Political Situation Now

Political Situation Now

Many of the Christian Zionists in the United States think that Benjamin Netanyahu (Bibi) is the greatest Prime Minister conceivable. However, Messianic Jews who live here have a much more nuanced view of Bibi. I have lived here now for 16 years and follow politics closely. It does have a great impact on our lives. At this present moment, there is still no unity agreement between Benny Gantz and his party and Benjamin Netanyahu and his party. The political stalemate and the haggling are going on even now. Bibi and some of his senior people are in quarantine, but they communicate as we all do now by internet connections. I compare Bibi and Gantz in three categories: one where Bibi is better, one where Gantz is better and one where I don’t see much difference.

Where Bibi is Better

Bibi is strong on international diplomacy. He has a strong charismatic personality. This has been a great gain. The weakness is that his diplomatic people, in embassies especially, are very underfunded and cannot do their work well.
Bibi is stronger in promoting Israel’s rights in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank). Though for years he would not do what he thinks he can now do with Trump being president, he wants to annex the Jewish towns to Israel and to annex the Jordan valley on the Israel side of the river. Trump is indicating that he will support this if the Palestinians do not come to the negotiating table. Others to the right of Bibi have been pushing this for years, but Bibi has not been willing to buck the United States. Gantz has said he wants to do this only with International support, which means he will not do it. I believe taking these Jewish towns off the table for negotiation is now important since there will otherwise be no peace agreement. Dismantling these towns would lead to civil war. There are 400,000. It will never happen. Gantz and Bibi are making this an issue in the negotiations.
Bibi understands money and economic growth. He is strong in this. Maybe Gantz would be strong but he is unproven.

Gantz is stronger than Bibi on most social justice issues. I am not defining social justice in a socialistic way (see my book Social Justice). Here is a list.

Adequate spending for sufficient hospital capacity.
Not vilifying Israel’s Arab citizens, but equally spending for them per capita on roads, schools, hospitals and police protection. It almost seems as if Bibi wants to alienate them, but it is really a way to use fear to keep his base motivated.
Requiring the Ultra-Orthodox to work and their schools to educate for the work place. Bibi has been hopelessly weak on this. He needs their parties in the coalition.
Gantz is stronger on providing for Russian Jews who are not considered Jewish by the Orthodox. This means lessening the power of the state Rabbinate, allowing them to marry in Israel or empowering the more moderate Orthodox conversion standards.
This will be a real surprise, but I think Gantz is stronger on military defense. Bibi, despite his reputation, has been weak. He has allowed Hezbollah to rearm after the last Lebanon War (as has the U. N.) He could have quickly re-invaded and required enforcing the U. N. arms embargo against them. Now we have 150,000 rockets against us. He has also been weak in Gaza. If he used targeted assignations of terrorist leaders, Hamas in Gaza might stop their attacks. But he has allowed Hamas to terrorize the south. Gantz has spoken strongly about this.

A Probable Tie

The cost of living and housing. Though Bibi for years was weak on this, his Finance Minister, Moshe Kachlon has really succeeded in moderating the cost of living increases. I think this would be a part of Gantz’s policy as well.
Building infrastructure: roads, bridges and public transportation. All want to do this if they can find the funds.
Having a strong military force.
Opposing the Iran regime and motivating sanctions on the regime.
Fighting the Corona Virus. I do not see any differences.
Justice for Messianic Jews. Both are embracing Shas that has said it will guarantee the rotation. This might be also enshrined in passing a law. So our hope of fairness in immigration with Shas in power does not look good.

So far, to build the unity government Netanyahu has committed to leave the Prime Minister’s office in 18 months and have Gantz serve as Prime Minister. Gantz will allow an indicted Prime Minister to serve (contrary to his last position) and will not pass legislation to bar such. However, Gantz has now been elected the Speaker of the Knesset. This is his ace if Bibi does not really share power. He can still pass legislation on not allowing an indicted Prime Minister to serve, and then Bibi is gone. But Bibi’s is in danger of rebellion on his right because the coational partners and his own party, Likud, do not want to see so many ministries controlled by Gantz. To give all his right party partners their due and to fulfill the requirements of Gantz and his party, Bibi plans to create many more ministerial positions. This would yield a cabinet of 36 people (17 or 18 is the usual figure). At times like this, we so wish there was a constitution in Israel.

The Exploiting Deficit

The Congress recently passed and the President signed into law a 2,2 trillion dollar spending bill to provide for businesses and individuals to survive the terrible measures that had to be taken to stem the advance of the COVID 19 virus. It also includes massive spending to support health services. I agree that it was necessary though sadly some, mostly Democrats, added spending that had nothing to do with the problem. Thankfully that is a very small percentage of the bill. It almost seems ungracious to look at the issue of deficit spending during this time. However, the issue of the deficit is an important one, and the growing deficit could lead to devastating consequences. It is important for disciples of Yeshua to know something about this issue. In my book Social Justice, I argue that deficit spending is a social justice issue. Believers in Yeshua should be biblical justice warriors but on a sound basis of evidence.

When I was majoring in philosophy at Wheaton College, I considered those interested in business and economics to be inferior to those of us who cared about the important issues of life. I was so foolish. The business people created the wealth that paid the bills that enabled me to study philosophy. I was a left-leaning returning to faith student. I actually called myself a Christian socialist in the early 70s. Then I studied a few books on economics. What an eye-opener. I actually learned how money is created and how economies expand. My socialist views simply would not hold up since the expansion of wealth would not take place long-term in a socialist economy. In this study, I learned something about deficits. The theory is that a nation should keep a surplus, balanced budget or an almost balanced budget unless there is a recession. Deficit spending in times of recession would lift the economy, but in times of economic expansion, the deficit can be paid down. There are reasons why this is a social justice issue. Mainly the big reason is that deficits compromise the possibility of the government being responsible in taxing, spending and social programs.

An expanding economy is necessary to increase wealth for the mass of the population. A shrinking economy increases poverty. As President John Kennedy said when approving a massive tax cut to spur business expansion, “A rising tide lifts all boats.” There is a social justice issue in business expansion. It is that the expansion has to really benefit the average employee. As such, tax incentives should be motivating business expansion for all, and limiting tax shelters and executive compensation packages that are given to those who do not really expand businesses for all.
Taxes provide necessary services for the public; infrastructure, transportation, national defense and more.
Taxes also provide social services, including welfare payments when needed, support for job training, education, health care, social security, and more. Welfare needs to have incentives for people to go to work or get trained so that welfare does not create a perpetual poor or underclass. I am one that does believe in social services and am not a libertarian. However, I want those services to lead to greater self-sufficiency.

Basically, a deficit is produced when the government takes in less in tax revenue than what it spends. The government then prints more money. The idea is that the amount of money created is justified by the size and expansion of the economy. It is able to print more money because it sells bonds or obligations to finance the deficit. The deficit is not only on paper but is a real obligation to pay those who hold the debt. It can be individuals holding government bonds or even nations that buy our debt. People are willing to do this for the return they get and until maturity, the bond can be sold. The government can issue new bonds to pay off the old bonds that mature. The government is not obligated to pay the principal of the debt but only the interest. When the government continually increases debt, more and more of the budget goes to finance the interest. We also have a problem of future commitments to legally mandated spending for such things as social security and Medicaid etc. (Entitlements) These programs are perpetual and take up the largest share of the federal budget. The projections of revenue and these mandated obligations are such that economists project a huge deficit as well for these programs, even if not a present deficit.

Economists generally agree that if you take too much out of the private sector to finance government programs, business expansion slows down. The growth in the wealth pie can even shrink. More people become poor. The big debate is among economists who have differences as to where that point of too much taxation is. However, a growing deficit adds another big challenge. A point is reached (as with Greece) where the interest is so large that the Government no longer has the funds for its spending for the public good including social welfare programs. Higher taxes are no longer an option. As such the expanding deficit at some point can destroy social welfare.

Why does this happen? It is because politicians spend for the immediate future and for their own re-election. Taking the long-term view is not to their personal benefit. Politicians lack self- control at a huge level. They want the program for their constituents now and will increase the deficit to achieve this. It also is to their political benefit. Deficits are too abstract an issue for most voters. Who votes for fiscal responsibility? People vote on the basis of their immediate prosperity. However, slowing the expansion of government so that the government lives within its means, will over the long haul produce much more funds for social spending. But social spending is squeezed when so much goes to the deficit. There would be so much more to spend today if politicians did not pile on deficit after deficit in the past. The end result of all this is either cutting benefits or massive inflation to continue to pay the face amount in money that is of much less worth. It can lead to national bankruptcy, and no country wants to default on its obligations or there would be deep depression. Deficit spending ultimately will destroy justice-social welfare spending ability. This has happened in other nations. This can then lead to social upheaval and disintegration.

If this is not dealt with, there will be a day of harsh reckoning. There may be coming a day that only private help and mutual help in the community and family will be available. We no longer have politicians even talking about this. It hardly seems recent any more (2010) that one Democrat Erskine Bowles, and one Republican Alan Simpson, were shouting the alarm and were leading a commission to deal with this. The day of reckoning will come. Had the United States been responsible then we could have swallowed the 2. 2 Trillion bill just past without much difficulty. However, with the deficit we have, now everything in the future will be squeezed. As many say, our children and grandchildren will pay for it. That is why this is a biblical social justice issue. I hope that many of you will obtain my book, Social Justice.

Fundamentalism

Fundamentalism began as a movement to counter modernism and liberalism in the church world at the beginning of the 20th century. Most noteworthy was the book of artless published in 1909 entitled, The Fundamentals. Most of us who are conservative believers, Evangelicals, Pentecostals, Charismatics, and Messianic Jews, would agree with many of these articles. However, as time passed, the Fundamentalists lost many of the battles to the modernists in the denominations. One of the last lost was Princeton Theological Seminary in 1930. Historians say that Fundamentalism turned inward, became defensive, and acted as if it was fighting a rearguard action. Fundamentalism eventually became dominated by Dispensationalism. The issues with Dispensational theology are too complex to explain here. Suffice it to say that the same historians assert that Fundamentalism became insular, gave up the battle for the culture and expected an escape in the rapture (seven years before the Yeshua returns to earth, the born again are taken out of the earth). For many the Church would be in decline, but the few faithful will escape. My professor of philosophy Arthur Holmes looked at these directions and stated, “We have lost 100 years.” In 1947 Carl Henry wrote The Uneasy Conscience Modern Fundamentalism. Henry was the theological mentor to Billy Graham and the first editor of Christianity Today. Henry exposed some of the critical weaknesses of Fundamentalism, its lack of social engagement, the disunity of the various streams and more. In 1959 the President of Fuller Seminary and the famous apologist, Edward Carnell wrote a blistering critique and claimed that Fundamentalism had become Orthodoxy gone cultic. (See his Case for Orthodox Theology). This was typified by an article in the Wheaton College Year Book in 1968 where a student wrote, “But What if I don’t Want too Be a fighting Fundamentalist.”

I think the most glaring example of the problem was when Fundamentalist Christians rejected Billy Graham for inviting mainline denominational Christian leaders to be recognized at his evangelistic crusades. For the Fundamentalists, he was compromising with the enemy.

This was the era when the people began to distinguish themselves from Fundamentalists by calling themselves Evangelicals in contradistinction to Fundamentalist. At Wheaton College, the flagship Evangelical liberal arts college, one just did not identify as a Fundamentalist. Though the description of Fundamentalism was exaggerated, much was true.

Here are some characteristics.

Simplistic theological approaches. Sometimes doing biblical theology is not easy. There are different emphases in the Bible and not everything fits a simple black and with the system. Fundamentalism is given to black and white thinking.
Inability to effectively engage the larger culture and become salt and light in it. Since the world is going downhill, we are to just get people saved and into the lifeboat. The culture is part of a sinking ship, the world.
Fear of those who are not speaking the same language and towing the same black and white thinking.
A critical spirit that easily sallies off in tirades of criticism of those who are not in the same camp.
A fear of contamination. One may be holy, but if one connects to one that is not sufficiently separated, then one becomes unholy by association
A sectarian spirit that easily separates from those seen as not theologically pure enough and not sufficiently holy (not by the Bible commands but extra standards of holiness in the Fundamentalist camp.) This is part of a hypercritical spirit that heresy hunts and constantly looks for error that is greatly feared. Really the Fundamentalist is insecure.
Emphasis on doctrinal points that do not hold up to sound scholarship. For example, the pre-tribulation rapture is a litmus test. Its rejection is thought to be the first step toward liberalism.
An inability to understand the views of others and to engage them with respect showing that they have first been understood. Fundamentalism is characterized by refuting straw man misrepresentation of others.
Skepticism and rejection of new insights, directions, and methods.
Difficulty in engaging others who are not perceived as people in whom God may be working. If they are not born again, there is great guardedness.

When I graduated from Wheaton, I was very glad to know that I would not have to deal with Fundamentalists. I could name names, denominations, associations, etc. but will refrain. I became a Lutheran and then was ordained in the Presbyterian Church. I was an Evangelical Presbyterian. This was before Messianic Judaism (1971).

Generally, the Messianic Jewish movement has transcended Fundamentalism. Embracing Jewish life in Yeshua was rejected by Fundamentalists who saw it as an aberration on the issue of the Church as a third race of former Jews and Gentiles. Messianic Jews found their support among Evangelicals, Pentecostals, and Charismatics. Pentecostalism at one time was quite Fundamentalist but is not so today. This transcendence of Fundamentalism is characteristic of Messianic Jews in the United States, Brazil, Russia, Ukraine, England, and Australia.

The NAR Controversy

When I was a student at Wheaton College over 50 years ago, I learned that if one wants to have an understanding of any area of existence, one has to take into account all of the relevant evidence/information available and seek to comprehend it together, as a whole. This is so for writing history as well as for understanding movements, be they political or theological. In philosophy, we call this test of truth, comprehensiveness. To pass the test, the theory in science, historical account or even a description of a political, social or religious movement, has to take into account all of the relevant evidence.

Almost 40 years ago, we believe God helped us understand Ephesians 4:11 ff. Though the government of the Church is by a plurality of elders, both in a local congregation and an association of congregations, we came to believe that God gives different kinds of giftings to leaders who are called to do different things. (The idea of the restoration of five-fold ministry understanding goes back to the early Pentecostals of over 100 years ago.) Indeed, if one wants to see a strong pastoral congregation, one does not put an evangelist in charge unless he also has the gift of pastor. Sometimes more than one of the Ephesians 4 gifts is given to one person. Jerry Dirmann, a leader in the Foursquare Church denomination, recently gave a good summary. It matches the synopsis I gave in my 1982 book, Growing to Maturity. We came to believe that leaders of a growing movement of congregations are biblically functioning in the role of apostles. Apostle, I should add, with a little “a” in function, but not at the same level as the original Apostles of whom some wrote the Scriptures and were the Eyewitnesses of the Messiah Event. Though we reject titles before our names, we generally accept the importance of understanding who has been given the gifts and calling to function in various roles. This keeps us from tripping over one another. In the same way, as the Assembly of God in Australia and the Pentecostal Holiness Church denomination today, we added this aspect to our representative form of government in our network (1984).

Since that time, we have become connected to streams of churches that have the same view as we do. I would encourage you to research some of our historic relational partners. For many years, I served on the accountability board of Larry Kreider’s Dove Network and related to his network in East Africa under Ibrahim Omandi. They are just one example. Do look them up on the Internet. One of our most important partners was Olen Griffing in Dallas, who planted Shady Grove Church. Olen is the spiritual father of Robert Morris who leads Gateway Church. This is the 3rd largest Church in America and the #1 missions giving Church in America. They include us in their mission! Morris’ spiritual father, Olen, is now at Gateway. The first meeting of the International Coalition of Apostles met at his church. Olen was an original founder with us in starting Messianic Jewish Bible Institutes that came out of the greatest Evangelistic success in Jewish ministry since the first century. Jack Hayford, the former President of Foursquare Churches, transferred his school, The King’s University, to Gateway Church under Robert Morris. Jack and Robert both related to new stream movements as well as to Pentecostal denominational people. Jonathan Bernis led this effort in the former Soviet Union. You can easily find Gateway Church and Jewish Voice Ministries. Another amazing movement in Mozambique, under Rolland and Heidi Baker, began with orphanages and now consists of thousands of churches, a university and 3,500 in the schools that will feed the university. (The book Always Enough documents this.) Heidi led an amazing meeting at King of Kings Congregation in Jerusalem. We can also note Oral Roberts University, the main charismatic university in America, where Pentecostals and five-fold stream people attend. The school itself could be seen as connected to these new movements as well as the older Pentecostalism. Christ For the Nations Bible School is another school that teaches five-fold ministry.

To honestly and critically evaluate movements, one has to do much travel and research. My level of such travel and research is more than most, but still very limited. In recent years, books have been written that seek to describe what is happening in the world. Two of the best are The Next Christendom by Phillip Jenkins at Pennsylvania State University (this was a national religion award-winning book), and Miracles, The Credibility of New Testament Miracles by Craig Keener of Asbury Seminary. This 1000-page book is amazing, but Craig apologizes for the limits of his world travels! I have traveled to several nations to evaluate. I have been to East Africa, South Africa, Brazil, Argentina, Venezuela, the Caribbean, Europe, Singapore, China, Japan, and Korea. Peter Wagner, for many years at Fuller Seminary, traveled to research what is happening in the world and wrote several books on it.

Here is a summary of what these people found.

The advance of Christianity in the world is rapid and multiplying so fast that we cannot keep up with it. The Christianity that is so advancing is mostly in the Southern Hemisphere, the Global South, and is significantly different from conventional Western Christianity. It looks like the pages of the Book of Acts.
It is characterized by amazing signs and wonders, miracles that are frequent, documented and credible.
It is driven by Pentecostals but even more so by associations of congregations that do not fit the classical denominational arrangements but are more decentralized and “grassroots”. The new associations and streams are growing much more rapidly than the older Pentecostalism.
The growing associations are generally led by a strong team of leaders under a visionary leader who is passionate for Gospel expansion. These new associations are, by some calculations, the largest and fastest-growing segments of Protestant Christianity today.
Some use the terms apostles and prophets to describe their leadership. Some, though functioning in the same way, do not use the term apostle(s) for their leader(s).

So where is the problem? One of these researchers, Peter Wagner, in his later book gave a name to this phenomenon. He called what was happening in the world the New Apostolic Reformation (NAR). He was not suggesting that the rapidly growing churches in India, China or Africa were linked in some kind of grand organization. Most of them had no idea of what was happening in other regions of the world. Most had no contact with other movements like theirs. If they all came together, they would have fierce disagreements on many things.

We could think all of this is wonderful in an unqualified way, but rapid growth under strong leaders can also have negative aspects. We have spoken strongly about some of the problematic issues. Some networks have solid leadership and accountability structures. Some do not but instead take on an almost “tribal chieftain” style of leadership. Some are solid in Bible doctrine, but others are very weak due to lack of education and can come up with strange interpretations of the Bible. Really, it is hard to keep up.

Wagner’s name, New Apostolic Reformation, for the phenomena that was happening all over the world (but more in the 3rd world or global south), is a name for movements that include some denominations that we noted above and so many varied types and styles that I still think no one really has a full grasp of it. Wagner and John Kelly sought to start an association to bring people together who did not know of one another’s existence to bring them into mutual dialogue and exposure, and to learn from one another and to see greater maturity, but it is a very small, almost tiny percentage of the whole of five-fold movements. Most who come are from North and South America, but some Africans also attend. There is no organization called NAR. It was a label given to what had been happening in the last 50 years.

The accusations against these movements are almost ridiculous. One author points to a tiny number of aberrant leaders or streams and represents this as characteristic. This frequently happens when critics evaluate movements of which they are not a part and have no detailed experience. In Pentecostalism, for example, there was an offshoot called the Oneness Pentecostals. They denied the Trinity and claimed that one was not saved unless baptized in the name of Jesus only (not Father, Son and Spirit) and spoke in tongues. But to say that this is typical, or worse, a defining characteristic of Pentecostalism would be foolish. In the Messianic Jewish Movement we have a mainstream. But there are offshoots. Some, who are not Messianic Jews, teach that the churches are made up of descendants of the northern tribes of Israel or that the Church is Ephraim. Other groups teach that all Christians are responsible to keep the whole Law. The mainstream Messianic Jewish movement does not teach these things, but those who are aberrant do. They are not us. The Mainstream is very Evangelical in doctrine.

The Latter Rain movement, a mighty revival in Canada in 1948 that has greatly fostered Gospel progress world-wide, was key to the birth of the charismatic movement. However, there was an aberrant group that taught that some Christians could attain to their resurrection bodies before the coming of the Lord. This was called the “Manifest Sons” doctrine, but the Latter Rain was not characterized by this. One really wild claim is that the NAR believes in the “Manifest Sons” doctrine. I have never met one person in the new stream churches that believed this in my 40 years of ministry. Yes, such folks are out there. Many of the practices of the charismatic movement were from the Latter Rain practices. In a similar way, there are new stream churches that teach an unbiblical doctrine of prosperity, but most do not. The “Word of Faith” stream churches do embrace and teach five-fold, but they have hardly related at all to other five stream movements. I have a book refuting this false teaching entitled, Prosperity, What the Bible Really Teaches.

In reality, the only thing one can say about these movements is that they believe in the five-fold ministry and operate in a network of congregations or churches. Other than that, they are so diverse. Most believe in the soon return of Yeshua, and some believe Christians will take over the world before Yeshua returns. Some believe in unbiblical prosperity, but others teach such a strong doctrine of the cross that they live in extreme disciplined simplicity. Some believe in a “chieftain” type model of authority. Some believe in a very humble projection of authority and act in mutual submission. Some believe that we can receive new revelation but that it has to be consistent with the Bible. Most reject this but accept the Spirit helping us and revealing the meaning of the Bible. If they speak of revelation beyond this, it is to understand the demonic and angelic realms and spiritual warfare. Some are heavily involved in that kind of spiritual warfare prayer while others are not.

I have put what we believe about doctrine and government in two books. One is Growing to Maturity (1982) and the other is Relational Leadership (2015). Growing to Maturity has been the most used manual for discipleship and basic doctrine in the Messianic Jewish World for the past 38 years.

We do embrace the reality that God is doing something powerful in the new streams, but we approach these streams carefully and seek to be an influence in solid doctrine and government. They do not have the hundred-year record of working out their issues like the Pentecostals. These movements are very recent. In some cases, such as the underground churches in China, they had no choice but to be new streams.

The End of the Blue and White Party

In an unbelievable end to the saga of the Israel government stalemate, Benny Gantz, the leader of Blue and White decided to join with Likud in a new unity government and allow Benjamin Netanyahu to continue as the Prime Minister. This is a stunning development. It has led to the breaking up of the Blue and White Party. Yesh Atid led by Yair Lapide, and Moshe Yaalon are angry and disappointed, but they did not have a path to a government with two of the Blue and White members refusing to vote for a Gantz government if it depended on getting the votes of the Arab Party, the Joint List. Lapide will go into the opposition. This is less like a unity government than Gantz joining a Netanyahu government. I think that Gantz did this due to the emergency situation with the virus and the danger of being discredited for not seeking unity at this time. Bibi has promised him that he would become the Prime Minister in 18 months. It appears that in this arrangement the Ultra Orthodox will keep their power, but with Gantz’s faction and Labor joining the government is it possible that the power of the Ultra-Orthodox will be less. I don’t think it is likely. The only possibility Gantz had, and it was a very slim chance, was that he would have stuck to his guns and voted in the new parliament to pass a law that a person could not serve as Prime Minister if under indictment. Then he would hope that Likud without Bibi would not carry out its threat of no unity government if they did this. He could then keep have kept Blue and White together. Gantz decided to not take this chance. Bibi survives again, the cat of nine lives. Will he survive his trial for bribery etc.?

I have lived in ambivalence through this whole time. I saw Bibi as the better candidate re: the Land, the Trump peace plan and annexing the settlements. Now the settlements have to be taken off the negotiating table with the Palestinians. Removing the West Bank Israeli cities and towns is no longer possible. Bibi is stronger on this. Gantz had qualified his support for the Trump plan as needing international support. If this was the standard, you could kiss the Trump plan goodbye. Trump has indicated that Israel can annex the territories of the settlements and the Jordan valley if the Palestinians do not come to the negotiating table.

However, my other issue was the Ultra-Orthodox control and oppression in Israel. Bibi is in their pocket. If Lapide and Avigdor Liberman of Israel Batainu had been in the government, the power of the Ultra-Orthodox, who bleed the state of needed funds, and who control immigration to the detriment of qualified people, would have ended. This control will not likely be ended soon. I voted for Blue and White so they would be large enough so that in coalition with Bibi the Ultra-Orthodox would have to give up power. I also hoped for equal spending for the Arab Israelis for hospitals, roads, police and education. Defunding the Ultra-Orthodox welfare society where men don’t work and only study Talmud all day could be key to this justice. But this looks like it is not to be at this time.

Well, stay tuned. We have not heard from Liberman, but he is not needed at this point and will probably go into the opposition. What will the government be like in 18 months. Bibi has said, no tricks and he will keep his word. Time will tell. It is possible that there are not enough Knesset votes to fund the welfare society of the Ultra-Orthodox. Let’s hope so.

Prophetic Response to the Corona Virus Plague

Announcement: Before I write on this topic, I have an announcement. Yuli Edelstein, the Likud speaker of the Knesset has resigned. This opens the door for a vote on a new speaker next week, which will be chosen by Blue and White. What will happen in trying to form a government, no one knows. I still pray for a unity government in Israel.

There have been many prophetic responses to the Corona Virus. Some of these responses are credible and some are a projection of the limited theology of the prophet. Some who are giving prophecy on a national or world level are not sufficiently proven on this level to be giving such words. I have seen prophets minister in personal prophetic prophecy with amazing accuracy. In some meetings at 100% though their overall track record in such prophecy may be more like 90%. They describe personal details about the person who is the subject of ministry at levels that amaze. The testimony of the ones receiving shows this. I have received very accurate prophecy and these prophecies have been a great blessing and strengthened me for future battles. However, I have seen again and again that when such prophets speak on a national and international level, it is usually wrong. Many years ago, one prophet gave a major prophetic word against invading Iraq. He was able to get it to the President. At the time he was almost discredited but proved to be amazingly right. The war was a disaster. Saddam did protect the Christians who have since been decimated. He was a buffer against Iran. Many years ago, my colleague Asher Intrater, shared that one prophesies out of the soul and to the extent that the soul is pure, one hears more clearly. The way to accuracy includes a holy life and immersion in the Word. Many prophetic people build their theology on some passages in the Bible but then misapply them because they are not interpreted in the context of the whole world. I argued in my book Passover, Key to the Book of Revelation, that God would raise such credible international prophets that have great accuracy. In my view, this has not yet happened or happened in a very limited way, though there are some credible international voices at a beginning level.

Here are some of the prophetic words that I think come from a projection of limited theological bias.

One flow of leaders and churches that teach that God does not bring judgment during this period or at least until the Great Tribulation, has prophesied that this plague is not from God but totally from the Devil. We are to overcome it by faith and spiritual warfare prayer and doing deeds of love. They are having an international online conference to proclaim this. Here prophecy is colored by simply failing to read the words of the New Covenant Scriptures which again and again show that God still brings judgment in this age. Anyone ever heard of Ananias and Sapphira in Acts 5?

Other prophetic voices claim that this is the beginning of judgments and that it is a call for repentance. It is from God and due to sin. If you know the stream and the theology of these folks, this is not surprising. There is certainly an element of truth to what they are saying, but God’s working is more complex and the relationship of the Devil and God in such matters is not easy to sort out, not the least in the book of Revelation. Why would the Devil be used of God to bring plagues (Rev. 9) and why do the angels of heaven pour out plagues? And why does the Devil do God’s bidding?

Another voice from the movement that does not like gatherings beyond home groups, and believes only in house congregations argues that God has shut down the larger meetings to bring the Church into the right order. Of course, many cannot even do this and only can meet by computer! Maybe God is trying to shut down meetings altogether and launch the computer church where we do not gather at all?

I would take a long look at the Biblical concept of “The Day of the Lord.” It is a foundational Biblical theme. This is the day of God intervening in mighty judgment on the wicked but at the same time, it is a day of deliverance for his people. There are proximate Days of the Lord, but there will ultimately be a final Day of the Lord before the Second coming. When there are events at this level of world crisis, it is well to look at this Biblical idea and see if it fits the view of this being a “day of the Lord.” Certainly, such a world plague fits. However, it is obviously not yet the Day of the Lord but could be a prelude. Here are some things in summary that others have presented that I think are worthy and some things I believe I see in the Spirit. I am not seeking to put this out there as if I am a prophet and am not making big claims.

This plague is a demonic thing because the Devil comes to steal, kill and destroy. Yeshua came that we might have life.
The Devil is on a leash and God is ultimately sovereign. So God has allowed this plague for his purposes. What God is after in this and what the Devil is after are two different things. So this is a judgment from God.
The plague is an opportunity for believers to dial down, renew life in their families, pursue deeper prayer, and to strengthen faith. It is to identify with those suffering and to intercede for the suffering of the world and for the healing of the Gospel to go forth.
It is an opportunity to release healing gifts, especially through health professionals who have faith and can bring prayer with their medical expertise.
It is an opportunity to organize our congregations into prayer cells, home groups and to advance in fellowship through the wonderful gifts of technology that help us in these times. The fellowship built during this time can outlast the shutdowns. This does not mean that God is against bigger meetings. In the Book of Acts, the larger meeting in Solomon’s Portico was also important. It is important that every pastor, elder, home group leader, and five-fold ministry leader spur their congregations to be meeting in ways to strengthen prayer and relationships. Congregations that did not emphasize small groups before will be more challenged to organize people into such support groups, but they should do the best they can to do so.
The world is under judgment. When corporate judgments fall on the world from God’s point of view, though there is demonic attack, whole nations and peoples do suffer. This is to lead to repentance and also to lead to prayer for mercy and deliverance.

In addition, I do think the Devil wants to use this plague to attack the United States and Israel especially because of the Trump administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and the promises of the Land to the Jewish people. Whatever different readers think of Donald Trump personally, the issue of Jerusalem and Israel is very important to God. We do need to pray that this progress is not set back. Political derailment though this challenge poses a threat to the progress made with Israel.

In all of this God has shut us up to much greater individual and family seeking of the face of God.

Corona Virus: More Questions & More Political Intrigue in Israel

Some in Israel are questioning the national restrictions to fight the Corona virus. Are they really based on science or alarm which goes too far? For example, who is it dangerous for someone to take a walk outside for more than ten minutes if they keep six meters away from those they pass? How is ten minutes safer with this two meter rule than 30 minutes? We are allowed to go to the grocery store or to take out stores, other food stores and pharmacies. That is more dangerous than a walk outside. Some people are required by their health conditions to go for walks.

Or here is another question. Why wouldn’t it be more prudent, once there is sufficient testing to know virus location spots, to put the strict restrictions on cities and towns that have the virus and allow those within a town without any cases to have freedom, but to not leave the town except to commute to a safe workspace. We know where the hot spots are. There are places with no infections. Within those enclaves, there could be more freedom. In the United States, why wouldn’t this work really well for small cities and towns with no cases, rather than restricting the whole country? In Israel there are places with no infections. Should they be under the same standards as the areas where there are infected people?

In the midst of all this the political chaos in Israel continues to be even more amazing. I am asking my Facebook constituents to be praying for us, especially this week. Here is a little summary. Last week, Benjamin Netanyahu’s (Bibi) justice minister (Ohana) unilaterally postponed the trial of Bibi until May 24^th. The corona virus was the given reason. However, many pointed out that at this point the trail would be sharing information and dealing with preliminaries that could have been done safely. It seems that this will not be challenged in the Supreme court.

The second amazing thing is the speaker of the Knesset (Parliament), Yuli Edelstein, shut down the Knesset. The virus was given as the reason. However, most believe that the reason was political. If the parliament meets, though there is not yet a new executive government with the ongoing stalemate, the Knesset can vote to remove Edelstein and choose a new speaker that is not Likud. There are probably 61 votes, a one vote majority, to do this. The big issue then would be to form an arrangements committee. If the anti-Bibi 61 have require a one vote majority on this committee than they can arrange for laws to be voted on. The big fear from Bibi and Likud is that they will then arrange the passage of a law stating that an indicted person cannot serve as Prime Minister. President Reuven Rivlen (Likud) has called on Edelstein to open the Knesset and said democracy is at stake. The legal advisor to the Knesset has given the same opinion. Blue and White lead by Benny Gantz says that they will go to the Supereme Court to see that the Knesset is open. Now Edelstein is relenting and says he will open the Knesset on Monday.

In the midst of all this, the Times of Israel says that Gantz is now open to serving in a unity government with Netanyahu leading for either an emergency 6 months or in a three year unity with Bibi serving 18 months, but then having to relinquish leadership to Gantz after that. This would have to be made law so Bibi could not back out. However, two of his Blue and White partners, Boggie Yaalon and Yair Lapid, say they are against this, and if Gantz does this, it will break up the party.

All this is going on in the midst of the virus plague. I think Gantz is seeking to be a stateman and wants the best for Israel in this plague situation. He is willing to give up his pledge to not serve with an indicted Prime Minister for the sake of Israel’s present need. Of course, if Bibi is found guilty (who knows how long the trial would take) he would have to step down.

Israel is now in a terrible situation politically and economically. Sectors of the government can not function without a normal government. Major sectors of the economy are shut down. People are in isolation. Businesses are going out of business and many people do not have back up funds to survive. We have people in our own congregation who are in very difficult straits. Meanwhile we, in our connected network, pray for revival. Do pray much with us!

Corona Questions

For some time, I have been questioning the response to the Coronavirus and the economic devastation it is causing. This response is shutting down businesses and can cause great economic pain and even death (some will commit suicide in my view if their losses are too great. Others, losing their income will not be able to afford medicine and food. The policies are like a huge tax that all are paying to fight the virus. In Israel, we are seeing the most restrictive policies of any nation except for France. People here are losing jobs with no pay compensation. Some businesses will go under. Is it worth it?

The other day a spokesperson from the Center for Disease Control in the United States noted some very strange things about this virus. It is very different from the flu both in how mild and how severe. Usually, when a person has the flu, he or she knows it. When a person has this virus it may be severe. Those with compromised health can die from it and in larger numbers. However, it is milder than the flu. The expert did not know the statistics and noted that they would not be ever known because many people will never know they had it. They would have little or in some cases no symptoms. So those with mild symptoms can pass it to those who are in great danger. However, this means that the death percentage being reported is certainly much lower than the statistics since it is based on the percentage of people that die in proportion to known cases. No one has any idea of how many cases are unknown.

In light of all this, is the economy destroying measures being taken in many countries in the right direction? Why not just isolate those who are most at risk so they are protected. For the rest of the population, they live a normal life, taking more than the usual precautions that are taken for the flu season. They also would keep social distance by spreading their tables more apart in cafes, take care in gyms, etc. Was I the only one thinking this? Then Sunday night on Fox News, Steve Hilton, he said the same thing. He said that he has not been able to get any health expert in the government to answer the question as to why this would not be a better policy. The economic toll is terrible and the potential for inflation from massive government bailouts has to be credited as well. Well, I expect someone will answer Steve and prove that he (and I) are wrong. My understanding is that the British are approaching it more according to this alternative. They may be totally wrong! It is a big controversy as of this writing.

Here is a quote from the great thinker, Victor David Hanson. “Or, if the virus can scare us enough that we cease working and interacting, our canceled-out economy will grind to a halt.”

Here is a snippet from a British Financial Newspaper.

“Herd immunity.” In the absence of therapeutic treatments or a vaccine for the novel coronavirus, it suggests that there’s safety in numbers. Physicians say the reality is far more complex.

Patrick Vallance, the U.K.’s chief scientific adviser, said herd immunity is an option the government is exploring in its effort to grapple with the coronavirus-borne illness COVID-19. The aim would be to allow immunity to build up among members of the population who are least at risk of dying from COVID-19.

“What we don’t want is everybody to end up getting it in a short period of time so we swamp and overwhelm [National Health Service] services,” he told BBC Radio 4 on Friday. “Our aim is to try and reduce the peak, broaden the peak, not suppress it completely.”

His aim is to build up a herd immunity so more people are immune to this disease, thereby reducing the rate of transmission and protecting those who are most at risk of dying from COVID-19, the disease caused by coronavirus SARS-CoV-2.

“If you suppress something very, very hard, when you release those measures it bounces back, and it bounces back at the wrong time,” Vallance said. The U.K. has had 1,395 confirmed cases as of Sunday and 35 deaths, according to data the latest tally compiled by Johns Hopkins University’s Center for Systems Science and Engineering.

The approach represents a polar opposite to that implied in this week’s national-emergency declaration by U.S. President Donald Trump. The U.S. has had at least 3,774 confirmed coronavirus cases and 69 deaths. Coronavirus has infected 169,385 people globally and at least 6,513 deaths, John Hopkins said; it also reported 77,257 recoveries.

Israeli Politics and the Coronavirus

It is most amazing to note that Israel is in the midst of its third political stalemate after inconclusive elections. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s party, Likud, is already talking about another election! At the same time, Israel has embraced the most severe restrictions of any country to try to manage the threat of the virus. The planes are not flying, and the schools will now be closed. Closing the schools will be a terrible trial for working parents! There are to be no meetings of over 100 people. The hotels are mostly empty. Israel’s tourism industry is suspended. The economic consequences are terrible. All this is happening at the same time as the United States is holding its presidential primaries. History may note them as the virus primaries. The United States itself is embracing greater and greater restrictions. Even the National Basketball League has suspended games!!

What is God up to in allowing this terrible situation worldwide? Could revival follow? Some are praying for this.

It seems amazing that in the midst of such a plague that Israel is in political limbo. We really need to see our helplessness and our need for God, for we cannot even form a government. It is not only that the vote failed to put either the Likud or the Blue and White, the two largest parties over the top. A government could be formed but for the rigid positions taken by some politicians, an amazing stubbornness. My two favorite Israeli English language newspapers, the Jerusalem Post and the Times of Israel are in agreement, and I agree with them. Just where are the points of stubbornness?

Benjamin Netanyahu (Bibi) bears responsibility by insisting on remaining the head of his party though under indictment. The trial procedures begin on March 17^th. There are several things that could be negotiated. Blue and White would be in a unity government with Likud if not led by Bibi due to the indictment. They say they will not be in a government led by him due to the indictment. Several solutions could be found. Likud could choose a new leader and even say that after his trial, if found innocent, Bibi could return to leadership through a new party vote. Likud could commit to this.
Benjamin Netanyahu insists that all his right-wing partners be included in any government. This is a non-starter. This right wing includes the Ultra-Orthodox who have a stranglehold over the government. I have written many times on how their welfare state within the state is bleeding the government. They also say that they will not be in a government with Blue and White. My view on this? Good. Let there be a unity government without them. This would be very helpful.
There are two Blue and White Party members and one Labor-Gesher member who will not allow a government to form through the votes of the Joint List Arab party because the Arabs are not Zionists but want a bi-national state. This seems really foolish on the part of these three members, since after the vote, Bibi will be gone and there could be a unity government. At any rate, the Joint List will not be part of the government but only give the vote to end Bibi’s reign. All they are asking is parity in government services spending. Indeed, this coalition could pass a law that a person under indictment could not serve.
Blue and White could change their position and accept Bibi in a rotation for Prime Minister with Benny Gantz due to the very bad situation of not being able to form a government and to avoid a fourth election. It seems dire enough to defend such a change. They could promise pardon to him for allowing General Gantz of Blue and White to lead the government in the first rotation. Bibi can lead again if found innocent. For this to happen, Bibi has to let the Ultra-Orthodox go. Shas cannot control the interior department. There has to be a cut in welfare for men to study Talmud and Rabbinic arguments all day!
The Joint List, including Balad, the more anti-Israel faction, could vote to form the government with Blue and White and accept that only some of their demand can be met since the budget will cannot immediately provide all their demands. The government can take significant steps. How about a cut in Ultra-Orthodox welfare to finance classrooms, roads, police and hospitals in the Arab areas! Balad refuses to support a government and has an all or nothing stand.

There are many possible solutions, but so many are being stubborn. It is amazing! And some speak of a fourth election which again would likely be inconsequential. Can Bibi stay in power by having elections forever?

Meanwhile, the country is in turmoil not only in politically but with the virus. What a time for us to pray, exercise faith, heal the sick and share the Good News! What a great time for the Spirit to be poured out.

Weighing Evidence

I have taught Apologetics for 48 years.

One issue of faith and evidence is that people weigh things differently. No one really believes without evidence, but people are made up in such ways that different evidences strike them differently.

For example, the famous professor John Warwick Montgomery, Th. D. and Ph. D, was influenced by British Analytic Philosophy. For him, the worthy evidence was strictly empirical. The historical documents were trustworthy and proved the resurrection. So that settled it. In this regard, I sometimes tell skeptics to simply read Luke and Acts. The presentation there is so very credible.

Dr. Kenneth Kantzer, Ph. D. from Harvard, the dean of Trinity

Evangelical Divinity School for many years, a great theological teacher, thought the evidence for the resurrection was good, but unless it was part of the total world view that had convincing power, it was not enough. For Kantzer, the biblical world view in comparison to other world views was the key.

However, those with direct mystical experiences have what is direct empirical evidence to them. This direct evidence to them settles it. St. Theresa describes her experiences as certain. So also Heidi Baker, the famous missionary to Mozambique. If you read her books, her amazing experiences are certain. Her descriptions are sometimes like St. Theresa of Avila. Those with visions don’t always get them as a product of super hard disciplines like Theresa. The Apostle Paul was simply overwhelmed with a vision on the way to Damascus. After that, he argued from the Scriptures, but before that, he did not see the weight of the Scriptures that proved the case for Yeshua. The famous child painter, Akiani, has an amazing catalog of experiences since her childhood. You would well to look her up. I have a book of her amazing paintings. Some people just know by reading a text of Scripture. They know by the witness of the Spirit to them.

Then there the direct experiences of those who have had near-death experiences. Some who were not believers before becoming believers and become certain of their faith. The book by John Burke, Imagine Heaven, seems quite credible to me.

I should add those who have seen contemporary miracles. That settles it for them. I have directly witnessed great miracles but was already a believer.

Now I think that some weigh negative evidence against the biblical world view differently. For believers, the negatives are less weighty than their experience of the evidences. For others, the negatives such as the problem of evil and suffering or the disproportionate distribution of blessing and suffering are so weighty that all of the positive evidence is discounted. I think this is a big mistake. As human beings, we have to embrace mystery and the truth that there is enough evidence that we should not discount it due to the negatives.

I think it is well to keep all this in mind in our dialogue.

I think this is all very central to our reflections.