereby a believing individual can deny their faith or commit otherwise illegal or blasphemous acts while they are in fear or at risk of significant persecution.[2]
 
This practice is emphasized in Shia Islam, the official religion of Iran, whereby adherents are permitted to conceal their religion when under threat of persecution or compulsion.[3][4] However, it is also permitted in Sunni Islam under certain circumstances.[5][6] 
 
Taqiyya was initially practiced under duress by some of Muhammad's companions.[7] Later, it became particularly important for Shias due to their experience as a persecuted religious minority.[4][8] According to Shia doctrine, taqiyya is permissible in situations where there is overwhelming danger of loss of life or property and where no danger to religion would occur thereby.[4] Taqiyya has also been politically legitimised, particularly among Twelver Shias, in order to maintain unity among Muslims and fraternity among the Shia clerics.[9][10]
 
Yarden Mariuma writes: "Taqiyya is an Islamic juridical term whose shifting meaning relates to when a Muslim is allowed, under Sharia law, to lie. A concept whose meaning has varied significantly among Islamic sects, scholars, countries, and political regimes, it nevertheless is one of the key terms used by recent anti-Muslim polemicists."[11]
 
The term taqiyya (Arabic: تقیة‎ taqiyyah/taqīyah) is derived from the Arabic triliteral root wāw-qāf-yā, denoting "fear", or "prudence, guarding against (a danger)".[12] Term taqwa "piety" (lit. "fear [of God]") is from the same root.[13] The term is derived from the Quranic reference to religious dissimulation in Sura 3:28:
"Let not the believers take the unbelievers for protectors rather than believers; and whoever does this, he shall have nothing of (the guardianship of) Allah, but you should guard yourselves against them, guarding carefully (illā an tattaqū minhum tuqāt)."The two words tattaqū ("you fear") and tuqāt "in fear" are derived from this root, and the abstract noun taqiyyah refers to the general principle connected with the situation described here, first recorded in a Qur'anic gloss by Al-Bukhari (9th century).[14]
 
Regarding 3:28, Ibn Kathir writes, "meaning, except those believers who in some areas or times fear for their safety from the disbelievers. In this case, such believers are allowed to show friendship to the disbelievers outwardly, but never inwardly." He quotes Muhammad's companion, Abu Ad-Darda', who said "we smile in the face of some people although our hearts curse them," and Al-Hasan who said "the Tuqyah is acceptable till the Day of Resurrection."[15]
 
A similar instance of the Qur'an permitting dissimulation under compulsion is found in Sura 16:106.[16] Sunni and Shia commentators alike observe that verse 16:106 refers to the case of 'Ammar b. Yasir, who was forced to renounce his beliefs under physical duress and torture.[17] The term for the related concept of kitman "secrecy, concealment" is derived from a root kāf-tā-mīm (ك ت م) "conceal".[18] The two terms taqiyyah and kitman may be used synonymously, although the former has the more inclusive meaning of "dissimulation" in general, while the later refers to the "concealment" of one's convictions by silence or omission.[17]

 Chag Same'ach!  Happy [Passover] Holiday!

So much of the Bible is written in "Passover language" If you don't know something about how Jews celebrated it in Bible times, as well as today, you're missing something! 

Check out these passages, and next year, if you want a Passover seder for your church that will elaborate on these connections, contact me either through www.scripturesdramatized.com, or send me an e-mail.
 
Passover Scripture Verses
 

Exodus 12:12 - Establishment of Passover, importance of Lamb's blood, reason for the name "Passover".

 Exodus 12:38 - The "mixed multitude" who left Egypt (not just ethnic Hebrews), heralding the nature of God's acceptance: not by ethnicity, but by adoption.
 
I Corinthians 5:6-8 - Paul's use of Passover language to illustrate the nature of New Testament fellowship.
 
Matthew 26:26,27/Luke 22:20 - "This is My body". Christ's fulfillment of the seder's ritual eating of the matzoth and the drinking of the four wine-glasses.
 
John 13 through 17 - The "Passover Discourse": Christ's fulfilling of the seder's "hagaddah" [the "telling"] when the master of the feast applied the Exodus lesson for all in attendance.
 
John 11:55 - The first century rabbinical schools with their pilgrims arrive in Jerusalem for the holiday.
 
Psalms 120 through 124 - The "Psalms of Ascents" [as in "to ascend"/to go up] sung by first century pilgrims during their climb up Mt. Zion to sacrifice the lambs in the Temple.
 
Matthew 26:18 - The Passover purification, including the removal of leaven from each dwelling.
 
Luke 12:1 - "Beware the leaven of the Pharisees": Christ's use of the earthly purification ritual to illustrate its ultimate spiritual significance.
 
Exodus 12:8/Numbers 9:11 - The Torah's requirement that the lamb be eaten with bitter herbs.
 
Acts 5:35/Acts 22:3 - NT reference to Paul's teacher Gamaliel, the rabbi who is quoted each year during the seder meal. 
 
John 13:21 & 26 - Jesus and Judas mostly likely "dipped the sop" in bitter herbs at this time. This is a ritual dipping ceremony illustrating the bitterness of slavery.

John 6:32-35 - Jesus declared Himself to be "bread", a fulfillment of the liturgical "This is the bread of affliction" statement made by the master of the feast.
 
Exodus 12:39 - The reason why matzoth [unleavened bread] was eaten - it was "the bread of haste". They were fleeing the Egyptian army, and they needed to hurry.
 
I Corinthians 11:25 - The "cup after supper", most likely the drinking of the 3rd of four cups of wine.

Matthew 28:29 - The cup that Jesus would not drink until his brethren were in heaven with him; most likely the 4th of the four cups.

Matthew 24:1,2 - The reason why Jews cannot sacrifice lambs anymore: the Temple's destruction and their world-wide dispersion ["Diaspora"].

John 13:3-5 - The foot-washing at Passover, Christ's application of the ceremonial washing ritual.

Mark 7:3 - a reference as to why Jews historically had so many needless washing rituals: their conscience was defiled due to the Law's effect on their hearts.

Matthew 15:3 - Christ argues with the Pharisees: grace vs. legalism; a confrontation between the traditions of the elders and the pure word of God.

John 21:20 - The "reclining at table" custom, reflected in John's reclining with Jesus.

Deuteronomy 28:58 - The plagues on the Egyptians, and a warning to the Covenant People, both Jews and Gentiles.

Leviticus 26:44/Romans 11:12 & 15 - a promise to regather the Remnant - both ethnic Jews and Gentiles in a "New" Jerusalem, despite former covenant disobedience.

Matthew 26:30 - The singing of the Great Hallel (Psalm 136) at the end of the Passover seder.

Matthew 11:7-15 - the seder's chair for Elijah the Prophet, a custom that finds its fulfillment in the coming of John the Baptist.

Ephesians 2:20/I Peter 2:5 - the rebuilding of the final temple; not of stones, but of human beings, and the fulfillment of the Seder's concluding prayer.

Fact #1: The Book of Esther presented problems for the Protestant Reformers, and even the Jewish rabbis at one time. And for the same reasons for both groups!
 
Neither God nor prayer is mentioned at all in the book, at least not specifically. The book's very existence presented problems to Martin Luther (to name just one), at least for a while. He complained: "It hath too much of Judaism, and a great deal of heathenish naughtiness." [Luther's Works, Vol 3]. The book is written in a way unlike any other Bible text. There's a strong strain of patriotism and Jewish nationalism.  It also has a distinct element of humor. That's not humorous levity, however. It's still Word of God and it deals with serious topics as it depicts events that occurred in Persia about 475 years before Christ. But since biblical times it has been regarded as canonical by the rabbis. And, according to Maimonides (Judaism's most famous scholar), second only to the Torah in importance.
 
Fact #2: Esther's husband was likely the same king who fought the Greeks at Marathon, from which we get the marathon foot-race.
 
This would've been during the reign of Xerxes the Great, (a.k.a "Ahashuerus" in the KJV translation). Xerxes ruled an enormous empire of 127 provinces "from India to Ethiopia" as Esther 1:1 says. He was intent on humbling the Greeks, but was defeated on the plains of Marathon by a combined force of Greek city-states in 490 BC. According to legend, the messenger Pheidippides ran the approximate 25 miles to announce the defeat of the Persians to the Athenians. Then he dropped dead from exhaustion.

Fact #3: Either Xerxes or his father Darius is the same king that Nehemiah received permission from to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem.
 
This was likely due to how impressed they were by the amazing acts of the Hebrew God that the Persians heard about during the events of the Babylonian Exile, even as far back as the humbling of Nebuchadnezzar and his conversion to faith in the God he thought his god had conquered at Jerusalem.. The Jews in Xerxes' time were slaves and exiles in Persia, "hold-overs" from their former slavery to the previous empire of Babylon, and its king, Nebuchadnezzar.

Fact #4: Though God is not mentioned in "Esther", it's evident that Esther's uncle Mordecai had faith in Him, and that Esther herself prayed to Him.

Why? Because of these two statements: the first by Mordecai, the second by Esther:

"For if you remain completely silent at this time, relief and deliverance will arise for the Jews from another place, but you and your father's house will perish. Yet who knows whether you have come to the kingdom for such a time as this?" [Esth. 4:14]

Here it's evident that Mordecai had complete faith that God would deliver the Jews from certain genocide, either with Esther's help, or without her help.

"Go, gather all the Jews who are present in Shushan, and fast for me; neither eat nor drink for three days, night or day. My maids and I will fast likewise. And so I will go to the king, which is against the law; and if I perish, I perish!" [Esth. 4:16]

Here it's evident that Esther and her maidens also prayed. The Bible prescribes fasting for two purposes, and they almost always go together: a) as a sign of deep grief and mourning, and b) as an aid to effective, importunate prayer: the kind of prayer reserved for extraordinary circumstances. When you are "importuning" God, when you are pleading with Him to intervene in a situation that's critical, you fast. The point? Both God and prayer are present in this book that mentions neither one specifically.

Fact #5: The Haman-Mordecai animosity began with a blood feud 500 years before either one was born!
 
The Book of Esther makes a point of emphasizing the forebears of both Haman and Mordecai. Mordecai was a descendant of King Saul's father Kish. [I Sam. 9:1] [Esth. 2:5]. Haman was a descendant of Agag, King of the Amalekites. [Esth. 3:1]. 500 years before in Israel, King Saul was told by God to exterminate the race of Amalek for their great wickedness. This he refused to do. So 500 years later, Haman attempted to do this very same thing with the Jews! The national moral to the story? Obey God in history, or "history" will catch up with you.

Fact #6: Haman's death, which originally was planned for Mordecai, was by "hanging upon gallows" [Esth. 5:14, Esth. 7:10], but the execution wasn't by rope or strangulation. It was by impalement on a stake. 
 
That's right, Gentle Reader. Not "Western" style, but "Vlad the Impailer" style is the kind of  hanging in view here. The Persians were cruel, and the Romans equally so. Neither people practiced the kind of execution we're familiar with in the West. Death by dropping from a platform or even being strung up with a rope noose and asphyxiated is quick and comparatively merciful. But the pagans of antiquity preferred their lowest criminals to die by slow torture. That's what Haman had in mind for Mordecai. Both Persians and Romans also used more merciful methods but impalement upon a stake was reserved for the worst criminals. When the Bible speaks of Christ "hung upon a tree", what's in view here is piercing and slow death on a cross-tee. If Haman had succeeded in executing Mordecai and all the Jews of the known world [Esth. 3:13-15], he would've wiped out the family line of Jesus, and prevented the only "impalement" that could've saved humanity.

"The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto Me from the ground." (Gen. 4:10)
 
The story of Cain and Abel is the first instance in history of the shedding of innocent blood. God is not beyond using figurative language to drive a point home. Of course shed blood doesn't have a literal voice, but what this verse means is that the shed blood of the innocent gives loud testimony to God that He will not leave unpunished. And this is not just an ancient "Jewish" judgment confined to how God dealt with Old Testament Israel. For this same sin He punished Gentile nations too. Notice Leviticus 18, where He warns Israel to refrain from certain sins, including the slaying of the innocent:
 
" ... for all these abominations the men of the land have done who were before you, and thus the land is defiled, lest the land vomit you out also when you defile it, as it vomited out the nations which were before you." (Lev. 18:28)
 
Nor is this vengeance confined to Old Testament judgments from a bygone era, having nothing to do with nations today. It's relevant to our own New Testament times: Consider Rev. 6:10:
 
"How long, O Lord, holy and true, until you judge and avenge our blood on those who dwell on the earth?"
 
Who's doing the speaking? The martyred saints in heaven. If you thought it was wrong for Christians to ask for revenge, or that this kind of language is inappropriate for saints today, then explain this verse. The point? God avenges the shedding of innocent blood in all ages and with all nations. He punishes entire countries for slaying the innocent, the unborn, and those in "partial birth" status.
 
This past election, we had two viable candidates running for office: one who was in favor of this and one who was against it. One presidential candidate vowed to continue the abominations of Planned Parenthood and its "harvesting" of living tissue from persons in the womb, and to continue partial-birth abortions. The other candidate vowed to oppose it. 

According to Numbers 35:33, the shed blood of the innocents defiles a land in a way unique from other sins: 
 
"So you shall not pollute the land where you are, for blood defiles the land, and no atonement can be made for the land for the blood that is shed on it, except by the blood of him who shed it."
 
Repeatedly in Scripture God calls Himself the defender of the orphan and widow, the avenger of the poor and helpless and those who have none to speak for them. (Prov. 24:11,12)  Among these victims are the aborted.  Few political campaigns are decided by a single isse. But this "single issue" is among the most important. According to Scripture, a nation's punishment for innocent blood is war or famine or exile; or all three. What form that wold take in our modern America I shudder to think.
 
But "doom and gloom" is not inevitable in our lifetimes. God's wrath has been known to skip a generation, or several, if a country shows repentance, and "If My people who are called by My name will humble themselves and pray, and seek My face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and forgive their sins and heal their land." (II Chron. 7:14) He did exactly this in the days of good King Josiah and reserved his wrath for a future time. (II Kings 22).
 
When St. Paul penned his famous words in Romans 13:1-7 and I Tim. 2:1-3, roughly 10% of the populace were Roman citizens. Paul himself was a citizen (Acts 22:28). This was a rare privilege, and a citizen of Rome had certain rights that the other 90% didn't have. For example, he could appeal directly to Caesar for redress of grievances. Make no mistake, Paul used those rights. But what a Roman citizen could not do was vote for the election of his leaders. You, on the other hand, can.

Americans have that privilege as a gift of God. As St. Paul did in his time, we're to use that privilege for all it's worth this next election season.

Just because a "Christian" ministry says that it's  "pro-Israel" doesn't mean it really is. There's nothing more "anti-Israel" than teaching Israelis that now is not the time to come to Christ as Lord and Messiah.Take for example, John Hagee, the founder of "Christians United For Israel" (CUFI)
 
Hagee is a Premillennial Dispensationalist, but he's one that even other "Dispy" groups have a problem with. In his controversial book In Defense of Israel, Hagee says:
 
. Christ did not come to earth to be the Messiah
. Christ by His words and deeds refused to be the Messiah
. Jews can't be blamed for rejecting Jesus, since He was never offered to them. (!)
 
CUFI is well-funded, and is seeking a college campus presence to counter the growing anti-Semitic and anti-Israel  sentiments at universities.
 
Even other "Dispy" groups have a problem with CUFI and its founder. Take the organization "One For Israel" as an example, which has an impressive social networking presence and often features Jews who came to gospel faith in the Messiah. Eitan Bar, an Israeli Messianic, recently wrote a public plea to John Hagee to stop teaching heresy. It's called "Let My People Know".

https://www.oneforisrael.org/bible-based-teaching-from-israel/a-plea-to-john-hagee-let-my- people-know/
 
But it isn't just that Hagee's wrong; the whole under-girding theology of Premillennial Dispensationalism that he's just the most extreme example of, is wrong. Here are two excellent articles on that:
 
https://www.chaim.org/confusion.htm
 
http://www.chaim.org/xpansion.htm

0 Comments

Most of the scientific/academic community in America reasons from an agnostic or atheistic worldview. In the whole history of science, this assumption is very, very new. It's also illogical.
 
If scientists reasoned from the vantage point of sheer statistical probability, they would have to jettison agnosticism and presuppose the existence of an Intelligent Designer. Instead, they presuppose a random-chance universe and then reason everything else from there.
 
Check out this chart and this website:
 
An Estimate of the Probability for Attaining the Necessary Parameters for Life Support

Probability that feature will fall in the required range (given in percentage fractions)

galaxy size.1
galaxy type.1
galaxy location.1
star location relative to galactic center.2
star distance from closest spiral arm.1
z-axis extremes of star's orbit.1
proximity of solar nebula to a supernova eruption.01
timing of solar nebula formation relative to supernova eruption.01
number of stars in system.2
star birth date.2
star age.4
star metallicity.05
star orbital eccentricity.1
star's distance from galactic plane.1
star mass.001
star luminosity relative to speciation.0001
star color.4
3H+ production.1
supernovae rates and locations.01
white dwarf binary types, rates, and locations.01
planetary distance from star.001
inclination of planetary orbit.5
planetary axis tilt.3
rate of change of axial tilt.01
planetary rotation period.1
rate of change in planetary rotation period.05
planetary orbit eccentricity.3
surface gravity (escape velocity).001
tidal force.1
magnetic field.01
albedo.1
density.1
planetary crust thickness.01
oceans-to-continents ratio.2
rate of change in oceans-to-continents ratio.1
global distribution of continents.3
frequency and extent of ice ages.1
asteroid and comet collision rate.1
change in asteroid and comet collision rates.1
mass of body colliding with primordial Earth.002
timing of collision with primordial Earth.05
rate of change in asteroid/comet collision rate.1
proximity and mass of Jupiter.01
major planet eccentricities.1
major planet orbital instabilities.1
drift rate and rate change of major planets.1
atmospheric transparency.01
atmospheric pressure.1
atmospheric electric discharge rate.1
atmospheric temperature gradient.01
carbon dioxide level in atmosphere.01
oxygen level in atmosphere.01
chlorine level in atmosphere.1
iron quantity in oceans.1
tropospheric ozone quantity.01
stratospheric ozone quantity.01
mesospheric ozone quantity.01
water vapor level in atmosphere.01
oxygen-to-nitrogen ratio in atmosphere.1
quantity of greenhouse gases in atmosphere.01
frequency and extent of forest and grass fires.01
soil mineralization.1
quantity of sea-salt aerosols.1
quantity of decomposer bacteria in soil.01
quantity of mycorrhizal fungi in soil.01
quantity of nitrifying microbes in soil.01
quantity of sulfur in soil.1
quantity of sulfur in planet's core.1
tectonic activity.1
volcanic activity.1
decline in volcanic activity.1
viscosity of Earth's core at core boundaries.01
biomass to comet-infall ratio.01
regularity of cometary infall.1
dependency factors (estimate)100,000,000,000
longevity requirements (estimate).00001
Probability for combined occurrence of all 75 parameters = 10-99
Maximum possible number of planets in universe = 1023

Taken from Ross, H. 1998. Big Bang Refined by Fire. Reasons To Believe, Pasadena, CA.

By putting together probabilities for each of these design features occurring by chance, we can calculate the probability of the existence of a planet like Earth. This probability is 1 chance in 1099. Since there are estimated to be a maximum of only 1023 planets in the universe (10 planets/star, see note below), by chance there shouldn't be any planets capable of supporting life in the universe. Our existence suggests divine intervention and design. The design and care with which the laws of physics, the universe, our galaxy, our solar system, and the planet Earth were crafted suggests that God is caring and loving. He put in a lot of time in the design and creation of the universe so that we would have a nice place to live for such a short period of time.
Back to The Incredible Design of the Earth

Note: This is most likely a huge over estimate. In a recent survey of globular cluster 47 Tucanae, scientists found zero extrasolar planets out of 37,000 stars searched (Astronomers Ponder Lack of Planets in Globular Cluster from the Hubble Space Telescope).

References Cited literature for the estimates presented here can be found on the main design page, The Incredible Design of the Earth.

I spoke to a Saudi Muslim about the gospel this past Friday at the U. of Penn campus.
 
This past Friday, I visited the U. of Penn campus, 3400 Walnut St., Philadelphia, passing out gospel tracts and dialoguing with students and passers-by about the gospel.  I had to do this alone this time since my partner in ministry Dan Levy passed away suddenly from a stroke. He will be missed.

This "3400" location is a public access street across from the campus and has a lot of foot traffic. When classes change or lunchtime comes, there are mobs of students: many Chinese, many Indians, a fair number of Middle-Eastern and Pakistani Muslims, some Jewish students wearing yarmulkes (the skullcap: a sign of the observant or the Orthodox). They avoid me, but other Jewish students without the yarmulkes will sometimes stop and talk. This past Friday, I had the privilege of sharing the gospel with a young Chinese Buddhist and then a Saudi medical student (Muslim). Neither one had ever heard the Christian gospel and both spent a significant amount of time talking with me about it and showing real interest. The encounter with the Saudi is worth telling, so keep reading.

What I do at Penn Campus is to stand right there on the corner. Dan Levy used to stand caddy-corner from me across the street, doing the same thing, when he was here My technique is to pass out witnessing brochures, then ask each passer-by "Do you know what that is, that piece of paper?" Once in a while a student will stop, look at it, and say "No. What is it?"

"It's a gospel tract, a gospel brochure. Do you know what the gospel is?" I'll say. (What I'm looking for is a conversation.)
 
The Saudi student (Let's call him "N"), had no  clue what born-again Christians believe, but he told me he wanted to know. So I told him. He was friendly and though Muslim, wanted to learn. He told me that the Qu'ran speaks of Jesus as a great prophet, but that as a Muslim he cannot believe that Jesus is the Son of God.
 
"But Christians don't believe that God is the biological father of Jesus, if that's what you mean," I said. "And they certainly don't believe that God and Mary had sex to give birth to Him. There are two words in Arabic meaning 'son'. One word is 'walad', meaning  biological son. The other word is 'ibn', a more general use for 'son'. For example, a teacher can have disciples, and they may validly be called his sons. You even have this tradition in Islam."

"N" was impressed. I gave him some excellent Arabic-language literature which he promised to read right away. I told him that I came to believe in Jesus coming from a background of Judaism. "At least in Islam they revere Jesus as a great prophet, but I was taught growing up only three things about Jesus: 1) We don't know who He was. 2) He wasn't the Messiah, and 3) We didn't kill Him. I knew there had to be more to it than that." He agreed.

"You know," I said, "Where we are now is one of the few places on earth where someone like me can talk to someone like you about the Christian gospel and not be arrested." (or words to that effect). "N" agreed.

"Yes," he said. "You couldn't do this in my country, but I will read what you gave me." And we parted as friends.

So ... pray for this young man: "N". And I'll give you a progress report when I hear back from him.
 

Churches and synagogues are quite good at remembering birthdays and anniversaries. But there are other events in the lives of parishioners that, though not noted on a church calendar for all to see, should still be remembered: the anniversary of a loved one's death for example. 

I know a dear Christian lady who on a single day lost all three of her sons. I have another friend who lost a son on the very day of his and his wife's anniversary. These are not times of celebration that you can write on a church calendar and post on a bulletin board, but you can nonetheless write them on your own personal calendar, and send a card or give them a call on that special day. It's amazing how such small kindnesses that take so very little effort can mean so much to the recipient. Even if you don't know what to say and words fail you, your presence and even the fact that you thought of them will speak volumes.

One of the customs that Jews practice at the death of loved ones is called 'Sitting Shivah', (i.e., "sitting for seven days": shivah means "seven"). The immediate family mourns for seven days, (traditionally, on low stools inches from the floor) but friends of the family can come over to the house. And they sit silently with the bereaved for a period of time; not talking: just sitting, until the bereaved themselves decide to converse. The idea behind this is not that visitors should search for words to say, but by their very presence, they bring comfort. The idea of the presence of a person visiting, rather than just his explanations or expressions of condolence is a crucial biblical doctrine, and not just in the Hebrew Scriptures, but in the New Testament as well.
 
Genesis 50:10 states that Joseph "made a mourning for his father seven days". And in the Book of Job, Job's three friends sat in silence with him on the ground for seven days, " ... and none spake a word unto him, for they saw that his grief was very great" (Job 2:13). It's easy to criticize those three friends because of their foolish advice, but keep in mind: these men visited with him and waited in silence for over a  WEEK before they talked. If they didn't care about him, they wouldn't have even done THAT. When Christians pour out their hearts to God in grief they often feel that they're that owed an explanation. But what Jesus does, in He gives them, not an explanation, but a visit. He visits them by his Holy Spirit. He sits (so to speak) with them in their grief, and identifies with them in it.The presence of God's Spirit makes the difference between overwhelming grief and grief that is manageable. Yes, He does this through the prayers of others, and yes He even does this when no one is present, but He especially does this when His people care enough to sit and visit, even without words. It's the presence of the friend, that means so much. Jesus is called "Immanuel", meaning God WITH us: present with His people when they call on Him: not just His "theology" present, nor just His doctrines and words present, but He Himself. 

f you're a pastor, full-time Christian worker, or evangelist, I highly recommend this reference Bible. Not that I agree with everything Ray Comfort says in it, but his table of contents deals with every objection to the Christian faith that I've ever heard, or can imagine. It's a real work of scholarship and very readable.
Check out his quotes from Albert Einstein (below) !
"In view of such harmony in the cosmos which I, with my limited human mind, am able to recognize, there are yet people who say there is no God. But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views."
[The Expanded Quotable Einstein, Princeton U. Press, p. 214, quoted in The Evidence Bible, compiled by Ray Comfort, p.4, Bridge-Logos.

"We know nothing about God and the world at all. All our knowledge is the knowledge of schoolchildren. Possibly we shall know a little more than we know now. But the real nature of things, that we shall never know."

[Ibid., p. 207]
"I see a pattern, but my imagination cannot picture the maker of the pattern. I see a clock, but I cannot envision the clockmaker. The human mind is unable to conceive of the four dimensions, so how can it conceive of a God, before whom a thousand years and a thousand dimensions are as one?"
[Ibid., p. 208]
"I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know His thoughts. The rest are details."
[Ibid. p. 202]

 
CHAIM MINISTRY TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE PRESENTS:
 
"ISAIAH'S ADVENT MESSAGE"

 
A "Scriptures Dramatized!" live presentation
by Rev. Rick Anderson
 
A memorized dramatization of Isaiah the Prophet

 as a celebration of our Lord's Advent
 
Performed in "period dress" as Isaiah might have rendered it.
 
KJV is the base text, with appropriate paraphrasings and explanations.
 
Follow-along programs with chapter-by-chapter synopses are provided.
 
 All are welcome

 
 
When: 11 AM, December 24th
 
Where: Stratford Presbyterian Church
41 Warwick Rd., Stratford, NJ 08084
 
Given as part of our regular morning worship service

 
THE SCRIPTURE PASSAGES


Chapter 32:1,2

Isaiah looks beyond Israel's present political turmoil to the coming of a just King, using three powerful analogies from nature to describe Him and his reign.

Chapter 9:1,2,6,7
 
The prophet calls out regions in Galilee notorious for their coarseness and spiritual blindness, places where few Jews lived, and says that Messiah shall visit them. He refers to this King by three divine names and says His rule shall be eternal.

Chapter 1:1 through 18
 
God indicts the nation for its injustices and sins, condemns its pretense of religiosity, then offers mercy: "Come now, and let us reason together," He says.

Chapter 2:1 through 5
 
Isaiah predicts a time when all nations shall seek the Lord; a time when "they shall beat their swords into plowshares". This passage is engraved on the outside wall of the United Nations Building in New York City.

Chapter 6
 
The prophet receives a divine vision of God upon His throne, and  of the six-winged seraphim, each calling to the other: "Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of Hosts ..." Isaiah is overwhelmed by this, and fears for his soul. The Lord reveals the future to him.

Chapter 11
 
Of King David's father's family tree shall come forth a Branch, the Messiah who will render perfect judgment,defend the defenseless, and bring both justice and vengeance on the earth.

Chapter 12
 
With joyous enthusiasm, Isaiah exhorts the people of God to "cry out and shout" that God has become their salvation through the Messiah, the "Branch"  of King David.
 
Chapter 40
 
One of the most dramatic and visual passages in all Isaiah's writings, memorialized in Handel's Messiah, and heralding the very words of John the Baptist at the River Jordan. The prophet warns the people to prepare to meet their God.
 
Chapter 42:1-12
 
A prophesy of the coming Christ, filled with detailed and brilliant imagery. Christ will be given as a "covenant to the people" and "light to the Gentiles."  He will also be quiet and subtle in His method, as Matthew 12:18 records Isaiah's very words.
 
Chapter 52:13 through 53
 
A chapter avoided in synagogue readings, yet still considered part of the Jewish canon of Scripture. It is the clearest description of the coming Savior, given 700 years before His coming.
 
Chapter 55
 
God's offer of peace to the rebellious through the gospel message, and His promise that "My word shall not return unto Me void," but that it will have its intended effect regardless of how people respond to it.

Chapter 60

"Arise, shine, for thy light is come!" : a prophesy of heavenly Jerusalem's future glory, using the past imagery of Solomon's day when the wealth flowing into the city was in silver and gold. But here, the wealth is that of the souls of men.
 
Chapter 61
 
Luke 4:17 records Jesus in his hometown synagogue in Nazareth, called up to publicly read from the Scriptures (the "aliyah"), fulfilling a tradition still kept today in synagogues. Isaiah records his very words, 700 years before He spoke them.

Chapter 62
 
In Matthew 21:5 and John 12:15 God beckons Jerusalem to acknowledge her King, coming to her through the city gates on a donkey.  Isaiah records the event before it happens here.

Chapter 9:1,2,6,7
 
The presentation ends as it began: with a rejoicing over the birth of a divine Child Whose names are the names of Divinity.

 

[Wood Engraving: "Mattathias and the Apostate" by Gustav Dore]

During the Christmas and Hanukkah season, the Israeli-owned kiosks in NJ and PA's indoor malls are selling aromatic pillows and wraps, and creams and lotions from the minerals of the Dead Sea (supposedly). As you walk through the malls to do holiday shopping, young Israeli men and women won't wait until you stop to look; they'll stop you! Israelis tend to be very aggressive salespeople, and for a prepared evangelist who comes at the right time, this presents a special advantage. The CHAIM team will be talking to some of these young people this holiday season.
 
Most Jews, and even Christians, have no idea that Hanukkah's only mentioned in the New Testament. What connection are readers supposed to make from this? Why are we even told by John, for example, that on this particular day Jesus was walking in the Temple and being questioned by his countrymen:
 
"And it was at Jerusalem the Feast of the Dedication, and it was winter, and Jesus walked in the Temple in Solomon's porch. Then the Jews surrounded him and said to him, 'How long do you keep us in doubt? If you are the Messiah, tell us plainly.' " (John 10:22 ff)
 
For Jewish people, connection with the past has great significance. A First Century Jew would've seen the connection right away, because on Hanukkah he would've remembered how the old priest Mattathias of Modein had slain the apostate Hebrew who dared offer sacrifice to a Greek idol at the command of the Seleucid governor, and how his son Judah and his band of brothers put to flight the armies of the whole Seleucid Empire and their tyrant king Antiochus IV, fighting for freedom and winning against insurmountable odds.

Judah Maccabee was seen as a "messiah" of sorts, and a national savior of his day, and the people of Christ's day were questioning Jesus about whether he was the kind of "Judah Maccabee" who'd rescue them from the corrupt rule of Herod and the oppression of the Romans. The Maccabees gave Israel back its freedom and Judah indeed cleansed the Temple and gave the people back their dignity. But all this was temporary. Judah Maccabee was only a temporary savior. Yet the prophet Isaiah ("Yeshayahu" to the Jews) spoke of a coming permanent Savior in his 53rd chapter. Isaiah 53 is part of the canon of Hebrew Scripture but is never read in the synagogues. Yeshayahu said the Messiah and Savior would be disbelieved by His own people (verse 1), despised and rejected of men (verse 3), would be a man of sorrows and acquainted with grief (verse 3), yet wounded for the transgressions of his people (verse 5), and suffer a substitutionary punishment for the guilty (verse 6), be led to the slaughter as a lamb is led to be sacrificed (verse 7), that his life would be offered as an offering for sin (verse 10), that he would justify (i.e. "pronounce as righteous") many, and make intercession for the guilty (verse 12).
 
Though Hanukkah's not specifically mentioned in the Hebrew Scriptures (the "Old Testament"), the historic events that surround this holiday are indeed mentioned: and not by an historian recalling the past, but by a prophet, prophesying the future! The prophet Daniel, writing in 540 BC, spoke in detail about a series of events occurring 370 years after his death, specifically Daniel 11 and 12.

Definitely worth the reading!

Have a Merry Christmas and a very Happy Hanukkah!

Thanksgiving and Sukkot have much in common. Here are 5 similarities.

"Sukkot", a.k.a. "The Feast of Booths", a.k.a. "The Feast of Tabernacles" is a biblical harvest festival still celebrated by Jews today to commemorate God's provision for the Israelites in the Sinai desert en route to the Promised Land. During this holiday, temporary open-air shelters ("sukkot") are constructed of branches and the fruits of the Fall harvest to remind the Israelites of God's mercy shown to them in their trek through the desert wilderness, and their entrance into a new land, prepared for them "flowing with milk and honey" (Exodus 33:3]


1) Both Holidays Are October Harvest Festivals

At least the FIRST thanksgiving was! That one was in October, the one celebrated in 1621 and presided over by the Plymouth Plantation's first governor William Bradford. Sukkot, on the other hand, is almost always celebrated in late September/early October according to the Jewish lunar year of 360 days which differs from the Christian solar year of 365 days.The fruits and grains of the Fall harvest were used in the Temple (and in synagogue worship later): the palm, the myrtle, the willow, all bound together into a sheaf called a "lulav"; and also the "etrog", a citrus fruit resembling a lemon in shape. The booths, or "sukkot" were made of the more regular items of the fall harvest.


2) Both Holidays Celebrated After a Great Sea Crossing

Sukkot was to commemorate when God caused the Israelites to dwell in booths: (temporary flimsy structures) after He had saved them from Egypt's Pharaoh and after the Red Sea crossing. The first Thanksgiving commemorated another great sea crossing:

"What could sustain them but the Spirit of God and His grace? May not and ought not the children of these fathers rightly say: 'Our fathers were Englishmen which came over this great ocean, and were ready to perish in this wilderness; but they cried unto the Lord, and He heard their voice and looked on their adversity.' " ["Thanksgiving Readings" from William Bradford's Of Plymouth Plantation]


3) Both Holidays Commemorate God's Protection in the Wilderness

Certainly Sukkot was! God humbled the Israelites and taught them that they could only depend upon HIM through this desert journey. (Deut. 8:3-5). The New Testament declares that it was the pre-incarnate Christ who sustained them in the wilderness, though most did not know Him. (I Cor. 10:1-5) Similarly, Governor Bradford acknowledged God's providential protection of the Pilgrims, even to the point of calling the Indian Squanto, who taught them how to hunt, fish, plant, and negotiate peace treaties with otherwise hostile Indian tribes "a special instrument sent of God, for their good."

"Yea, let them which have been redeemed of the Lord, shew how He hath deliver them from the hand of the oppressor. When they wandered in the desert wilderness out of the way, and found no city to dwell in, both hungry and thirsty, their soul was overwhelmed in them." 'Let them confess before the Lord His lovingkindness and His wonderful works before the children of men.' " (Ps. 107:1-8) ["Thanksgiving Readings" from William Bradford's Of Plymouth Plantation]

 
4) In Both Holidays, They Sought Freedom From an Oppressor-King

Despite the claims of some, https://www.prageru.com/videos/whats-truth-about-first-thanksgiving#.WgxLTp-rwXw.facebook that the journey to the New World was motivated by a fear of seduction by the materialistic Dutch culture that they had been living under for over ten years, and NOT because of religious persecution,
the motive of the Pilgrims was primarily to escape the religious tyranny of the English Crown. Here's William Bradford in his own words:

"Suppression of Religious Liberty in England -- First Cause of the Foundation of the New Plymouth Settlement: First I will unfold to you the causes that led to the foundation of the New Plymouth Settlement, and the motives of those concerned in it. ... As is well known, ever since the breaking out of the light of the gospel in England ... Satan has maintained various wars against the saints ... so that in England at this day the man or woman of God must resolve with himself to sustain mocks and injuries as though he lived among the enemies of religion."

[William Bradford, Bradford's History of the Plymouth Settlement, Book 1, Chapter 1, pp. 1-5]

Similarly, the root cause of the Exodus from Egypt and the "Sukkot" journey through the desert of Sinai was for religious freedom from a satanic oppressor-king.

"Then the Lord said unto Moses, 'Go in unto Pharaoh and tell him, 'Thus saith the Lord God of the Hebrews, "Let My people go, that they may serve Me.'  And Pharaoh hardened his heart at this time also, neither would he let the people go." [Exodus 9:1, Exodus 8:32]


5) Both Holidays Were Kept With Reminders of the Frailty of the Human Body, and of a Home Beyond This World

The Pilgrims' first Thanksgiving was celebrated after a winter of death and of fifty or more Christian burials, so that the reality of this passing world and the frailty of the body was all-too real to them:

"But a most lamentable blow fell upon them. In two or three month's time half of their company died, partly owing to the severity of the winter, especially during January and February, and the want of houses and other comforts; partly of scurvy and other diseases, which their long voyage and their incommodious quarters had brought upon them. Of the hundred odd persons, scarcely fifty remained, and sometimes two or three persons died in a day."

[William Bradford, Bradford's History of the Plymouth Settlement, Book 2, Chapter 1, pp. 76,77]

In the New Testament, St. Paul refers to the Old Testament's Feast of Booths, and "spiritualizes" it to a New Testament lesson, comparing the wilderness "sukkot" to the human body, frail and susceptible to time and the wear and tear of the elements. He teaches that the body's very frailty reminds us that God has reserved for us a permanent dwelling beyond the grave.

"For we know that if our earthly house of this tabernacle were dissolved, we have a building of God, an house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens. For in this we groan, earnestly desiring to be clothed upon by our house which is from heaven. If so be that being clothed, we shall not be found naked. For we that are in this tabernacle do groan, being burdened: not for that we would be unclothed, but clothed upon, that mortality might be swallowed up of life." [II Corinthians 5:1-4]

You weren't told the whole story about the first Thanksgiving. It's not the one that kids hear in the government schools or in popularized American culture. Here's what really happened:

In 1620, 102 Pilgrims, Separatists from the Church of England sailed west across the Atlantic aboard the cramped 100 ft. "Mayflower" in a voyage that if compared with today, would be like a voyage to the moon. For 66 days they lived in an ill-lit, close-quartered, rolling, pitching, stinking, over-heated "below-decks"; the hatches battened down, the smell of the bilge in their nostrils, and the crew hostile towards Separatists. Cloistered in a space the size of a volleyball court, 102 people with their spiritual leader William Bradford endured the unendurable. Why? Because they wanted to worship God without the onerous legalistic restrictions imposed on them by England, and needed to escape the worldly, compromising culture of Holland where they were living before the trans-Atlantic journey.

On the voyage over, just two people died. One was a crew member who repeatedly mocked the Pilgrims until one day he died and that silenced the rest of the crew for the rest of the voyage; and the other, because he refused orders to drink lemon juice and so died of scurvy. They were en route to the mouth of the Hudson River in a huge swath of territory extending from Virginia to New England called the "Virginia Plantation", uninhabited by Europeans, in near-absolute wilderness, but claimed and peopled by hostile Indian tribes. If they had landed where they were supposed to land, they would've certainly been slaughtered. But they were blown off course by hundreds of miles and forced to land in a place known today as Massachusetts, and in a region where, unknown to them, no tribe lived because all tribes feared that the land was cursed by a great Spirit who had wiped out all the former Patuxet inhabitants. The Patuxets were known by their neighbors as one of the most ferocious of tribes, who had also killed every white settler and explorer they had ever met. In the spring of that year a single Patuxet named Squanto arrived in the Pilgrim camp and said in perfect English: "Welcome Englishmen. Do you have any beer?"

 Squanto's entire Patuxet tribe had been wiped out by disease while he was a prisoner on a ship bound for England. From the English he had been rescued by Spanish friars who taught him the rudiments of Christianity. Then he somehow managed to return to his homeland intending to rejoin his tribe. But when he returned and found them all dead, he wandered into the region of the Wampanoags. The Wampanoags hated the Patuxets. Yet the Wampanoag chief Massasoit decided to spare Squanto's life and to let him live among them. When Chief Massasoit was told by Squanto of the Pilgrims' arrival, he sent him back to them with Samoset, one of his own braves, in order to find out more about them and how they dared live in a region cursed by what the Indian nations believed was a dread and unknown Spirit. When both Squanto and Samoset reported back to the Wampanoag chief what they had seen and heard, Massasoit decided to show mercy to the Pilgrims, likely because he feared that the great and unknown Spirit was protecting them. Chief Massasoit instructed Squanto to help the Pilgrims.

The Pilgrims knew next to nothing about survival in the American wilderness. They didn't know how to plant or hunt or fish, except by their experience in England. They would've likely starved to death. But Squanto taught them how to refine maple syrup, make popcorn, trap and trade in beaver pelts with surrounding tribes, fertilize the soil; and how to become economically successful. At the end of their second year there, by order of their governor, William Bradford, a day of thanksgiving was proclaimed in the autumn, and Bradford invited Chief Massasoit to celebrate with them. When Massasoit came, he brought more than twice as many tribesmen with him as the remaining Pilgrims (some had died). But fortunately he brought his own food too. He arrived a day too early and stayed 3 days too late. He was the guest who wouldn't go home, and he enjoyed himself immensely. And so this day of thanksgiving was extended for 3 days more.
There were foot-races, games, shooting matches and sports, and by order of Governor Bradford the public giving of thanks to God, the Great Spirit that Massasoit so feared. And there they thanked God for Massasoit's kindness, too. And it was here that the Wampanoags heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ for the first time.
[from: The Light and the Glory: Did God Have a Plan for America? by David Marshall & Peter Manuel, Fleming Revel]

I said "Muslim-Friendly", not "Islam-Friendly". There's a difference. The Islamic Faith is diametrically opposed to the New Testament's teaching of God's grace shown to sinners through a sacrificed substitute. Instead, it's a religion of generalized grace that's fickle: arbitrarily administered by a god who requires 5 "Surahs"
 
[CHAIM is a Reformed and Calvinistic mission to Jews that also reaches Muslims with the Gospel of Jesus Christ. www.chaim.org ]
 
Muslims seek to merit God's favor by the performance of these 5 duties that must be done in order to be good Muslims: a Confession of Faith, a Ritual Prayer, Obligatory Alms, the Fast of Ramadan and the Pilgrimage to Mecca. Do them all and hope for the best, and perhaps Allah the All-Merciful will be merciful to YOU, and be gracious enough to bring you to Heaven. Perhaps. Then again, perhaps not. Because no one can know. Consequently there is no assurance of personal salvation as there is with New Testament faith. Unless of course you die in the performance of jihad, and in that case you go straight to Heaven. Otherwise, you just may go to the "other place" despite your 5 Surahs.
 
But World Missionary Press [wmpress.org]distinguishes between opposing Islam while being friendly to Muslims. Now how is that possible? Because World Missionary Press contextualizes the gospel for Muslims in its gospel tract "How to Know God" (in both Arabic and English): in other words, while sharply distinguishing Scripture's way of pleasing God from the Qu'ran's way, they still explain Christian doctrine in ways Muslims can understand.
 
For example: the title of one section reads: "Sacrifice Needed to Reconcile Us to God." The account of God telling Abraham to slay his son as a sacrifice is very important in Islam. And just as in Genesis 22, the Qu'ran says that God stopped him before he went through with it. In the Bible that son is Isaac. In the Qu'ran that son is Ishmael. "How to Know God" simply quotes the portions of Scripture that don't mention the son's name because they're trying to focus the reader's attention on the importance of the act of substitutionary sacrifice itself. Both accounts then mention the ram caught in the thicket as God's provided substitute. Then it uses other Scriptures that teach the importance of blood atonement using animals, and that God was pleased with such sacrifice. Incidentally, the Qu'ran also states the same thing.
 
The section right afterwards is entitled "Jesus Is The Lamb Provided by God," and uses that famous "substitutionary atonement" passage in Isaiah 53 that's been so effective in sharing the gospel with Jews:"He was led as a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before its shearers is silent, so He opened not his mouth."
 
Isaiah 53 works with both Muslims and Jews. Dr. Richard Ganz, Jewish believer in Jesus and  pastor of Ottawa Reformed Presbyterian Church who served on the faculty board of clinical psychiatry at Upstate Medical Center in NY, states that when he was first shown Isaiah 53 by a friend, he thought it was from the New Testament. Ganz states:

"Hans was obviously quoting to me from their Gentile Bible. I responded without a moment's hesitation: 'Anyone who was there at that cross could have written that stuff! What does that prove?' Hans handed me the Bible, and in a millisecond of receiving it my life was shattered. The name that I saw at the top of the page was Isaiah! Hans had been reading to me from my Bible, from my Hebrew Scriptures, and I felt as though someone had taken a sword and cut me to pieces. Hans then told me, as I sat with my eyes transfixed on that name, Isaiah, 'It was written 700 years before Jesus was born.' " [Dr. Richard Ganz, The Revival of a Rebel Jew [richardganz.com/rich-ganz-testimony.php]
 
The point is ... that the same text that's good for Jews is also good for Muslims. And "How to Know God" uses it.
 
The next section is entitled "Redemption Is Only By God's Provision". Here, the emphasis is on God's initiative and design, not man's, when it comes to sacrifice. God, being God, gets to decide what is and is not an acceptable sacrifice, and here, it deals with a controversial concept that the Qu'ran diametrically opposes: that Jesus actually died, and why He died. Isaiah 53 addressed that already, but here the tract elaborates with actual New Testament passages. Finally, the section entitled "The Birth of Jesus Announced" uses Luke 1:26 ff. This is important because it gives the account of the angel Gabriel. Muslims already believe in Christ's virgin birth, and they revere Gabriel; he's mentioned highly in the Qu'ran.
 
Hope this helps, in your personal and church Gospel witness to the world!

CHAIM MINISTRY TO THE JEWISH PEOPLE PRESENTS:
 
 
"THE HEART of PAUL"

A "Scriptures Dramatized!" live presentation
 
For churches, religious schools, retreats and conventions
 
A memorized dramatization of  II Corinthians
 
Performed in "period dress" as St. Paul might have rendered it.
 
KJV is the base text, with appropriate paraphrasings and explanations

 Follow-along programs with chapter-by-chapter synopses are provided
 
Free-will offering requested for the missionary work of CHAIM.
 
Contact us through www.scripturesdramatized.com

 
 SYNOPSIS of CHAPTERS


Chapter 1:
 
Paul tells of his escape from near-death in Asia Minor, explaining why he did not visit them as planned: in order to spare them his rebuke.

Chapter 2:
 
He enjoins them to now lift the excommunication he first required from them, of the member who openly practiced sin while enjoying their toleration.

Chapter 3:
 
He compares Old Covenant with New: one glorious but past, one more glorious and present; declaring that the blindness of the Jewish remnant will be lifted.
 
Chapter 4:
 
He compares the light that Christ sheds in the heart to the Creation in Genesis, and tells the theological reason for the crushing ordeals the apostles underwent.
 
Chapter 5:
 
He explains the theological reason for the afflictions of the human body itself: our "groanings", not to be rid of the body, but to be clothed upon with a new one.
 
Chapter 6:

Paul lists for this church his hardships and ordeals he endured for them, as he tries to protect them from the slanderers and liars poisoning his own reputation.

Chapter 7:
 
Paul reminds the church why he had to be harsh with them before: it was out of love. He rejoices that they then repented, showing respect for his authority.
 
Chapter 8: [optional recitation]
 
Paul stresses the importance of their financial giving.

Chapter 9: [optional recitation]
 
Paul further stresses the importance of their financial giving.
 
Chapter 10:
 
Paul gives examples of what the slanderers at Corinth were saying in their effort to destroy the church by destroying Paul's relationship with the church.
 
 Chapter 11:

He continues his attack on slanderers who boasted their religious credentials at his expense. He laments that now he too must "boast" to keep the church.
 
Chapter 12:

False prophets were claiming visions and divine guidance as way of refuting Paul. So he reluctantly defends his ministry with a "third heaven" experience he had.
 
Chapter 13:

He mentions a coming third visit to them, warning that if they continued to entertain slanders and lies he will come with an apostolic rebuke, with signs following.
 
 

A promising trend among evangelical churches today is their interest in Islam. And for good reason too: the religion grows rapidly here, and not just from immigrant influence, but from "home-grown" as well. 
 
In the city of Philadelphia, where CHAIM Ministry to the Jews www.chaim.org  does most of its missions work, we meet Muslims all the time. When we "aim" for the Jews, it seems we reach Muslim as well.  Philadelphia has one of the highest number of African-American converts to Islam of all cities in the US. 80% of these, however, were raised in the Church.  2/3 of Philadelphia Muslims are now African-American, and there are over 15,000 Muslims (foreign-born and domestic) in the city's public schools. So local churches would do well to take more than a passing interest in learning how to witness to them!
 
Philadelphia was the first US city to adopt the Muslim holiday of Eid (pronounced "eede"). When Islam first made a significant presence here, it was due to the Black Muslim movement started by F.D. Fard, who founded The Nation of Islam. This was actually a cult, or heresy of Islam because of its teachings that "God is a Black man", and that the Negro race is superior to the White. Fard's disciple was Elijah Mohammad, who taught that Fard was divine. Elijah also taught that the Black race must separate and subdue the White, and (FYI), Elijah Mohammad's disciple is Louis Farrakhan.
 
The filming of the movie "Malcolm X" (1992) with Denzel Washington produced a huge increase in Muslim conversions among Philadelphia's young blacks, as well as a return movement to traditional Islam among them. One reason: Malcolm X (the person) had a kind of "conversion" experience (not in the "Christian" sense) when he made his first pilgrimage to Mecca and saw that true Islam was egalitarian. Contrary to what he had advocated and taught for years, he saw that true Islam did not support the racism of The Nation of Islam. But when he returned to the US to share this revelation, he angered some of his co-religionists. This may have led to his assassination. The point is, more young blacks are finding their way into traditional Islam than ever before, and the churches must respond to this, for these are the very children and grand-children of their own congregations.
 
Unfortunately, the ignorance of the true nature of this faith, even in its traditional form is still so widespread and so tainted by state-sponsored "tolerance" values and "political correctness" that it's hard to get a bead on what the faith actually does teach: No, Islam doesn't advocate racism: Malcolm X got that right, but what it does teach is alarming enough it itself, and is aptly covered in the book The Third Choice: Islam, Dhimmitude and Freedom, written by Rev. Mark Durie, Anglican priest and human-rights activist.
 

 A promising trend among evangelical churches today is their interest in Islam. And for good reason too: the religion grows rapidly here, and not just from immigrant influence, but from "home-grown" as well. 
 
In the city of Philadelphia, where CHAIM Ministry to the Jews www.chaim.org  does most of its missions work, we meet Muslims all the time. When we "aim" for the Jews, it seems we reach Muslim as well.  Philadelphia has one of the highest number of African-American converts to Islam of all cities in the US. 80% of these, however, were raised in the Church.  2/3 of Philadelphia Muslims are now African-American, and there are over 15,000 Muslims (foreign-born and domestic) in the city's public schools. So local churches would do well to take more than a passing interest in learning how to witness to them!
 
Philadelphia was the first US city to adopt the Muslim holiday of Eid (pronounced "eede"). When Islam first made a significant presence here, it was due to the Black Muslim movement started by F.D. Fard, who founded The Nation of Islam. This was actually a cult, or heresy of Islam because of its teachings that "God is a Black man", and that the Negro race is superior to the White. Fard's disciple was Elijah Mohammad, who taught that Fard was divine. Elijah also taught that the Black race must separate and subdue the White, and (FYI), Elijah Mohammad's disciple is Louis Farrakhan. More than an anti-Zionist, (Many Muslims are that.) Farrakhan is an outspoken anti-Semite, and is on public record as making many statements denigrating the Jews. What he's done is to adapt and alter Islam to fit his racism.
 
The filming of the movie "Malcolm X" (1992) with Denzel Washington produced a huge increase in Muslim conversions among Philadelphia's young blacks, as well as a return movement to traditional Islam among them. One reason: Malcolm X (the person) had a kind of "conversion" experience (not in the "Christian" sense) when he made his first pilgrimage to Mecca and saw that true Islam was egalitarian. Contrary to what he had advocated and taught for years, he saw that true Islam did not support the racism of The Nation of Islam. But when he returned to the US to share this revelation, he angered some of his co-religionists. This may have led to his assassination. The point is, more young blacks are finding their way into traditional Islam than ever before, and the churches must respond to this, for these are the very children and grand-children of their own congregations.
 
Unfortunately, the ignorance of the true nature of this faith, even in its traditional form is still so widespread and so tainted by state-sponsored "tolerance" values and "political correctness" that it's hard to get a bead on what the faith actually does teach: No, Islam doesn't advocate racism: Malcolm X got that right, but what it does teach is alarming enough in itself, and is aptly covered in two books: The Truth About Islam, by Anees Zaka & Diane Coleman (P & R Publishing); and Christology in Islam and the Biblical Antithesis by Anees Zaka (Church Without Walls Publ.) Both will help the reader not only to understand Islam's threat, but also to dialog meaningfully with Muslims in an evangelistic way. 

Hey, I voted for Donald Trump. And I'm still happy with that. Now some might say to this, "Well, that's your problem." My answer? Well now it's your problem too because he's President. He's my president.

And some might say back "Well, he's not my president!" Okay, now I know what they mean by that. It means that they disown him and won't acknowledge him as President of the United States. But if he has the power to start war or declare martial law due to some domestic situation he doesn't like, I guarantee you that his decision will do more than mess up your day. You'll find out quickly enough that he's your president, like it or not.

A lot of those who voted for Trump saw that there were two choices in a close race. Choice "A" was Donald Trump. Choice "B" was unthinkable. So we voted Choice "A".  It was a simple choice, and we made it gladly.

Which brings me to the point: "Are you praying for Donald Trump?" Criticize him; find fault with him if you must, but are you praying for him?

I'm talking mainly to born-again Christians here. So for the rest of you, go take a siesta for 20 minutes. But for the born-again Christians, its your job to pray for the welfare and conduct of the President of the United States, whoever he is. Whether it's Trump or "Never Trump", whether it's Obama or Hillary or whoever, it is part of your job description as a believer to pray for whosoever is in that office.  There are some big reason for this. But I'll just give you one: self-interest. This man has the power, either through acts of omission or commission, whether intentionally or not, to seriously mess up your way of life by the decisions he makes. His decisions impact 325,000,000 Americans, regardless of whether they say he's "their" president or not. Notice I Timothy 2:2:

"Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence ..."

Notice that phrase "first of all". It means, well ... "first of all". Obviously St. Paul believed this was of primary importance to do. And he told his young protege pastor Timothy to make sure his church was praying this way. Notice also, that he uses this phrase " for all who are in authority". Does that include bad people? Well ... are there bad people who are in authority too? Yes. So that includes bad people too. Notice also these words "supplications" and "intercessions" and this phrase "giving of thanks". If you don't know what the first two words mean, then for heaven's sake look them up, because rest assured, what Paul is talking about is not the kind of brief, perfunctory prayers you make right before you eat dinner with your family.  He's clearly talking about something else: another kind of praying.

There are three objections people have for not praying for the current president. They have no trouble with the criticism part They have a big problem with the other part. Three objections: here they are:


Objection #1: "I Just Can't Stand the Man."

Really? Do you like him more than Nero? See, when St. Paul said to pray for those in authority, the ruler of Rome was Nero Caesar. Nero made Trump look like a choirboy. We best know Nero from the terrible things he did near the end of his life: played his fiddle at culturally insensitive times of national disaster, put on anti-Christian half-time shows during the arena games, and rumor has it he tried to make his horse a member of the Roman senate to show the senate what he thought of politicians. (Or was that Caligula?) Well anyway, Caligula, equally evil, lived at the time of Paul too.

Consider Romans 13: 1-7 and I Timothy 2:1-3 Here, St. Paul, writing by the Holy Spirit's inspiration, lived at the time of two of the most perverted, wicked emperors ever to rule Rome. His entire adult life spanned the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius and Nero. When you read in the Scriptures that he "appealed to Caesar" for redress of injustices (Acts 25:11) done to him, he meant Nero Caesar, who reigned during the last 10 years of his life. But regardless, Nero or not, under the Caesars were various appointed kings, governors and other servants of Rome; King Herod's sons Agrippa, Archelaus and Phillip; as well as Felix, Festus and Pontius Pilate being key examples. Scripture does not white-wash the sins of these pagan rulers, yet these are the rulers Paul spoke of in Romans 13. Needless to say, they were not sterling examples of Christian virtue. But what they did was uphold Roman law. And in the First Century that law protected the people of God and maintained, in a rough and imperfect way, the restraint of evil in the world.

"Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves. For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to evil. Do what is good, and you will have praise of the same. For he is God's minister to you for good. But if you do evil, be afraid; for he does not bear the sword in vain; for he is God's minister, an avenger to execute wrath on him who practices evil."

Notice again Romans 13. The appointees of Caesar were called "God's ministers"; not ministers in a church sense, but "ministers" in a political sense. Yet most of them were pagan, often dishonest, cruel, manipulative and self-serving. But the Scriptures boldly and unequivocally call them God's servants and ministers. Now for what purpose are they called this? Look again at  I Tim. 2:1-3 ...

"Therefore I exhort first of all that supplications, prayers, intercessions and giving of thanks be made for all men, for kings and all who are in authority, that we may live a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and reverence. For this is acceptable in the sight of God our Savior ..." 
 
Notice two things here: first, the ruler rules by God's choosing for the purpose of blessing and protecting God people through good government. And second, this blessing is conditional, not automatic. In other words if God's people are not consistently praying for God's restraint of the ruler and for wisdom given to him to rule well, then they will not reap the benefits. Notice how the text itself brings this out. Also notice the kinds of prayer God's word says to offer. And if your wondering what "supplications" means, it implies you're praying with your whole heart as if this was one of the most important things in the world to you; and probably on your knees. The times we live in require such prayer. Let's move on to Objection Number Two:


Objection 2: "We don't deserve God's grace as a country anymore. So how can I pray for him with any confidence?"
 
We never did deserve God's grace as a country. The very definition of "grace" rules out any such possibility of "deservability". At various times in the past, America was certainly more biblically-based, but never did she deserve the unmerited favor of God, which is what "grace" is. The reason Christians are told to pray for their rulers in I Tim. 2:2 is so that God would, despite our "undeservability", would show favor through the rulers  to those they ruled.  And to take it a step further, even the good conduct of obedient Christians does not merit the unmerited favor of God. What merits the favor of God to Christians is the "deserveability" of the One that they are putting their trust in. Theologically speaking, that's why God shows us grace through the governing authorities, and ultimately, that's Donald Trump today. The "Nero" comparison is helpful: not everything Nero did was insane or wicked. He often acted out of his character to protect the early church. St. Paul personally appealed to him in Acts 25:12 and 25:25 for redress of wrongs done to him by the Jewish authorities. The honorific title "Augustus" was used for Nero, and is in most translations.  ["Augustus: lit: "worthy of honor"] This "Augustus" was not the original Augustus Caesar who decreed at the birth of Christ "that all the world should be taxed." (Luke 2:1) and who died when Jesus was 14. No, this "Augustus" of Acts 25 was Nero Caesar who reigned from AD 37 until AD 68. Under God's restraining hand, the Emperor heard Paul's appeal, and allowed him to live and minister as a captive "guest" of Rome for two years, unmolested, "in his own hired house, no man forbidding him." (Acts 28:30,31) Here's the point: despite the wickedness of Rome and its emperor, God restrained Nero's evil for a long time in order to answer the prayers of the saints for the welfare of the church and for Paul's protection. Only towards the end of his life did Nero's madness make him the monster that history knows him to be. Final objection for not praying for Trump:

 
Objection #3: "It's hard enough to stay faithful to prayer in general; for myself and my family, let alone praying for a US President!"

Okay. Now if that's the case, you don't have a problem with Trump; you have a problem with prayer. Making time for intercessory prayer is usually a sacrifice. If it's not a priority, it won't get done. But people are always making sacrifices anyway: parents make time sacrifices for their kids, for example. And again, a lot of people don't know how to pray for their leaders. They think they have to pray for their salvation or it doesn't count. But that's not primarily in view with I Tim. 2:2. Rather, it's that the leader, despite himself, would make wise choices. Nero probably didn't become a Christian before he died, but those of his "household" did! (Phil. 4:22). That word "household" here, used in most translations can either mean those who were his immediate relatives or those close to him in his palace, who had the ear of the Emperor and could, if they wanted, exercise a certain restraining influence.

Prayer for your country's leaders whoever they are, is not something people are naturally "good" at doing. But like anything: parenting, riding a bicycle, anything; you get better at it by doing it!

Muslim militants and terrorists threatening violence against the US are not the only threat from Islam. A "slow-burning fuse" is the deceptive way the Islamic faith ITSELF has been "sold" to Americans by the intellectuals and elites of Academia.
 
Most US Muslims are peaceful and tolerant of others DESPITE the teachings of Islam, not BECAUSE of them.
 
Typical of this are imams in local mosques and Muslim scholars in America's universities who insist that though the "crazies" overseas are doing evil things, the basic religion itself is peaceful and tolerant. Nonsense. The faith of the Qu'ran has never been so. Though there have been historical lapses of violence in the past, the history of Islam is the history of the violent and coercive spread of this faith. 
 
The next time someone tells you that Christianity and Islam use the same methods and have the same violent history, point them to the lives and deaths of the Christian apostles. All but one: John of Patmos, died the death of a martyr. And most importantly to this comparison, they did not take the lives of others. Compare that with the lives and deaths of the apostles of Islam.Though cruel excesses were certainly done by false followers of Jesus, the apostle gave an example of how to live and teach peaceably in this world.. And "The servant is not greater than the master." (Jn. 15:20) If the masters gave an example, then their followers can be expected to do the same.
 
The same holds true with the apostles of Islam. Now to some specifics ..
 
1) Mohammad dies in 632, leaving no plan to succeed him. Among his lieutenants and their followers there are 3 civil wars fought.
 
2) Abu-Bakr, Mohammad's father-in-law was the first caliph. He killed or forcibly eliminated all rivals.
 
3) Omar (also known as Oman) killed Abu-Bakr in 634 (a rival he forgot to kill)
Omar reigns for 10 years; and kills or forcibly eliminates all his rivals.
 
4) A rival Omar forgot about cuts his throat in 644. As Omar dies, he appoints Ufman as caliph. Ufman reigns for 21 years. With help from uncles and aunts, Ufman kills or forcibly eliminates all of his rivals.
 
5) Ufman is beheaded by Aisha, wife of Mohammad in 655 with the help of  Aisha's lover Ali as well as Zuber ,a Muslim general. (As a side note, the 53 year-old Mohammad married Aisha when she was 7 years old, then consummated the marriage when she was 9, according to both the Hadith and authoritative Muslim tradition. The Hadith is the companion commentary to the Qu'ran. The Muslim explanation for this? She was very precocious, so it was lawful.)
 
6) After General Zuber kills Ufman, he himself is executed 3 days later.
 
7) Aisha then has her lover Ali executed in 661 because he was sleeping with a young concubine.
All this, of course, can be substantiated by either the Qu'ran, the Hadith, or authoritative Muslim tradition, just as the lives and deaths of the Christian apostles can be substantiated by the writings of the post-Apostolic Fathers of the Church.
 
"And the angel of the Lord said to her: 'Behold, you are with child, and you shall bear a son. And you shall call his name Ishmael. He shall be a wild man; His hand shall be against every man; And every man's hand against him." (Genesis 16:12)
 
The next time someone tells you that Christianity and Islam use the same methods and have the same violent history, you'll know what to say.