Barna and Discipleship

Barna and Discipleship

Some of my readers are familiar with the Barna Group founded by George Barna and the important work they do by surveys that tell us where the Church and its members are. One of those areas of the survey is on basic discipleship, including knowledge of basic doctrine. My readers can do an internet search of Barna and easily find the progression of studies from year to year. My Anglican friend form Graduate School days from 49 years ago, David Virtue (who publishes Virtue online) sent a summary of an update. As usual, it was sad and alarming. Even such basic knowledge as salvation by grace versus works was unclear among the Evangelicals surveyed. A majority said that one could be saved by being a good person!

It raised some questions. I am puzzled. Where did the pastors go to Bible school or seminary if they did? Did they not think it important to emphasize basic truths so that everyone would know the truth and would at least be able to answer the basic questions of our beliefs. When I was 12/ ½ I started attending an evangelical Reformed Church congregation. I was not there for a month before I learned that salvation was only by grace through faith. I prayed to receive Yeshua by faith, April 1960. One of the first verses we had to memorize in Sunday school was Titus 3:5, 6, “Not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy he saved us.” Eph. 2:8,9 were next, “By grace are you saved through faith and that not of yourselves. It is not by works lest any man should boast.” Forgive the King James. Of course, there was John 3:16. When I was 15, I attended catechism classes every Saturday morning for a few months. We memorized the answers to questions about our faith which established basic doctrine in our hearts. I also recalled outreaches some 30 years ago. There was a two question test. “Why when you die should God let you into his heaven?” Of course, it was on the basis of grace and the atonement for our sins by the death of Yeshua. There was the basic presentation of the Gospel in the Four Spiritual Laws, which I would correct by a more Kingdom emphasis. However, the basics were there. I wrote Growing to Maturity to disciple in basic knowledge and growth. Then knowing that catechism was very helpful I wrote the Growing to Maturity Primer as a catechism in a Messianic Jewish contest.

What happened? Barna is not even talking about deep discipleship but that people in Evangelical Churches are not clear on the Gospel itself and salvation by grace through faith. What do pastors in such churches teach? Friends, help me out here? How can congregations really grow if the people do not understand the Gospel?

The Power of the Gospel and the LGBTQ People

Many Christians and Messianic Jews find themselves in a political battle with LGBTQ people. They do not want to be forced to endorse the lifestyles or be accused of hate speech or be so accused by reading the Bible on these moral issues. They don’t want to see artists forced to create works that promote the LGBTQ lifestyles. They also don’t want to see transgender women (biological men) compete in women’s sports. Other than that, many would support basic civil rights for all LGBTQ people and would stand with the LGBTQ people for that. However, the political battles should not be the center of our concern.

Our central concern should be the power of the Gospel and compassion. A generation ago the great Anglican healing minister, Leanne Payne reported amazing progress in caring for homosexuals. Many were able to find power through the Gospel to completely change their orientation. Some entered successful marriages. It may be that I am ignorant but I just don’t know of great evangelistic success with this group. More important than the political issues is serving this group with love and compassion. Our hearts should be broken with their pain and their struggle. It is praying and receiving the power of God at a much higher level than we are seeing. Maybe some of my friends can let me know where the ministries of compassion are successful to the LGBTQ community. What are the stats?

The first thing that we should project from a real place love is a compassionate face, but also confidence in the power of the Gospel. If the Gospel is really the power of God unto salvation, which means more than going to heaven, but victory over sin in this life, then we should see healing and deliverance with these people.

On Passing the Trump Test in How We Treat Fellow Believers in Yeshua (Jesus)

In Mike Brown’s book on Will Evangelicals Pass the Trump Test, he argues that one key to that test is how we treat those who will vote for and against Trump (if they expose themselves and engage in debate). If we do not treat them with love and respect and credit that they have reasons we err. While I think the reasons on platforms and all else favor the Republicans, I well know that there are some good counter reasons. Some very precious people in my life will vote against Trump, including one best friend of 56 years, the retired Pastor of the Church where I was a charter member in 1966, the wonderful Pastor of a Presbyterian Church who took my courses at the King’s University when it was in Van Nuys, California. I will not arrogantly treat them as moral idiots though I see such darkness coming much more from the Democrats. Soon, in a few years, the proof will be in no matter who wins on the basis of what happens.

My daughter pointed out the arrogance of people and was very disturbed by my Facebook page at the amount of arrogance on both sides. Not the majority, but enough posts show this arrogance. If you are not in agreement, you are a moral/ethical idiot. I have had posts where some say that if you vote for Trump you can’t be a believer. Others, especially on the abortion issue, that if you vote against Trump you are a moral idiot. Yet these folks are anti-abortion and want to fight it by the Gospel and not by legislation. I think they are wrong, but they are not idiots.

One thing that is very disturbing is the painting of the other side like Hitler. Both sides do it. Yes, there is the cancel culture and some of the things Antifa is after is totalitarian. Then we hear that Trump is like Hitler. First, I think this violates the command of Scripture to not vilify our civil leaders. We can speak correction but with humility. Scripture is very clear on this. Secondly, as one historian of Hitler said in Germany recently, this is a terribly wrong comparison. There is no evidence that Trump seeks ethnic cleansing, and Hitler revealed this all along. Jews should especially be offended that such a comparison is made when Hitler and the Holocaust has no comparison. To draw such comparisons is such slander against all those who have reasoned positions to vote for him. If Trump is like Hitler, then a Bonhoeffer needs to rise up and assassinate him. If the volant protesters and cancel culture is like Hitler, then we need to rise up a militia and kill them off like the Jewish resisters in Warsaw. I have posted on what I think is the outlandish behavior of the left. Do my friends understand that when you bring in Hitler comparisons you slander all those who support their side as such moral idiots that they are supporting a Hitler and are as dumb as can be? I can give a list of the most fine and sensitive people who are supporting Trump, including Blacks, Whites, Hispanics, and Asians. I can point out the years of ministry integrity of some of his supporters, including pastors, evangelists, and rabbis. Most of the most sensitive people in the prophetic that I know, support, Trump. What does it say about all of these people to say they support a Hitler. I also can make a list of fine people, best friends, sensitive people who are totally anti-Trump. What does it say about them if we accuse them of supporting a Hitler like direction or that they are supporting Bolsheviks? It really is accusing them of being moral/ethical idiots. So, let’s stop with the arrogance. Let’s stop with the incendiary rhetoric. Let us accept that each side has at least some good reasons. This is a challenging time for all of us. In Mike Brown’s book, again, the key issue in passing the Trump test is how we treat those who don’t agree with us among the believing community and how we prosecute our cases. If we stoop to vilification and treating the other side as “a basket of deplorables,” God help us. And as Mike also argues, let us never think that the solution is in the political realm despite our civic responsibility and its importance. Our hope for people is in the Gospel, so let’s not make an idol of politics. For many who are not committed to God, politics is their religion. We must not go there. By the way, Mike is measured and gracious. He gives the reasons against voting for Trump. I think he left out some key policy issues where I disagree with Trump. However, I strongly recommend his book because he passes his own Trump test.

The Israel Political Crisis Never Ends

Israel has two moderately conservative newspapers that for many years were quite positive to Prime Minister Netanyahu. That has changed. Why? There are several reasons. and the issues they write about now take us to another crisis.

First, the editors did not think an indicted Prime Minister should run for Prime Minister or be in office of P. M. The Supreme Court ruled that he can do so. The issue is as the editors stated, that his attention would be diverted, and that he would develop policy directions tainted by the upcoming trial and then during the trial. This seems to be exactly what is happening. One of the issues is that in Israel it is possible for the Knesset to pass a law that a Prime Minister cannot be indicted but only removed by the Knesset. However, passing that law after an indictment is problematic indeed. We recall that Prime Minister Olmert stepped down when indicted and afterwards was convicted and served his time.

After the last election, Netanyahu did not have enough votes to form a coalition without the centrist Blue and White. The negotiations were hard, but hardly anyone in Israel wanted a fourth election in so short a time. A new election did not seem to favor Bibi. So, after hard negotiations, it was agreed in the coalition agreement that they would pass a two-year budget. When a government cannot pass a budget, the government falls, and elections are required. The two-year budget assured that this would not happen. The agreement also stipulated that in November of 2021 there would be a rotation and Benny Gantz would become the Prime Minister. The Knesset agreed to all this. The ultra-Orthodox Sephardic party, Shas, said they would guarantee the agreement and would not support moves by Bibi to get out of it. Now in only a few months Bibi wants to scuttle the agreement on the two-year budget. Shas said they would not support this move. Bibi’s excuse is that the virus makes a long-term budget unfeasible. But the virus was here when the agreement was made. It looks to almost everyone that Bibi wants a one-year budget and then to go to elections before Gantz has his turn. Then he can pass the legislation that lets him off the hook with the court. If the polls look good, he would want an election right away to get out of the court case. This is the most manipulative political wrangling that I have ever seen. So, what does Bibi do with Shas? He offers hundreds of millions in shekels to the ultra Orthodox Yeshivot (religious Talmud study schools) to buy them off to gain their acceptance if he goes to elections for a fourth time.

Bibi has done very, very, good things for Israel. The news editors I referenced say so as well. However, they think things are now over the top. There is as I write now only 48 hours to avoid an election and pass a budget extension, but that will only delay the problem. If Likud, Bibi’s party, changed their leader, I think they would do well.

Meanwhile, Bibi’s direction is losing votes to Naftali Bennet of the new Right Party, not to Blue and White or Yesh Atid, the two recent biggest parties opposing him This is due to Bibi taking sovereignty for the West Bank in part or in whole off the table for the peace agreement with the UAR. Bennet also sees the integrity issues. Likud’s Gideon Saar also would like to replace Bibi due to the integrity issues. However, the Likud members will not yet vote to replace him. What will happen? We don’t know, but we are in a political crisis again. It is a crisis totally created by Bibi. We are still fighting a spike in the Corona virus. The new Corona Tsar, Dr. Roni Gamzu, seems very solid and balanced. In the midst of this, to spend hundreds of thousands of shekels on unnecessary elections seems unconscionable. As for the budget issue, a two-year budget could be passed and adjustments could be passed later if necessary. So again, we need much prayer.

A Cry for Deeper Discipleship/ Growing to Maturity

Yeshua commanded the disciples to go and make disciples of all the nations, immersing them and teaching them to observe all that He commanded them. The goal of discipleship is to “be conformed to the image of His Son,” (Romans 8:29). This is God’s destiny for all who are in Yeshua. When a person enters the Kingdom through the preaching of the Gospel, they enter a whole new realm of resources to enable them to grow. Salvation by faith, when unpacked in meaning, includes pledging our allegiance to Yeshua. We then have the gift of being immersed in the Spirit, have his living presence, and the gift of the Word of God by which we can grow in understanding. The Word actually has real power to change us through the Spirit.

As a young pastor, I was troubled by the number of people in my congregation who just seemed so far from biblical responses to others, their spouses, to their children, to fellow members in the congregation (48 years ago). Since that time, I have seen such a plague of divorce among those who profess faith in Yeshua. I came to believe and still believe that the primary issue is the failure to disciple and to become disciples. I often assert one axiomatic affirmation, that two people who are conformed to the image of Yeshua will have His love for each other and divorce becomes impossible.

So, how does discipleship take place? I came to understand 45 years ago that preaching is not the key to discipleship. Spirit-inspired preaching can bring people to repentance and to a commitment to discipleship, but usually, discipleship is a matter of mentoring by a person who has grown to a significant level of spiritual maturity. Since that time studies have overwhelmingly confirmed my conclusion. The key is to establish structures of small groups with mentor-leaders who can disciple and then those who are discipled can disciple others. Discipleship includes establishing a solid devotional life first of all, then learning how to know the presence and leading of the Spirit. The Word will also show sin that requires repentance. There is deliverance ministry, how to build faith, corporate worship, and commitment to life in the Body. The most effective disciple-makers I have ever known finds himself discipling pastors who have never really been discipled.

Why are we not obeying what Yeshua commanded and understood that discipleship is one who has learned to obey all that he commanded? It is because it is much easier to give a weekly message and depend on that. Secondly, when leaders embrace the call to disciple, they will sometimes find people who are unwilling to deal with some serious sin patterns in their lives. There is a protective wall of self-defense. This calls us to emphasize prayer and the conviction of the Spirit to bring a person to the humility to address the areas of life that are resistant to the ways of Yeshua.

When I began to see the centrality of discipleship, I first created seven lessons on discipleship that I first used with a couple I led to the Lord and another who came to us as new believers. These seven lessons eventually were expanded into the book Growing to Maturity, which was published by the Union of Messianic Jewish Congregations in 1982. It has been through several editions and its latest edition now is published by Lederer/Messianic Jewish publishers. It is also in Russian, Spanish, and Hebrew. It has been the most used book for discipleship in the Messianic Jewish world. It is also a foundational doctrinal manual. I have been amazed to find so many still use this book and write to say how helpful it is. It is strange that there are not many other examples of such books. This book presents its theology from the original Jewish context of the Bible and does give the foundations for understanding the Bible. If you do not have a copy of this book, do obtain a copy.

Approaching the Victims and the Beatitudes

Recently a famous black sports reporter, Jason Whitlock, expressed his alarm at the tenor of Black Lives Matter protests, including his disagreement on some of the false assumptions (not all the assertions are wrong) and the tenor of the Democratic Convention. He noted black people were being used through instilling unfounded fear. Michelle Obama asserted that black people were afraid to go out because, she indicated, of the long list of killings of unarmed blacks by police. The problem he said was that there just was not such a long list but this year the number was 8 so far out of millions of people and last year, 14. We should be concerned for every unjustified killing. His point was that the Democrats were pushing a victim mentality that would lead people to give up; that the deck was stacked against them and that there was no reason for trying. Unless people are given hope and reason to believe that they can succeed, they will find it very hard to get ahead. Though socio-economic issues are a continuing problem, for Whitlock, being black was not the major issue for hindering success, but the continued situation victimhood and hopelessness in the underclass communities. I am told that we should listen to the black voices, but often people mean to listen to the black voices that fit their ideology. Do we listen to the voices of the 81% of poor blacks who want the same police presence or more, or to the voices saying to defund the police? Then is there a voice that transcends the debates?

His presentation caused me to think. How did Yeshua address the issue of the poor and marginalized since he spent the primary (not exclusive by any means) thrust of his ministry reaching those we would call the underclass? He did not rail against the government system under Rome, though it was bad. He did rail against the religious leaders and their relationship to the needy. (This would be like our criticisms of the Church for its lack of involvement.) Rather, He declared the new power of the Kingdom of God. The key for the marginalized was to enter that Kingdom and to live from a new power in God that made for all kinds of new possibilities. Many scholars now understand, for example, that Yeshua’s teaching in Matthew 5, called the beatitudes, was misunderstood He was not calling for us to have life orientations to live so that we could be blessed. Rather He was announcing a great reversal of fortunes because the Kingdom of God had come. In Matthew 5:3-5, we read,” Blessed are the poor in spirit for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are those who mourn, for they shall be comforted. Blessed are the meek, for they shall inherit the earth.” The noted scholar N. T. Wright gives us the keys to these verses. Because the Kingdom of God has come in Yeshua, the poor are no longer determined by their poverty. In Luke, the words “in spirit” are not added. It just says the poor are blessed. Mourners are no longer trapped in terrible grief. The meek, who were not able to push their way toward success, would no longer be cast aside, but they would inherit the earth. They would be changed and no longer meek in a negative way. Dallas Willard, in his Divine Conspiracy, says that the Gospel of the Kingdom is the invitation in the present to live in and from the Kingdom of God that has broken into this world. Therefore the passage in Luke 4: 17-21 is parallel and an interpretive key to this Matthew. Here Yeshua announced that the Spirit of the Lord was upon him to announce a jubilee year for the captives, the blind, and the oppressed.

Yeshua did not organize a protest against the oppression of the Roman government, the taxes that impoverished people, the collaboration of the Sadducees, and the Jewish tax collectors with this oppressive government. Yet he initiated a revolution that eventually changed the whole Mediterranean world. It was because the Gospel really brought people into a level of supernatural power and a confidence that came from forgiveness and certainty of God’s favor. One could not choose to continue in victim status and continue to live in and from the Kingdom. This is why with all the social problems many argue about in the United States, the followers of Yeshua cannot lose sight of the most important thing always, the Gospel. It is the power of God to salvation, and that is more than just going to heaven, but victory in this present life. We may support different approaches by the government that might be helpful more or less. Some approaches might make the problem worse. But if we put our hope for the underclass in political solutions, we betray ourselves as falling prey to a secular humanistic mind and not really believing and knowing the awesome power available in the Gospel. How many are the testimonies of the poorest of the poor and oppressed from around the world who triumphed through the power of the Spirit in Yeshua! May we know that the great answer to the greatest needs of all is in the Gospel. This is not to say that we do not vote for the best policies, but where do we really rest our hope!

The Ultimate Clash of World Views

In one of my recent posts, I distinguished and sought to define the differences between the liberal-left of center Democrat, the leftist Democrat, and the radical far-leftist. The radical left is based on an integrated world view to a much greater extent than the left of center and the left. Some of the positions of the last two are incompatible with a biblical world view, especially on abortion. But the radical left views are almost totally the opposite of Biblical teaching. When the left of center and left give in to the radical left, they then become an anti- God of the Bible force. While some may see the whole Democrat Party as propounding such an anti-God world view, I think such claims go too far and do not take into consideration how much these Democrats are pragmatists, seek their own power and preservation without a clear world view. I don’t think they are coming from a philosophical position, but the leaders of the far left are. There is one point of agreement with the radical left and the Bible. It is that we are to care for the poor and the marginalized and find ways to lift them up and improve their lives. The question is how, and for us, the Gospel is the key without which we do not expect success. The world view of the radical left is built on totally shaky ground. First, it is built on their subjectively chosen values that have no rooting and are not found in other non-western cultures historically. The best writers admit to this subjectively. It is just their choice. Analytic philosophers show this to be the case when they examine the thinkers of the far left. The philosophy is built from a combination of philosophies. There is a critical school that began in Germany in the 1920s. The most influential in these leftist movements is Herbert Marcuse and his later writings in the 1960s. These writings are full of pontification but not really grounded. I will write more about him in another essay. The views of neo-Marxism and Freud are credited though academic criticism of these writers has largely discredited them. But in an internet age and on the university campus which is rife with subjectivism, any view can gain traction. In addition, postmodernism has been integrated. It teaches that there is no meta-narrative like the Biblical world view or natural theology or philosophy on which to base one’s life, but one chooses one’s values with the hope that enough will agree to implement the change desired. Their approach to history and literature is deconstruction where the claim is made that history is the narrative of the winning powerful and literature as well is by such. Yet since there is no objective history writing it is all people making power assertions against one another. Therefore there has to be a tearing down of the western canon. You will see the roots of Antifa in this and the destructive tendencies in the universities. The great Francis Schaffer lectured on Marcuse and anticipated this some 50 years ago.

Here is a list of some contrasts in world views, the Biblical and the radical leftist. This is the foundation of the present clash in America. The Black Lives Matters official organization is neo-Marxist, though the movement of ordinary blacks would have no idea of all this.

Human beings are created in the image of God. All are to be treated as having incalculable worth, with dignity, with respect, and with goodwill. Every nation is from one original pair and God loves all nations. We are called to live by the metanarrative of the story of the Bible and its hope for the redemption of all nations.

Human beings are a product of natural material and energy forces, a product of chance or if there is a higher order, we cannot know anything of it so it is irrelevant. Human beings are important because it is our species and we claim to believe that human beings are of worth and important. We should see all humans as equal. (This view comes from the biblical world view and our view is that it will not last without biblical roots). However, the past corporate sins of white people require them to pay special restitution is now ordering society so that some groups are given special favor to produce greater equality. There is no metanarrative from which we are to live our lives. Atheism drives this view. There is really no reason for seeking the betterment of human beings and no argument against those who choose a selfish life.

God is the creator of human beings, the world, and the whole universe and has revealed his will for how we are to live. This includes the basic principles for organizing society, including marriage, the family, and definitions of justice and love. Ethics and morals are objectively grounded in the will of God revealed in the Bible. There is a heaven and hell and a final judgment of people for good and evil. This motivates people to get right with God and live righteously.

Morality and social relationships are social constructions and based on no objective order. They the product of choices made by the people in society. Every human being is free and is to construct their own meaning for their lives. There is no meaning form above or outside of us.

God created two sexes, male and female. Sexual relationships are to be limited to monogamous heterosexual marriages. Sexual relationships are for the enhancement of the bonding union of love between a husband and wife. It is also the plan of God that marriage produces offspring.

Sexual arrangements are a social construction. All sexual arrangements chosen by consenting adults should be affirmed. This includes heterosexual marriage, homosexual marriage, relationships without marriage, polyamorous relationships, polygamy, transsexuality, bisexuality, etc. The idea of biological genetic determinism is generally not credited, but rather there are orientations that can be chosen for many reasons. To not affirm all such chosen relationships is foundationally unjust and constitutes hatred. It is valid to cancel people who disagree and shut down contrary speech as hate speech. Biblical norms are hate speech.

God’s order for raising children is ideally a father and mother in a good marriage. Those sometimes it is necessary to see a single parent family supported, and they should be, policy should be toward the traditional family as the building block of a stable society. This means that adoption should favor those in traditional marriage.

As all sexual arrangements among consenting adults should be embraced, so all types of arrangements for raising children should be equally embraced, including single-parent families, polyamorous arrangements for family, lesbian and homosexual parenting families, transsexual parents, and more. To favor the hetero-normal marriage as key to the family is foundationally unjust and should be opposed. Ending heteronormality should be a goal of the quest for justice. The traditional family of marriage and family is overly restrictive and oppressive. There should be greater freedom for pleasure.

The child in the womb is created in God’s image and but for saving the physical life of the mother is to be brought to term and given birth.

The child in the womb is not to be defined as a human person. The social construction chosen by the radical left is to see the child in the womb as a physical form that is completely subject to the women’s choice as to whether or not to carry it to term and then give birth to what will be defined as a human person.

Justice is the pursuit of an order of righteousness where every person can pursue their God-given destiny. Love seeks justice so that all may find fulfillment. Adequate food, housing, education, and medical care is a foundation of justice so that individual destinies can be pursued. The question of organizing society is an empirical question about which arrangement, politically and economically, will best move us closer to this goal. Equality is only part of justice in regard to equal standing before the law and the courts.

Justice is equality. As such, the capitalist system needs to be torn down so that equality in income, distribution of housing, medical services are given to all. Medical services should be provided by the state and equal for all. Education should be free and equally offered to all and qualifications for college should be loosened to allow more from minorities to be accepted. Quotas for ethnic groups are valid. Justice requires replacing capitalism with socialism.

A just society requires a strong police force that prevents crime and arrests criminals. The fallenness of man will make this necessary. Non-violent criminals should be placed in rehabilitation and restitution structures and not just sent to prison. Violent criminals should be sent to prison but opportunities for reform should also be provided. Religious services are key to that change. There is not an agreement on capital punishment for crimes. Policing and the courts must treat all races and ethnic groups with equal justice under the law (Deut. 1, 17) The biblical world view eschews violence for social change.

There is generally an acceptance that some policing is necessary, but the idea of tearing down the present order produces an indulgence of criminals, a lack of sympathy for victims, and an anti-police orientation since the police are part of the present order that has to be torn down. This world view accepts violence for tearing the system down and replacing it.

On the issue of human society and what is possible, the Biblical world view is that there can be a great improvement when people embrace the Gospel and seek to live in God’s ways. However, due to sin, human societies at best will always show glory and shame. Any attempt to produce a utopian order without God will lead to terrible pain, violence, and destruction.

The present order of American and western free enterprise societies is foundationally evil and unjust. One sees this in the racism of western countries. Though there is no clear systematic clarity on how a really just society of true equality and fulfillment can be built, the best way forward is to destroy the present order with the hope that something can be built-out of the ashes.

There are many other issues that are questions of empirical research. Balancing the environmental concerns with the need for economic development to lift the poor is a case in point and is seen in the African countries rejecting the Green New Deal. There are many issues that are a matter of research and evidence and the Biblical world view does not pre-orient us to a conclusion.

The peaceful protesters the Black Lives Matter movement may be right or wrong about the level of police injustice. This is a matter for empirical research. They largely are not ideologues that embrace the philosophical position of the radical left. The violent protesters are influenced by the world view we described. The universities in America have many professors who are influenced by the radical left world view, and they make many disciples among the young. This discipling is taking place in our high schools and now even in the materials and teaching in elementary school. Parents wake up!!

Historically, revivals can change the prevailing world view of a culture and return it back to the Biblical world view. That is our great hope and prayer.

Rising Anti-Semitism

Decades ago Derek Prince, the great Bible teacher, and leader told of his conversation with a friend after Israel became a nation. The friend states that the issue of Antisemitism was a sociological issue, that Jews were persecuted in the nations because they were different. Having their own nation would solve the problem, he asserted. Derek Prince responded that if the problem of Antisemitism is primarily a sociological problem he would be right, but if it is primarily a spiritual problem, then the establishment of the State of Israel would eventually produce the worst Antisemitism that the world had ever seen. Why would he claim this? It was due to his theology, a theology that I share. Basically, God’s faithfulness to the Jewish people, their preservation, and their return to their Land is a necessary condition for the triumph of Yeshua and his rule of the whole world. The confession of Yeshua by Israel through its leadership in Jerusalem leads to the Second Coming, the defeat of the Devil and the Antichrist, and the ultimate rule of Yeshua over all nations. (Romans 11:15, 25-29, Roman Catholic Catechism Paragraph 674). Yes, the Roman Catholic Catechism affirms these texts and their implications. Therefore, if Satan can thwart the plan of God through destroying the Jewish people or their significant presence in their ancient Land, he wins. This is the only explanation that really makes sense of the situation that a small population out billions is a world focus in current events and a focus of hatred for so many.

Recently, research surveys have shown a great increase in Antisemitism. It Is not only the growth of the white supremacist and far-right nationalists. Their Antisemitism is familiar and maintains the same terrible lies that were present from the 19th century and early 20th century leading up to Hitler. That the Jews are an inferior race, inherently evil, control the world banking system, plot to control the world, and the source of all evil ideologies. (Yes, some Jews were key communist leaders but many other ethnic groups produced communist leaders. These ideas were also rooted in America, as exemplified by Henry Ford, and only became unacceptable after the terrible war against Hitler. But now these ideas return. They also include anti-black ideas and a general disdain of all non-white groups.

The second influence is from the Islamic World. Muslims have immigrated to the Western nations and those not promoting a reformed and moderate Islam are carrying their deeply held anti-Semitic views with them. Thomas Bostom destroys the thesis that life was good and more tolerant for Jews in the Muslim controlled governments in the past. His book Islamic Anti-Semitism is the most important and comprehensive source. The number of Jews slaughtered under Islam is greater than in non-Islamic countries and only the Holocaust changed these statistics. His new introduction makes this very clear.

However, the characteristic of the present time is new forms of anti-Semitism not before seen in history. There is the new black anti-Semitism. It is influenced by the intersectionality views of the leftists who state that the Palestinians are oppressed like the blacks oppressed by whites, from slavery onward. Jews are connected to whites and not accepted as a minority group. It is even claimed that Jews were a key part of the slave trade. Pop artist Jason Wiley writes on Twitter that Jews are “snakes, cowards, at war with black people, responsible for the slave trade and deserve to be shot.” The slave trade claim is not true but propaganda from Islamic sources. Actually, the Arabs were a key part and very few Jews were involved. Muslims owned many black slaves. This lie has led beyond anti-Israel rhetoric to anti-Semitism. One of the new features is the black celebrity anti-Semites. Rapper Ice Cube raps, “Get rid of that devil. Real simple. Put a bullet in his Temple. Cause you don’t’ want to be a n**** for life crew with a white Jew telling you what to do.” Ice Cube has supported the very anti-Semitic Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan. With Farrakhan, the prejudice connects to Islamic sources. Influential rapper Jay Electronica wrote that “Jews are imposters and black people are the “true children of Abraham.” Theories that the Jews are not really connected to ancient Israel abound. If this were true, God’s promises would be null and void. But this replacement of Jews by blacks is growing, including the black Hebrews, etc. He writes’ And I bet you a Rothschild, I get a bang for my dollar/ the Synagogue of Satan wants me to hang by my collar.” Yet this album includes many biblical references. For Hitler, of course, the blacks were also to be eliminated. It is interesting that Twitter censors conservatives and fact checks but does little about this anti-Semitism. Wiley referenced above was given a week suspension, but Twitter banned a feminist writer for life for referring to a trans-woman as “him.” Jewish leaders are protesting loudly and promoting a boycott. There are also top black sports figures that are saying such things. There are many other examples in a column by Shmuley Boteach in last Friday’s Jerusalem Post. It is such a shame since there was a great black/Jewish alliance for civil rights.

Former Ambassador Zalman Shoval notes a new kind of bigotry among progressives, a very different source than the old white supremacy. Bari Weiss, who recently left the New York Times, has suffered snide remarks from some of the staff for “writing a lot about Jews.” She wrote about anti-Semitism. The latest report of the American Anti-Defamation League notes that the wave of anti-Semitism sweeping through America in 2019 was the worst it has been in the last 40 years. Some on the radical left are claiming that the Jews control the world’s money just as was claimed by white supremacists. Today, Knesset member David Bitten warned that the Coronavirus has spurned a new wave of Christian and Muslim anti-Semitism, and that the Knesset must urgently put together a committee to fight anti-Semitism. Bitan cited a study done at Oxford University, which said that 19.1% of the public in the United Kingdom believe Jews caused the outbreak of the virus. Again I note, this is the United Kingdom!! The idea of the Jewish cause of the virus is spreading, despite the overwhelming evidence of Chinese origin.

One thing for sure, with the internet, evil heartedness, gullibility, and a lack of grounding in the Bible’s teaching on God’s love for the Jewish people, the devil is able to inspire every kind of stupid idea, and then the idea gains traction. Those who are polar opposites on political issues and their vision for society, white supremacists and leftist radicals, can agree on anti-Semitism. I am not claiming that all radical leftists are anti-Semites, but with intersectionality and other canards, there are a growing number of anti-Semites on the left and many claim that it is more dangerous than the right, especially with their acceptance of Islamic propaganda. Who has more political power in the United States right now? White supremacists or radical leftists? You decide.

So, Derek Prince was certainly correct. The problem is spiritual and cannot be fought without the spiritual taking the primary place in the fight. It is for the Church to pray its heart out, stand with Israel and the Jewish people and to counter every argument that is raised against the teaching of the Bible. (To paraphrase Paul’s words). This is the taking down of strongholds. There will be a final battle of good and evil and Israel will be in the middle of this battle, but those on the right side of the battle must raise their banner high.

Complexity of Political Terms and Left and Right

THE GREAT COMPLEXITY OF POLITICAL TERMS LEFT AND RIGHT, AND EXTREME LEFT AND RIGHT, AND RADICAL LEFT AND RIGHT, AND MODERATE LEFT AND RIGHT makes our discussion of issues difficult. We use these terms to show that there is a cohesion in identifiable groups of people. However, as I learned in philosophy, no term is circumscribed with clear lines of demarcation, and terms only describe areas of meaning with fuzzy lines. My friend Eitan Shishkoff responded to my post on selective compassion where I speak about the far left and radical left and was concerned that I would alienate unnecessarily people who would think they were being pigeonholed. So, I want to just give some definition. I want to introduce this by noting that the center hardly exists today in American politics in the sense that there are really people that are almost in the middle between the great parties. Joe Biden used to be such a person, what we would call moderate left or left of center, but he now seems to be embracing more radical policies that he used to eschew. Also, Maine Senator Susan Collins would be considered moderate right, very centrist.

No issue has been so clearly a dividing issue than abortion. There used to be pro-choice Republicans, but now only Susan Collins is known for that stand. There used to be pro-life Democrats, but now only Senator Casey from Pennsylvania and a conservative pro-life Democrat from the South hold to such positions. Pro-life people consider the Democratic party to itself have become radical since they do not support limiting abortion to the early months of pregnancy and now almost universally support abortion at all stages of pregnancy for any reason, even up to the point of birth. The Virginia governor even spoke of letting the baby die after being born alive though the baby could be saved. No issue has been more polarizing and due to this, many pro-lifers now will not vote for Democrats. To think that 60 years ago the Democrats were the favored party of Evangelicals, many of whom like my Norwegian family, loved Franklin Roosevelt. Most were pro-life.

One of the problems in dealing with the issues of right and left is that the terms do not mean what they did just a few years ago. More and more of the people in the Democrat party, in my view, no longer are left of center but are really on the left fully. Some of the same people who would have been moderate left have moved more to the left. We also see the more moderate left losing elections to the radical left candidates. I will speak of this more. Abortion is only one such issue. But we can list many more such issues. Here are some other key other issues on which Democrats are united. The Democratic party as a whole embraces the LGBTQ agenda fully. A few years ago, Barak Obama said he was not in favor of gay marriage. Now they accept the idea of pregnant men in the men’s barracks (an Obama regulation). Joe Biden used to support the Hyde amendment that did not allow spending tax payer dollars for abortions. This is an accommodation to pro-life religious conviction. Now he has dropped his old position. This is a position of the left. The idea that religious conviction for charities is overridden, and they must support health services (like contraception) is the position of the Democrats now. (This was recently overturned by the Supreme Court, thank God.) The idea that Catholic adoption agencies after so many successful years can no longer partner with the state since they want to place children in homes with mothers and fathers, has been accepted. The idea that nurses and doctors should not be able to opt out of abortion services in hospitals due to conscience is strongly held. Democrats used to support charter schools but with the pressure from the teaches union, they are mostly now dropping that support. On the issue of private artistic business being required to be accomplices to gay weddings, what they would consider sin, is a Democratic position (the Supreme Court rule against the Democratic position. They now talk about packing the Supreme Court to get their agenda established. In issue after issue, the mainstream Democrats have moved more and more left. They used to be anti-Socialist but desired more spending for the welfare side of the State. There is now a very strong anti-religious bent now to former party of the Evangelicals. On the environment, they seek to avoid the answer to the green house issues in natural gas as a transition and nuclear (a best solution) for fantasies of wind power. They have adopted more of the radical green new deal (AOC) which they used to reject. I do not think we can talk about moderate Democrats today. There are a few and some may privately think in more moderate terms, but they have been pushed left. I now say the Democratic party is leftist with strong socialist influence. But this is not the same as what I mean by radical or extreme leftists.

What do I mean by extreme left or radical left. The radicals have embraced a host of directions that align them more with types of revisionist Marxism. In some ways what is being put forth is more like Hebert Marcuse’s later book on Revolution written in 1969. Here are some aspects of this.

A fully socialist agenda
Cancel culture. Those who espouse conservative views are to be canceled and not part of the discussion. Religious and political views that used to be within normal dialogue and debate are now to not be permitted. Free speech is questioned. The Constitution is not valued. This will lead to religious persecution. In today’s Jerusalem Post, Zalman Shoval spoke out strongly against this and worried that this orientation is totalitarian and leads usually to Anti-Semitism. He gave several examples. Ben Shapiro, Jordan Peterson, and Denins Prager are only a few that are sounding the alarm.
Traditional religious moral teaching on sexuality and marriage is defined as hate speech. You can see this with the radicals that last night burned Bibles in Portland. Also, former presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke’s called for Churches that do not support LGBTQ lifestyle legitimacy to lose their tax exemption. (He was not speaking about civil rights, but about what the churches are allowed to believe and teach).
The doctrine of intersectionality where all oppressed people are one and their oppressors are to be identified together. This includes vilifying white men as oppressors of women and minorities, white women called karens who do not fully embrace the cause, seeing Israel as the oppressor of the Palestinians which is leading to Anti-Semitism (witness Congresswoman Ilhan Omer), ending the favoring of the hetero-normal nuclear family. Then there is demanding minority hiring to the percent they have designed (23% black hiring in Seattle), defunding the police, allowing criminals to be released form jails, even if violent).
Legitimizing violence in the protests for racial justice. Note that 81% of Blacks polled said they want more police presence or at least the same amount. The anti-police radicals do not represent the Black community.
Claiming that America was born in sin and America is from first to last an evil nation. They claim that the founders were not good people even though some founders were abolitionist. They have torn down statues of Washington and Grant! There is an anti-American thrust that is painful to watch. All nations are mixtures, more or less, of good and evil. Selective research can make any nation into evil incarnate.

One sees this sweeping the college campuses and also popular culture. Teen Vogue just had an article calling for abolishing private property. One sees it in the response to Heather McDonald, the researcher on statistics for how police treat blacks, banned on social media. She may be wrong, but she is a serious researcher who does not think the racism with police is as great as claimed. She should be part of the debate and the questions do need more research.

What is sad is that the former moderate Democrats are not speaking out strongly against the radical leftist views. And in addition, the racial leftists are winning primaries against the mainstream. Somehow the mainstream Democrats are now less mainstream and do not speak out firmly against those in the protests that are violent, against Antifa, against police defunding. Any words have been mere qualifications, tepid, almost as if they need the radicals as part of their vote. The university campuses have largely been lost to radical views.

I think the country is in very bad straights. So due to all of this, I have concluded that only mighty spiritual revival can stem the tide. The darkness is very dark right now, but as promised to Israel in Isaiah 66:1,2, the light can arise and has before in history in times of great darkness.

Selective Empathy And Biblical Compassion

A family relative is a strong supporter of the Black Lives Matter protests and has played down the violence and riots that come more from the mostly white radicals that have hijacked the movement. My daughter in law wrote a response. Then she was taken to task for not agreeing with the millions of aggrieved black people but pointing out problems with the protests. Then my daughter in law wrote a response, and it was brilliant. She noted that she is a person of color, from Guatemala with Sephardic Jewish, Spanish and native American roots. She knows well about discrimination. She was being treated as if she was from white privilege! How bizarre was that? She shared personal information on the trials of growing up, coming to America for high school and then becoming an overcomer. Then she married my son. She gave a valiant defense of her experience, knowledge and right to speak up as a minority person. Of course, Yeshua made all the difference. However, the essence of her post was a critique of the selective empathy and rage that ignores the suffering of others that do not fit into the political agenda of the left. It was brilliant and inspired this post of mine.

When people respond to Black Lives Matter by saying All Lives Matter or Blue Lives Matter, they are vilified. The right answer instead of vilification might be to say, “Yes, all lives matter, but we are highlighting the injustice done to blacks.” That would be a valid response. Then we can look at the stats to see the evidence for how bad the police treatment of blacks is. We can also examine prejudice otherwise in education, jobs, housing, (not on the basis of stats that show disparate levels of attainment or imprisonment, etc. but on the basis of unfair treatment compared to other people of races in parallel situations of crime or qualification for work, etc.. We will find problems. What offends some is the callousness toward some who are suffering due to the violent aspects of the protests that do not fit into the narrative of the leftist agenda. Where is the empathy for the small business people whose businesses have been destroyed by the rioters, and this includes black and other minority business owners? Where is the empathy for the police who have been killed in the rioting, and indeed this includes black police? Where is the empathy for their wives and children? The left media mostly ignores this. Where is the empathy for those who were employed by some of these businesses and now have lost their jobs?!! There is also little empathy for those who have been killed in black on black violence including innocent children, 7,500 per year! Those in these neighborhoods cry out to not defund the police who protect them, even if they sometimes act wrongly. In some cities now there are many black police, in Atlanta a majority but still they are attacked. Why? The radical left seeks revolution and reject the black police as part of the evil establishment.

I have noted the very selective empathy of the left for a long time. Has anyone noticed that the leftist movements are really very self-centered? For example, it is a good thing that women are free to pursue opportunities according to their gifts and desires, but that the feminist movement does not care about the oppression of women in Islamic countries. Only Christianity is accused of stifling patriarchy when such stifling patriarchy was historically the case in most cultures and worse than in the West. Is there concern about the oppression of Hindu religion that keeps the poor in their poverty as their just deserts in reincarnation. Who cares about the persecution of Christians because they have liberated these people form their oppression? We could go on and on. Or who cares about the terrible suffering and persecution of Christians in many lands? Not on the news!

One of the amazing aspects of the teaching and modeling of Yeshua is the empathy for all who are suffering and in need. The prophetic thrust of God being with the poor, the widow and the orphan (the marginalized) is given the strongest support as Yeshua brings supernatural healing, deliverance and hope to them. However, He also can show love for the oppressors. He heals the servant of the Roman soldier. The Roman soldiers are the oppressors. He tells his followers to turn the cheek to the Roman soldiers and to carry the load a second mile when they are conscripted for the task. This shows the love of God to the oppressor. He not only eats with prostitutes, who are very wounded, abused and deeply damaged, but eats with tax collectors, collaborationists with Rome and despised by most. Yeshua taught the way of love and reconciliation but in a context that called for repentance and forgiveness by all. All hatred was to be renounced. In the present situation of protests, much of it driven by atheists according to a recent poll, we believers have a special opportunity. Followers of Yeshua are called to stand for justice but in a context of biblical love that is not selective in empathy. That empathy is given to all who are suffering in the present, the protestors including the peaceful and violent who are so deceived, those who have been ruined by the violent rioters, and finally to show love for those who oppress, for the oppressor destroys him or herself. We call upon all to repent and submit to the Gospel and then join in love and reconciliation. Only the Gospel has the answer, and it is the only world view where real justice can be advanced. We are not to show selective empathy but do emphasize reaching the marginalized as the first priority.