Looking for His glorious appearing! Titus 2:13

WashingtonThink Tank Predicts New Mideast War
Apr 23rd, 2010
Daily NewsArutz Sheva - Hana Levi Julian
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;War

A U.S.-based think tank has issued a report saying that a new Middle East war may be looming on the horizon.

If hostilities do in fact break out, writes David Schenker of The Washington Institute, “fighting could take on a regional dimension not seen since 1973.” The prediction comes in response to reports that Syria has supplied the Lebanon-based Hizbullah terrorist organization with advanced Russian-made 9K38 Igla-S anti-aircraft missiles. Transfer of the shoulder-fired ordnance to the terrorist group has previously been marked by Israeli officials as a “red line” issue.

Schenker also cited pronouncements posted in late February on the internet by the Lebanon-based Hizbullah terrorist organization hinting the group might renew its aggression against the Jewish State. The statement followed an unprecedented trilateral summit / dinner meeting on February 26 in Damascus between Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Syrian President Bashar Assad and Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah.

A new development

Meetings between the Syrian and Iranian presidents have become very common in the past several years; however, Nasrallah's presence at the table marked a new chapter in the development of the Evil Axis. Little was publicized about the discussion, other than what was later posted on the Hizbullah website, said Schenker, noting the account recounted “the escalating strategic response of the axis of the confrontationist, rejectionist, and resistance states” to the so-called U.S.-Israeli threat.

Schenker also noted Nasrallah's sabre-rattling earlier in February, during a speech delivered on Hizbullah's Martyred Leaders Day, in which the terrorist laid out the new strategy for reprisals against Israel:

“If you [meaning Israel -ed.] bomb Rafik Hariri International Airport in Beirut, we will bomb Ben-Gurion Airport in Tel Aviv. If you bomb our docks, we will bomb your docks. If you bomb our oil refineries, we will bomb your oil refineries. If you bomb our factories, we will bomb your factories. And if you bomb our power plants, we will bomb your power plants,” Nasrallah declared.

Recent reports that Syria has provided the terrorist group with Scud missiles capable of reaching deep into Israel's central and southern regions have supported and underscored Nasrallah's threats. The U.S. State Department summoned the Syrian Ambassador, Imad Mustafa, to “inform his government about the level of danger if the missiles crossed the border” but did little more.

Syria 'broke the code'

The Institute has also concluded that “Damascus has finally broken the code to Europe, and appears to be on the verge of doing so with the Obama administration as well. Currently, Syria appears to be in a position where it can cultivate its ties with the West without sacrificing its support for terrorism.”

In addition, the report noted IDF Chief of Staff Gabi Ashkenazi's testimony in mid-March before the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee that Hizbullah was “building up its forces north of the Litani [River].” Ashkenazi reported at the time that the northern border was secure and calm, but that “this can change.”

The fact that Hizbullah continues to stockpile weapons in violation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1701, the ceasefire agreement that ended the 2006 Second Lebanon War, and that Iran and Syria continue to provide the group with illegal arms, observed the Institute, has contributed to the deterioration of the security situation in the north.

“Hizbullah retaliation against Israel for the 2008 assassination of its military leader Imad Mughniyeh could spark a war,” writes Schenker. “So could Hizbullah firing missiles in retribution for an Israeli strike against Iranian nuclear facilities. The transfer of sensitive Syrian technology to [Hizbullah] could also prompt an Israeli strike. Regrettably, even if Israel continues to try and defuse tensions in the north, given the central role Tehran has in determining Hizbullah policy, a third Lebanon war may be inevitable

U.S. Envoy Mitchell Makes Surprise Visit
Apr 23rd, 2010
Daily NewsArutz Sheva - Maayana Miskin
Categories: Today's Headlines;The Nation Of Israel;Peace Process

United States envoy George Mitchell arrived in Israel Thursday for a surprise visit. Mitchell is expected to remain in Israel until Sunday, and to meet with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. Thus far, no official statement has been made regarding the purpose of his visit.

The visit may be tied to reports of recent progress in US-moderated peace talks between Israel and the PA. Progress is thought to have been made during a visit by the Obama administration's Senior Director of Middle East at the National Security Council, Dan Shapiro.

Shapiro visited Israel this week along with David Hale, Mitchell's deputy, and met with aides to Netanyahu and Abbas.

Freeze fight

US officials recently asked Netanyahu to freeze construction for Jews in neighborhoods of Jerusalem that were under Jordanian control between 1948 and 1967. The PA has insisted that Israel stop building in those areas, which it claims as the future capital of a PA state in Judea and Samaria.

According to the Wall Street Journal, Netanyahu informed the White House last weekend that Israel would continue to allow construction throughout Jerusalem. Other U.S. officials claimed that Netanyahu promised Obama a two year building freeze  in the Ramat Shlomo neighborhood in northern Jerusalem.

A recent WorldNetDaily report stated that the Obama administration has told the PA that US emissaries will pressure Israel to extend the current construction freeze in Judea and Samaria, which is slated to expire in late September. A senior PA official told WND that the PA had “reached an understanding” with America according to which Israel would extend the freeze and would stop construction for Jews in Jerusalem.

Report: PA Forces Turn to Hamas
Apr 23rd, 2010
Daily NewsArutz Sheva - Maayana Miskin
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

While Palestinian Authority officials put the focus on winning concessions from Israel, a recent WorldNetDaily report indicates that they may face a greater challenge – a Hamas uprising from within. Support for Hamas is growing within PA ranks, WND said, as it did in Gaza prior to the 2007 Hamas takeover of the region.

Quoting PA sources, WND said several members of Fatah had recently been arrested for helping Hamas to establish an infrastructure in Shechem. Fatah members helped a doctor smuggle roughly $1 million to Hamas for the purpose of buying weapons, the sources said.

Hamas is suspected of rebuilding its terrorist infrastructure in other Judea and Samaria cities as well. Hamas terrorists in Jenin recently managed to obtain hundreds of high-powered assault rifles, PA officials said.

In addition, PA officials suspect that Hamas is infiltrating Fatah by secretly recruiting members, including those in the PA armed forces. Many young members of the forces have received military training from the US, as part of a plan to train the PA to fight terrorist uprisings.

Hamas is believed by many PA analysts to have infiltrated Fatah in Gaza prior to its takeover of Gaza in 2007. The fight for Gaza was relatively swift and bloodless – of the several tens of thousands of armed Hamas and Fatah members in Gaza, slightly more than 100 were killed, and Hamas completed its takeover in under one week. Some analysts believe the Hamas victory was swift because many Fatah fighters stood aside and willingly allowed the Islamic group to seize control.

Hamas has previously threatened to conquer Judea and Samaria, but more recently has made overtures to Fatah and is seeking reunification.

PA Troops Jailed for Terrorism

The WND report came as PA officers were arrested on suspicion of involvement in terrorism. According to PA media, Israeli troops arrested two members of the PA's US-trained forces, one of them a member of the elite Presidential Guard unit.

A third PA officer, Salim Ubayat, was recently convicted and sentenced for terrorist attacks on Israel. Ubayat was convicted of membership in the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigades, of planning bombing attacks and of carrying out shooting attacks in Judea and Samaria.

Pentagon Disinvites Evangelist Who Scorned Islam
Apr 23rd, 2010
Daily NewsNews Daily - Phil Stewart
Categories: Today's Headlines;Contemporary Issues

WASHINGTON, Apr. 22, 2010 (Reuters) — The U.S. Army on Thursday withdrew an invitation to a Christian evangelist to speak at a Pentagon prayer service next month following an outcry over his references to Islam as a violent religion.

Franklin Graham, the son of famed evangelist Billy Graham, said in a statement he regretted the Army's decision and would keep praying for U.S. troops.

The invitation prompted a harsh reaction, including from a prominent U.S. Muslim group that said Graham's appearance before Pentagon personnel would send the wrong message as the United States fights wars in Muslim countries.

In an interview last year with CNN, Graham said "true Islam" was too violent to be practiced in the United States.

"You can't beat your wife. You cannot murder your children if you think they've committed adultery or something like that, which they do practice in these other countries," he said.

"I don't agree with the teachings of Islam and I find it to be a very violent religion."

The interview can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByovBdIRV2o

The Army said it did not invite Graham to the May 6 event organized through the Pentagon Chaplain's office. The invitation was instead extended by the private, Colorado-based National Day of Prayer Task Force.

"Once the Army leadership became aware that Reverand Graham was speaking at this event, we immediately recognized it as problematic," said Colonel Tom Collins, an Army spokesman.

"The bottom line here is that his presence would be inappropriate. His past statements are not consistent with the multi-faith emphasis and inclusiveness of this event."

Graham acknowledged the decision, saying in a statement: "I will continue to pray that God will give them guidance, wisdom and protection as they serve this great country."

The National Day of Prayer Task Force called the Pentagon's decision part of an "assault on religious freedom and people of faith" driven by groups including the government and media.

"The Pentagon, representing the most powerful military in the world, melted like butter and withdrew the invitation," it said, citing opposition by "a small group of naysayers."

'ISLAM ATTACKED US'

President Barack Obama and the military have repeatedly sought to assure the Muslim world that the U.S. fight against insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan should not be viewed as a war against Islam.

Former President George W. Bush heightened those concerns shortly after the September 11 attacks on New York and Washington in 2001 when he referred to his war on terrorism as a "crusade," a remark critics warned raised images of Christian knights attacking Muslim cities during the Middle Ages.

Franklin Graham gave the benediction at Bush's 2001 presidential inauguration and famously declared after the September 11 attacks: "We're not attacking Islam but Islam attacked us." He called Islam a "very evil and wicked religion."

This year, the military discovered a U.S. arms manufacturer had embossed biblical citations on rifle scopes sent to Afghanistan and Iraq. The manufacturer halted the practice.

The Military Religious Freedom Foundation, which also voiced outrage over the rifle scopes, wrote a letter of protest earlier this week to Defense Secretary Robert Gates over Graham's invitation.

The Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations said the invitation was damaging to the U.S. image.

"To have an individual who calls Islam evil and claims Muslims are enslaved by their faith speak at the Pentagon sends entirely the wrong message," said the group's national executive director, Nihad Awad.

Art's Commentary....The issue here is not Franklin Graham, but rather that Islam now has greater influence in America than Christianity. Criticism of Christianity is accepted as legitimate, bur criticism of Islam will not be tolerated. There will  be an awful price to pay for this policy as Islam continues to gain acceptance and influence. Look at the world, and take note of those areas where Islam has gained the upper hand, all freedom has been repressed in those areas.

Iranian, Syrian Presidents Discuss Mutual Cooperation on Phone
Apr 23rd, 2010
Daily NewsFNA
Categories: Today's Headlines;Warning

TEHRAN - Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in a phone conversation with his Syrian counterpart Bashar al-Assad conferred on ways to boost all-out cooperation between the two Muslim states.

"Iran and Syria will continue to cooperate on bilateral, regional and international issues," Ahmadinejad said.

"The enemies will never succeed as long as Iran and Syria stand by each other," Ahmadinejad added.

During the phone conversation on Wednesday, Ahmadinejad also reiterated, "Concerning disarmament, we should move in a direction that forces Zionist regime to accept international rules and disarmament."

"Zionist regime's measures in Holy Quds and other areas will come to naught and Iran-Syria efforts have paved the way for Palestinians and Gazans."

Al-Assad for his part said, "Super powers have not reached their final goal regarding Iran and try to create enmity between Iran and Arab countries, but seemingly, some Arab states want to be representatives of the West on Iran's nuclear issue and they have forgotten their main enemy which is the Zionist regime."

He also turned to Iran's nuclear disarmament conference, and said Syria supports any decision by Iran on global disarmament.

Book Review: Rejesus: a Wild Messiah for a Missional Church
Apr 23rd, 2010
Book ReviewFrom the Lighthouse - By Larry DeBruyn
Categories: Commentary;Topical Study

What might it all mean, and where might it all lead?

“Therefore I make known to you, that . . . no one can say, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except by the Holy Spirit.” 1 Corinthians 12:2,

Amongst pan-evangelicals nowadays, there’s a lot of talk . . . talk . . . talk . . . going on about “Jesus,” the name that bespeaks the humanity of the historical person known by that name. The best selling religious allegory The Shack humanizes Jesus as a relatively unattractive Middle Eastern Jewish man with a “big nose” who functioned as the retreat center’s repairman.

At face value, there is nothing wrong with portraying Jesus as human. In Jesus, God became incarnate. Paul the Apostle wrote, Jesus was “made in the likeness of men . . . [and] found in appearance as a man” (Philippians 2:7-8). Christians cannot deny—though Docetism, an ancient heresy in the early church, taught that His body was not real, that He only “seemed” (Greek, dokein) to have a body—Jesus possessed and possesses a genuine humanity. To counter the false teaching of Docetism, John the Apostle wrote that “the Word became flesh, and dwelt among us,” and that “many deceivers have gone out into the world, those who do not acknowledge Jesus Christ as coming in the flesh” (John 1:14; 2 John 7). For reason of His incarnation, no true Christian believer denies Jesus’ humanity. But with all this “Jesus-Jesus-Jesus” talk, believers ought to be concerned that a Christ-identity crisis is going on amongst professing evangelicals as they attempt to deconstruct the traditions surrounding Jesus in order to discover the authentic Jesus of the primitive gospel.

“ReJesusing”
To this point, a couple of authors have written a book titled, ReJesus: A Wild Messiah for a Missional Church. The book proposes ”a rediscovery of Christology that includes a preoccupation with the example and teaching of Jesus for the purposes of emulation by his followers.” Why do the authors propose rediscovering Jesus? Because, as they rightly describe,

Whether it is the grand ecclesiastical project of institutional churches, epitomized by the ostentatious excess of the Vatican, or the tawdry grab for the hearts and minds of the aspirational middle class by prosperity-style Pentecostalism, the Christian movement has been subverted. Like a forgotten nativity scene in a shopping mall dominated by Santa Claus, reindeer, elves, Disney characters, tinsel, baubles, and fake snow, the biblical Jesus is hard to find.

Then the authors add: “Let’s get our Christology right and then dare to place all our deeply held desires for how to do church at its service. Not vice versa.”

Though the authors make a fair point for going back to the source of the Christian faith, a faith that in many ways has been corrupted by intruding ideologies for two millennia, we must note that their desire to restore Christianity to its primitive roots is not new. It’s been tried before, and rightfully so, for we Christians ought to desire to rid our faith of symbolic baggage and get down to the nitty-gritty practice of it. Presumably that’s why God gave to us His Son and the Scriptures that witness to Jesus (Luke 24:44; John 5:39); to clarify what we should believe about Him and how we ought to behave in Him (2 Timothy 3:16-17).

But my concern is that Jesus talk may not be all it’s cracked up to be, and that because it appears to deemphasize Jesus to be, as Peter confessed Him, ”the Christ the Son of the living God” (Matthew 16:16), it will lead to nowhere in the end. In fact, the authors seem to infer that understanding Jesus to be the Lord Jesus Christ is a metaphysical imposition by the church upon the primitive but authentic Jesus. This is what emergents believe has accumulated around Jesus, what they call the Jesus myth. Thus they propose that, to really understand Jesus, the mass of ecclesiastical beliefs and traditions about Him must be discarded so that the modern church can be ”rejesused.” In their view, the church must be “rejesused,” or to use a computer metaphor, be “rebooted,” so that a new kind of Christianity can emerge. Coordinate with this line of thinking, one can observe that in Wm. Paul Young’s novel The Shack, Jesus is never referred to as “Christ” or “Lord.” Maybe those designations represent for Young a philosophical imposition upon the life of Jesus.

A Name above All Names
Yet in contrast to Paul the author, we can note that in various combinations Paul the Apostle predominately referred to Jesus as “Christ Jesus” (90 times), “Jesus Christ” (79 times), “Lord Jesus” or “Lord Jesus Christ (72 times), or “Jesus our Lord” (10 times). In the minority of instances when Paul refers to Jesus as “Jesus” (Romans 3:26; 8:11; 2 Corinthians 4:5, 10-11; Galatians 6:17; Ephesians 4:21; 1 Thessalonians 1:10; 4:14), the context indicates Jesus is being referred to as Jesus Christ, Christ Jesus or the Lord Jesus Christ. Why then, in contrast to the “Jesus-Jesus-Jesus” talk going on these days, does the Apostle refer to Him as such? I suggest the following reasons.

First, He is Jesus because He is the Savior for our sins (Matthew 1:21). Second, that He is “the Christ” is how Jesus Himself expected to be referenced (Compare Peter’s confession and Jesus’ response to it in Matthew 16:16-17.). Third, by His resurrection, Jesus was “declared the Son of God with power by the resurrection from the dead, according to the Spirit of holiness, Jesus Christ our Lord” (Romans 1:4). Fourth, Paul wrote to the Romans that nobody can be saved if they do not confess “Jesus as Lord” and believe in their heart that “God raised Him from the dead” (Romans 10:9; Now in contrast to name-it-claim-it hyper-charismaticism, there’s the real the word of faith! See Romans 10:8.) And fifth, in that He’s now ascended into heaven and there occupying the honored place at the Father’s right hand (Romans 8:34; Ephesians 1:20; Colossians 3:1), addressing Jesus as “Lord” by faith gives recognition to Jesus’ honored state. One day “every knee” shall bow, “of those who are in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth, and that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord” (Philippians 2:10-11). Question: Before our ascended Lord, why should we not bow our tongues and like the Apostle Paul, refer to Him as “Christ Jesus,” “Jesus Christ,” “Lord Jesus,” or “the Lord Jesus Christ”? Having observed that the New Testament refers to Jesus as Savior 24 times and Lord 522 times, one author concludes: “We should be able to make a personal application of these important statistics.”

So what are we to make of all this Jesus talk, this talk which while it rightfully exalts his earthly name on the one hand, wrongfully diminishes His heavenly name on the other? We need to be careful lest we create a Jesus so earth bound that He becomes of no heavenly relevance. After all, Jesus is “the Son of Man” (Matthew 16:13; Compare Daniel 7:13). Here’s what I mean.

A “Conspiracy” of Jesuses
In ReJesus, the authors state that, “A true Christian expression models itself on Jesus . . .” Then after citing Romans 8:29 (For whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son . . .), the book quotes an author who calls this the “conspiracy of little Jesuses,” to which the authors add, “we believe it is fundamental to God’s plans and purposes for his world [i.e., that Christians be a conspiracy of little Jesuses].”

Now for the purpose of working up God’s kingdom below, one can only wonder when this conspiracy of little Jesuses will morph to become a collusion of little Christs. Could this eventually be the fallout of an emergent Christology that attempts to affect the institution of God’s kingdom on earth through little Jesuses? On this point we must note that New Age author Neale Donald Walsch tells his readers, “Many have been Christed, not just Jesus of Nazareth. You can be Christed, too.” Or as Helen Schucman stated in A Course in Miracles:

Is he [Jesus] the Christ? O yes, along with you. His little life on earth was not enough to teach the mighty lesson that he learned for all of you.

Conclusion
“Jesus” was as common a name in Israel during the Lord’s life as it is in Latin America today. So what is it that distinguishes His name above all other names? It is that–as the Apostle Paul knew Him–He is “the Lord Jesus Christ”! To the extent that emergents prefer to refer to Him mostly as “Jesus,” they trivialize Him, making His name an inconsequential moniker.

So who is Jesus? Is He Jesus-Jesus-Jesus, or THE LORD JESUS CHRIST? As we answer this question, we ought all remember that “no one can say, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ except by the Holy Spirit” (1 Corinthians 12:3). If we should find a deficiency within us making it difficult to refer to Jesus as “Lord” there may be indication of a deeper problem going on within our souls; and that is in all this Jesus talk, we are not really being led by the Spirit (John 15:26); or worse, that our hearts are not really regenerate. After all, regeneration is the nexus by which the Holy Spirit imparts Jesus’ life in us for the purpose of living His life through us. To be Christlike on the outside demands that people first possess the Spirit of Christ on the inside (Romans 8:9). In its fullness, the Kingdom will not come by emulation, but by regeneration.