Prophecy and Biblical Authority

Prophecy and Biblical Authority

Pentecostal/Charismatics and non-charismatic evangelicals sometimes live in different language worlds. This produces deep divides that are not necessary even if there is no agreement about some of the issues of theology. Thankfully these divides are not as great as a generation ago since there have been dialogues, and leaders of both orientations are joined in cooperation in organizations like the World Evangelical Alliance. Yet sometimes I come across leaders who are still in their more isolated bubble and have not come to yet understand the other. For example, some Evangelicals who would not identify as Pentecostal/Charismatic do have significant experiences of the Holy Spirit and his leading, and speak of the “still small voice” and of the Spirit showing the meaning of Scripture. Pentecostal/Charismatics should not think that Evangelicals are all rationalists that believe all knowledge is only by rational empirical processing. Augustine himself taught that all true knowledge comes from the illumination/revelation of the Spirit. However, there are Evangelicals and Fundamentalists who have a mostly rationalistic bent. Here are some points that we need to ponder if we are to not be like ships passing in the night without understanding the other.

Pentecostal/Charismatics generally believe in the gift of prophecy today and many in the existence of prophets today. They almost all believe that prophets today are not 100% accurate but with the gift of the Spirit to all believers, God expects all to test and hear God for themselves and for prophecy to be confirmed by leaders in the community and by the person who receives a prophecy. God intentionally then has a prophetic gift where his people no longer depend on the 100% accuracy of the prophet as in the pre-New Covenant period, but on their own hearing and confirmation. Evangelicals who claim that only a 100% accurate rule for prophecy can be accepted (or the person could be stoned!) preclude the possibility for mutual progress. Pentecostal/Charismatics generally believe that the continuing work of the Spirit today means that we continue to receive revelation. The idea of receiving new revelation strikes those who do not know and understand Pentecostal/Charismatics as an alarming claim, but it is not so. Here are some points about that.

The word “revelation” is used by Pentecostal/Charismatics as a parallel synonym term to “illumination” as used among evangelicals. Evangelicals want to reserve the word revelation for those prophets in the Bible and those who could write Scripture. However, it is obvious that if something is illuminated, then one can see it and it is revealed. Both believe that the Holy Spirit helps us understand the meaning of the Bible. New insight that is proven out by study of the Bible in context is the experience of both. Aside from heretical and strange groups, Pentecostal/Charismatics do not mean that revelation provides them with an understanding of the Bible that is not to be tested by good Biblical study that proves it to be so. Craig Keener’s Spirit Hermeneutics is the best book I know on this subject. God speaks to us and shows us the meaning of his Word but this understanding has to be tested by the Biblical text!!
Pentecostal/Charismatics also use the word revelation for God showing them things that are not in the Bible. Some who are not Pentecostal/Charismatics think that by this they believe in having a corpus of revelation that is equal to the Bible and is authority. Pentecostal/Charismatics do not believe this but accept that the foundations of doctrine are only in the Bible. However, they do believe that God by experience in the Spirit shows us how to approach deliverance from demons, or how to pray more effectively, or the roots of the problems in a city. The Bible does not tell us everything we need to know; not our vocation, not our calling in the Body, not whom we are to marry or where to live. This comes by the leading of the Spirit.
Pentecostal/Charismatics use the Bible as a jumping-off point by analogy of something the Spirit is saying today in prophetic exhortations. This kind of jumping-off point by analogy is common in the New Testament use of the Hebrew Bible. There are many books by scholars showing this usage. Such jumping off is not an exegesis of the meaning of the text. The text in context is still always the key for Bible interpretation. We try to train our prophetic speakers to say in such contexts that they are not claiming their words to be the meaning of the text.
Pentecostal/Charismatics minister in words of knowledge or prophecy that is accurate about persons they never met. They have been called out of audiences, and their lives have been described. It is amazing to behold. The accuracy sometimes is stunning. Some also give words about events to come and they come about.

Maybe Evangelicals and Pentecostal/Charismatics can at least understand what the other is saying. Maybe they will not agree, but at least they will not misunderstand what the other is saying. Yes, prophecy can go bad and be dangerous. I wrote a book on one church that did fall into error The Dynamics of Spiritual Deception. There are keys to understanding how this happens and how to avoid it.

Can A Democratic Republic Government Survive in the Internet Age?

The Founding Fathers of the United States created not a democracy, but a Democratic Republic. The difference is that in a democracy the majority decides through vote whatever the majority wants. The founders feared the corruption of both the rulers and the masses and rejected the idea of democracy. The vote of the majority was only one part of the checks and balances to limit power and to give great freedom to the citizens. Democracy is restrained by the separation of powers, among the judiciary, legislative and executive. Many state governments follow the same checks and balances. There is also an electoral college that limits the power of the populous states. There is a Senate whose diversity from different states does the same. Then there are the limits of the constitution which constrains popular voting. It is hard to change the constitution. The newly formed government was called a republic, not a democracy.

Today, there is more and more of a desire to overcome the checks and balances. There are ideas to pack the Supreme Court by the Democratic Party (so they can have their will), to eliminate the electoral college, to have a popular election of the President and to limit the involvement of corporations in politics and issues, though they are one check in the system. (I have written before on a way to limit big money and also to ensure real competition in my book, Social Justice.)

In my recent posts on narratives, I raised the issue of how dangerous this age is since narratives that interpret aspects of our life in the 21st century are based on little real evidence but are the power assertions of the imaginations of leftists. This ranges from human sexuality, to the support of abortion, to socialism as a solution to injustice in society, to the claims of racism and colonialism as defining America and Israel as well. History is re-written from leftist imagination with only partial information to create the new story. What is alarming is how rapidly the society changes, from Barak Obama supporting only traditional marriage and California passing Proposition 8 forbidding gay marriage, to today. In ten short years since then, anyone who does not support the total LGBT agenda is hounded and vilified as a hater, as phobic and are to be shunned and protested. The hard ball power tactics are stunning. Leaders in corporations have even been fired.

How did this happen so quickly? The issue is really the power of the mass media to vastly change public opinion. We are now at a point were a few large hi-tech companies through search engine setups and the control of speech can vastly influence the culture. They overcome the checks and balances and like a ramrod, destroying the protections of historic cultural norms. However, they now also have the power to create narratives and to control information to swing votes. Robert Epstein Ph. D., a liberal Democrat, is the Senior Research Psychologist of the American Institute for Behavioral Research and Technology. He testified before a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee. He made the stunning claim that the leaders of the big Hi-Tech companies, and especially Google, can swing 15 million votes. The vote is still very important and with the wrong people in charge, the checks and balances can be eroded. This power in the hands of a few is like nothing we have ever seen in our society before. Unless people are informed from another source of information that protects them (alternative media, the Bible?) they vote according to the molding of public opinion and skewed information. Those who would be elected form the far left believe in shutting down debate and having a totalitarian control from the left. Generally, they reject free speech and open debate. Notice how conservative speech is now shut down on campuses in the United States.

Of course, the way to fight back is massive media campaigns based on truth and exposing the lies of the false narratives, but this is hard to do with the left in control of the press, mainstream media, the internet and even still has the largest internet news followings in spite of conservative gains. This fight will likely require the decentralization of the Hi-Tech companies, of those in power over our internet sources of information.

Can a Democratic Republic overcome the onslaught? It will be difficult. And of course, a religious revival that sweeps millions into the Kingdom can be a game-changer. But who will take on this fight and tame the tech giants? Along with abortion and the LGBT agenda, this is probably the defining issue of our age.

The Dangers of Fundamentalist Dispensationalism

In using these two terms together, I am speaking of the joining of two distinguishable concepts. Dispensationalism refers to an interpretative approach to the Bible that goes back to John Nelson Darby from the middle of the 19th century. Many are familiar with the distinctions of Dispensationalism. The classic statement of it was in the Schofield Reference Bible (1909) while the greatest work of Systematic Theology was by Luis Sperry Chafer the leader of Dallas Theological Seminary (the 1930s and 40s) This established the theology with great detail. These are key distinctions of classical dispensationalism and their problems.

A rigid distinction between law and grace. The New Testament presents a covenant of grace contrary to the Old Testament as a dispensation of law. We are no longer under law but grace. One can be saved and continue to live in sin. Any other view is said to be adding works to salvation by grace. The dedicated life is a second but not required step. This has given rise to hyper-grace theologies and hyper-grace leaders with all its dangers. It abandons the applicability of the Torah.
A rigid distinction between Israel and the Church. Like historic Pre-Millennialism (before Darby) Dispensationalism affirms the fulfillment of the prophecies made to Israel. But the catch is that when a Jew becomes a follower of Yeshua, his destiny is no longer with his ethnic nation, but is now with the Church. Therefore, continued Jewish life in the Messiah would not be fitting. This is why in my early days of leadership in the Messianic Jewish movement in the 1970s, we were attacked by people who believed this.
The way they made the distinction of Israel and the Church (and there is a distinction rightly to be made) was part of what led to their view of the rapture. To keep Israel and God’s work with the Church separate, the Church needs to be removed before the 7 year Tribulation. In my youth, it was taught that giving up this view of the rapture was the beginning of the slide to liberalism. Then God again will work through Israel. The Church with Jewish believers will be out of here. This means that the Church will not be the instrument at the end to make Israel jealous. Nor will Jewish believers before the rapture. They are not seen as the “saved remnant” of Israel that is still part of the destiny of their nation. It also means that that Messianic Jews are not part of the irrevocable calling of Israel. (One can do a workaround so that the work of making Israel jealous is remembered seven years later when Israel comes to Yeshua. I have seen moderates assert this).
The classical view was cessationist on the gifts of the Spirit. The supernatural gifts of I Cor. 12-14 were only for the transitional age in the first century before the New Testament was written down. There is no gift of prophecy. There is no gift of apostle or prophet today. It was anti-charismatic or non-charismatic.
The Gospel is not the Gospel of the Kingdom and the Kingdom of God did not come even partially in the coming of Yeshua and Pentecost.
They fear the idea of the unity of the Church (John 17:21) as only leading to a false ecumenicism and deception.

I could say much more but want to be brief. Today there is a new trend called Progressive Dispensationalist that questions many of these tenants, but most of these are still pre-Tribulation rapture people. Today Dallas Seminary accepts the Progressives and is a much different place. Progressives are moving closer to my view, historic pre-millennialism.

Classical Dispensationalism was also Fundamentalist. Fundamentalism describes a narrow orientation that is sometimes viciously critical of others that do not follow rigid ideas of separation and purity. Separation for purity is almost a badge of honor.

There is a fear of contamination. It tended to cause splits. When combined with Dispensationalism, it holds as suspect all who are not also like them as Dispensationalist Fundamentalists. It leads to a sectarian approach. It is a narrow Orthodoxy and not a broad Orthodoxy. It will split from and condemn those who do not tow the mark. One of the most glaring historical examples is the 1957 rejection of Billy Graham because he cooperated with the mainline Protestant Church leader whom the Fundamentalists consider suspect. The attack was vicious. An early example was the closed Plymouth Brethren who condemned taking communion with any other than closed brethren. The sectarian division is characteristic.

Dispensational Fundamentalism is a dying movement. It produces very little today in world missions which is now mostly growing by Pentecostals and new stream charismatic networks. So why take the time to deal with this? It is because we still fight aspects of this both in theology and the narrow spirit. For example, the roots of hyper-grace teaching are in this movement though hyper-grace teachers do not endorse the whole system. The opposition to the role of law is also still very common despite the role of law in classical Christian theology. In addition, there is a severe criticism of charismatic movements, even a vicious slander at times and misrepresentation. The idea of Jewish life in Yeshua is also rejected and opposed. So, what is to be done? Pray and proclaim a better presentation of Biblical truth. We have experienced this spirit of Dispensational Fundamentalism. The great scholar of yesteryear, Edward John Carnell, called it Orthodoxy gone cultic. Thankfully this is a dying movement.

Israel’s Orthodox Jewish Crisis

When I first came into Jewish ministry (June 1972), I had very little knowledge of Judaism. I had the best of Evangelical Christian education and also studied at a liberal Christian Seminary. My professors taught about Jewish backgrounds for understanding the New Testament, but not about post-New Testament Judaism. I thought I should study Judaism; how else could I be in Jewish ministry. I read books on Judaism. Then someone gave me an old copy of the Talmud in English translation by Rodkinson. The Talmud is the primary foundation of Judaism; volumes that define the requirements of Judaism based on the debates in the early Jewish schools, Yeshivot. It claims to preserve the Oral Law given to Moses. This very inadequate abbreviation of the Talmud in 10 volumes did not have the classical pagination so I could not look up references. Therefore, I took a copy of the Soncino Talmud in English and went through the Talmud page by page in both editions and added the page numbers to Rodkinson. As part of this, I browsed through the Talmud and more carefully read some parts. I was amazed! I concluded at that time that the Talmud could be divided into four evaluation aspects. First was the most incredible level of legalistic extension and minutia in legal requirements that the world had ever seen. This was the dominant bulk of the Talmud. Secondly, was good wisdom in some applications of the Law. Then there were stories that did sometimes bring out good moral inspiration, and finally some amazing superstitions. I also studied the worship texts of the Jewish people, attended a Jewish college and took a full course on this. This part of Jewish tradition was an accurate reflection about God, his mercy, grace, and redemption based in the Hebrew Bible. It points to Yeshua. God had not left himself without a witness among our people even after our leaders led us astray in the rejection of Yeshua.

Recently I decided to again read through the first part of the Talmud, the Mishnah, which was written down about 200 C. E. I was even more amazed by the arguments and the detailed conclusions by which life is to be regulated in classical Judaism. There were some who were able to relate well to the larger world despite the restrictions Judaism required (Maimonides as a case in point) but the preoccupation with things that are really irrelevant is again amazing. Some will take issue with me and defend this first aspect of the Talmud. My conclusion is that this aspect of Judaism is the result of our leaders in the first century rejecting Yeshua. In a sense, it is a punishment that locks our people into this very restrictive structure. As Yeshua said, the Pharisees already were teaching as precepts the traditions of men. (Matthew 15:9). The punishment was God giving our people up to their choice whereby the precepts of men became multiplied into volumes of unbelievably detailed irrelevant material. One cannot read through the Mishnah with a biblically formed mind and heart and think it shows God’s ideal for His people. It is a great departure from the biblical path.

Orthodox Judaism, the Judaism that seeks to be true to classic Judaism is now established in Israel. Both Sephardic (Eastern and North African) and Ashkenazic Judaism from Eastern Europe maintained the standards of rigid legalism. When the Zionist movement began, Jewish religious leaders rejected it. The Orthodox rejected it due to the teaching that we were not to have a state until the Messiah came and led us back to the Land. Reform Judaism was seeking to break from the Orthodox legal restrictions and be a universal religion. The Zionist nationalism did not fit their desire for Judaism to morph into a universal religion. Only as Zionism succeeded did Orthodox thinkers arise who saw in the re-establishing of Israel a prophetic fulfillment and a foreshadowing of redemption. Rabbi Abraham Kook led in the establishment, in the 1930s, the formation of a nationalistic modern Orthodoxy that would fully support Zionism and the idea of a state. Modern Nationalist Orthodox today fight in the army, seek to be in the professions and to be interacting with the larger society. Modern Orthodoxy in America, as in Yeshiva University in New York, has the same orientation. These folks seek to follow Jewish strictures, but in a way that allows for cultural relevance. What is the problem? The problem is that in Israel they are more and more of a minority. Recent statistics indicate that they are not growing. Young people exposed to the larger world can be convinced to leave the world of Orthodoxy. What is growing greatly is the Ultra-Orthodox. The Ultra-Orthodox have displaced the Modern Orthodox in political power in Israel, though most are not Zionist. The National Orthodox are shrinking in power in comparison. The Ultra-Orthodox lose very few of their children and have large families. Here are some important points.

The Ultra-Orthodox, for the most part, refuse Army service. They claim to be studying Torah and should be exempt. They mean studying Talmud and Jewish debates on the application of Jewish law (Halakah).
They reject courses in their schools that could prepare them for the workforce. Yet the state must pay for these schools.
The men in large numbers do not enter the workforce. Therefore these large Jewish families require enormous expenditures of welfare. The women work to support the family but at low wages.
A very large number of the Ultra-Orthodox are poor.

Article after article in the Jewish press, Hebrew and English, claims that the Ultra-Orthodox are an existential threat to Israel. Why? Because Israel cannot forever support this growing segment of the population that is projected in future decades to be 30% of the Jewish population. The present government (Netanyahu) does not respond to this threat, but gives in to them, to stay in power. This is very shortsighted. The Ultra-Orthodox passed the 1 million mark in 2018. Unless they are economically productive, they will destroy the economy. There is nothing in Jewish Law historically that requires a Jewish observance contrary to personal economic responsibility and productivity. When this battle is finally engaged, it could lead to devastating conflict in Israel.

The thought comes to me. Isn’t it amazing that Judaism, as it developed and now is rooted in Israel, is one of the greatest threats to the State of Israel? And isn’t it amazing that this Judaism grew from out of that ancient Jewish tradition in Talmud that results from the rejection of Yeshua? It is also amazing that the only answer to the paradoxes of the state of Israel and the secular/Orthodox divide is to look back to where this wrong trajectory was set, back to the first century and to embrace Yeshua. The continuing rejection of Yeshua has many causes. Anti-Semitism is one. However, before Anti-Semitism from Christians, there was the Jewish rejection of Yeshua. Other Judaism that is not Orthodox and the secular reject Him in part due to their roots in the formation of classical Judaism between 70 and 600 C. E.

Lying Narratives

My previous post on Narratives did not get my usual response. My media team thought that maybe it was too intellectual. I am a university Apologetics professor and do gravitate to such analysis. But I want to simplify.

One of the great ways that the Devil destroys is to get people to accept interpretive narratives that will lead to social breakdown and the personal destruction of those that buy into them. We have many such narratives today. Through media, they gain traction in ways beyond any other past age. It is an age of shallow interpretive narratives, not based on the evidence, and fostered by propaganda.

That the problems of the world are due to white males. White males are more evil than other people. Believing this will set racial and cultural groups against one another. All people are equally evil and need redemption. Some white Europeans were for a time dominant in the world, but the same white Europeans who were influenced by the Bible brought us all progress on the foundational ideas and implementation of human rights. Today’s toxic masculinity narrative is a corollary. All people are sinners, potential toxic unless discipled through the Bible.
That the primary problem in the Black community is police discrimination, shaming and brutality. Believing this will impede progress in solving the biggest problems; the breakdown of the black family, the bankruptcy of Black schools (private schools and charters are needed) and black on black crime which requires massive policing. As the police now withdraw, more blacks are killed and the Devil loves it.
That the reason for poverty is the capitalist system and the greedy business people ripping off the poor. Yes, crony capitalism, where some large corporations are unfairly dominating the market, is a problem. But only free enterprise creates the wealth that lifts millions out of poverty. Incentives for business investment is one of the most important programs to address poverty.
That Israel occupies Palestinian Land and is the oppressor, creating an apartheid state. Israel is a white colonial power. However, there was never a Palestinian state. The reason there is not one is that the Palestinians refused a state three times when offered in preference to keep the fight against the existence of Israel (1948, 2000, 2006).
That Christianity is the white man’s religion that brought oppression. Not so, it is the liberating religion that delivers from bondage.

These narratives are shallow, not based on looking at all the evidence and supported by massive propaganda through media. Only immersion in the Bible which brings us a Biblical world view and the power of discerning by the Spirit can give us an orientation so we do not succumb to these false narratives. There may be some aspects of truth in them, but they are generally inspired by the realm of the demonic whose goal is always destruction. The Bible is God’s ultimate narrative about existence and human life.

An Iranian Strategy

Killing Kassem Soleimani, the leader and General in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and the Al Quds forces, brought a sense of justice and closure to many. This was especially so in Israel. There is not really any push back here, unlike among the Democrats in America. Just about all leaders, left, right and center, think this was the right thing to do.

Many here hope for more. They would like to see Iran provoke the United States into a massive retaliation. It is possible that a massive retaliation would take out Iran’s air force, missiles and missile bases, navy, oil fields and ultimately their nuclear facilities. Some think this could lead to the collapse of the regime (but would Iran’s military permit this?) (Is this John Bolton’s hope?) We can think of a world without this terrorist-sponsoring nation that seeks to dominate the whole Middle East and to bring about domination from the Shiite form of Islam.

Iran does serve one positive purpose. Their existence has broken down the united front against Israel in the Sunni Muslim world. In a kind of unspoken and loose secret alliance for pragmatic reasons, Saudi Arabia, Bahrein, United Arab Emirates, and others now join Israel in opposition to Iran. Could this even lead to diplomatic breakthroughs? May God have a purpose in mind for allowing Iran’s present regime to continue? Israeli geopolitical strategists do see how Iran has pushed Israel and some of the Arab nations into cooperation.

However, from my point of view, in spite of the secondary benefits, with Iran’s actions in many nations and not only the Middle East, and with the danger of Iran’s nuclear bomb, it would be best that the intention of the United States and the West would be to eventually carry out the full attack. It would not take a ground war. It could be very quick. Israel would probably have to fight Hezbollah in Lebanon in its one last desperate action. It is best not to depend on Iran to gain good relationships with the Gulf Muslim countries.

The Democrats say that they do not want to see us at War. President Trump says the same. But we have been at war for many years. It is an asymmetric war and is based on both radical Shiite and Sunni ideologies that seek to use violence and conquering through war to gain their objective of Islamic world conquest. It begins with the Middle East and Pakistan. Turkey is with the Islamists now. (We are deluded to think they are a NATO ally.) Then it is the struggle for Africa, as we see in Somalia, Sudan, Niger, Chad, Nigeria, Kenya, and so many more nations. The world war has begun, but as yet the West will not admit it. Politically correct people won’t see the problem. Russia and China play with Islamic tyrants and think they can control it while devastatingly crushing their own Muslim populations.

We speak of strategy from a geopolitical point of view. How do we fit this into the Biblical accounts about the last invasion of Israel being mostly described as from what are today Muslim nations? More and more writers are taking the last invasion to be Muslim led. (W. Shoebat and J. Richardson). Nations cannot base their policies on such biblical pictures of the last days. God can bring long delays in the process that eventually leads to the end. Acting for national self-interest and only secondarily for justice will guide even relatively good nations. The Biblical exhortation to rescue the perishing being led to death (Pr. 24:11) is not heeded by political leaders even if the cost is not high. (eg. Rwanda genocide, Syria chemical bombing). We hope for policies that do two things. One is policies, even if inadvertent or unintentional, that will bring the greatest mercy and justice to the largest number. Secondly, we desire policies that will lead to the greatest spread of the Gospel.

Narratives

We live in a time of many narratives about many aspects of life. The very word narrative, as the story or description that is how we see reality in various realms, has become ubiquitous. Fifty years ago, we hardly ever heard the term narrative except in literature. Postmodern Philosophy constantly tells us that there is no true meta-narrative. What does that mean? It means there is no ultimately true story or view of the nature of existence or no ultimately true world view. Of course, that is just their assertion. Do those who assert this conclude this after rigorous searching and comparing world views and taking into account all the relevant evidence to come to this conclusion? Maybe some think they did so, but I think most just are asserting this position. It is their preference. I have yet known of a post-modernist who has really sorted the evidence for the Biblical world view. There is the evidence of design that follows from the details of the forces of the universe stemming from the big bang. There is the amazing integrated complex order of a cell that is as complex as New York City. Then there is the evidence from the Biblical material itself. For example, the credibility of the accounts of Luke in the Gospel of Luke and the Book of Acts are amazing. The day of Pentecost itself amazes. So does the testimony in I Cor. 15 on the resurrection of Yeshua. The evidence of continuing miracles today done in the name of Yeshua (Jesus) should astonish and cause wonder. Craig Keener’s massive two-volume scholarly study is only a small sample! This is dishonesty and shallowness in the postmodern assertion.

Meta Narratives provide the organizational key to tying together all the various aspects of existence. The Biblical world view is the true truth narrative. Without it, we are adrift on a sea of subjective assertions. Commitment to the truths of the Bible should make us careful about quickly buying into the shifting narratives of our day, many based on subjective prejudice. Here are a few. The narrative that the problems of the world all are rooted in the evil of white people from Europe who spread colonialism and oppressed non-white peoples in slavery and massacred the native Americans and stole their land is now constantly asserted by the radical left. There is a degree of truth in this narrative, but it fails to deal with the fallenness of human nature and the universal reality of power and abuse. Did the Mongol invaders colonize nations and oppress and abuse? Did the dominant Chinese and Indians tribes slaughter whole villages in their conquering and wipe out their enemies? How did China become an empire? Did some African tribes slaughter and oppress other tribes? Did some native Americans do the same? The Biblical world view has been the greatest influence in overcoming this corruption. This narrative leads to many other skewed conclusions. Should the founding fathers of the United States be totally rejected because the Virginia founders held slaves? Is that the end of the story? Did they make human rights progress that was an advancement in the era in which they lived? Who were the people who eliminated slavery after fighting against it tooth and nail? It was mostly white English people. It was their understanding of the Bible that motivated them. And we can go on and on. People will oppress others for their advantage when they have the power or capability to do so and only biblical transformation can mitigate against it.

Then there is the black lives matter movement. Yes, blacks are often not treated fairly by white policemen. But in this narrative, the idea is that the biggest problem of the loss of life in the black community is from the police. There is little loss of black lives from the police. This is not a true narrative. Rather, creating a barrier between police and the black community will lead to a much greater loss of life. The drug gangs and the slaughters from this can only be addressed in part by a police presence that is far beyond what is yet contemplated. Just after the assassination of the Iranian terrorist Qasem Soleimani, Colin Kaepernick made the statement that America only kills non-white people. I think he is not becoming absurd in his comments. The last world wars saw white against white and yellow against yellow in the East. But his comments arise out of being captured by the last two narratives we mentioned.

The narrative about toxic men and the new despising of men by some feminists is another case in point. A biblical world view would tell us that men and women can be evil, both can be toxic. Unless men and women are discipled in biblical values, there will be a social decline on many levels. Who was that woman who procured the young women for the infamous sex fiend Jeffrey Epstein? Oh? A toxic woman? When men are trained in biblical values they honor and treasure women and treat them with special regard. The men in my family did so.

Then there is the narrative about capitalism being only about greed and unfair wealth distribution. Of course, crony capitalism where the government favors some corporations and does not incentives investments that lift the general population are a problem. However, socialism just does not expand wealth and life people of poverty. This has been proven again and again. This does not mean that there should not be social safety net programs. Again, there is a narrative that is not based on evidence but on emotional preferences.

Then there are sexual narratives about homosexuals, bi-sexual and transsexual people. Generalizations are plentiful. These narratives have some truth in that people were not treated in loving ways as created in the image of God, but the interpretations of sexuality are subjective narratives.

We even see simplistic narratives about war. Removing the Baathist rulers in Iraq (though Saddam had to go) was a great mistake. Some, including myself, predicted an Iranian controlled Shiite Iraq. Yet the narrative is pervasive that George Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction and that that the reason for the war was oil. Bush did not lie, but the Clinton appointed head of the CIA told him it was certain they were there and that it was a “slam dunk.”

Then there are simplistic narratives on global warming and the environment. The folks pushing these narratives will not face the fact that the U. S. has lowered its emissions more than European nations. They will not face the issue of China, India and how Africa will develop without fossil fuel. It is a prejudice against the old white countries which must be the problem!

Simplistic narratives now define our American and our Israel political discourse. In America, the narrative about President Trump from the left is simply a gross oversimplification though there are grounds for concern. In Israel, Netanyahu lies and calls the Blue and White party leftist. They are probably right of center. But that is now the narrative among some of the right in Israel.

How do we deliver ourselves from being corrupted by the narratives that swirl about and constantly bombard us on the internet? Narratives that are exaggerations and so out of balance Here are my recommendations.

Be immersed in the Word of God and see all of life through biblical rooting.
Note that all people are corrupt. They need to be saved. As such, when the going gets tough, many will do evil to save themselves. Witness Hitler’s power in the Holocaust. Don’t ever conclude that one group is good and another bad or that all the oppressed are good (identity politics and intersectionality). All have sinned, are corrupt and need salvation.
Be skeptical about all sub-meta-narratives that do not square with biblical perspectives on human life.
Prayerfully seek the Holy Spirit. He can alert you to know that something is wrong with a narrative.
Pursue competing narratives and compare their basis in research and evidence.
For any issue pursue the standard of comprehensiveness; taking into account all the relevant information about the issues at hand.
Recognize that we are limited and it is fine to say that you do not know and have not studied the issue sufficiently. You are only responsible to pursue knowledge in areas as led by the Spirit.

Israel’s New Year and the Political Dilemma

It is somewhat strange to be in Israel during New Years Day. The world change of calendar is not a holiday in Israel. It is a normal workday. Our family in Israel, all from America, did gather for a New Year’s celebration. It was a wonderful time of fellowship, food and the rukus of the younger of our 11 grandchildren.

However, there is no break in the political perils in Israel. The Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, has been indicted for fraud and breach of trust. He has not asked for immunity from the Knesset. The last Prime Minister before Benjamin Netanyahu, Ehud Olmert, resigned when he was indicted. The Parliament (the Knesset) can grant immunity for good reasons, but if the reasons are not good, the Knesset can be overruled by the Supreme Court. Then the Knesset can change Israel’s basic law so the Court cannot overrule them on these kinds of issues (but that is highly unlikely). Hope you are not confused at this point! Basically, his asking for immunity will likely delay the court filing by the attorney general until after the March 2 election, the third election. Then the new Knesset after that election would have to decide. It is still unlikely according to the polls that Netanyahu would get 61 votes necessary to pass the immunity request and unlikely that he will be the Prime Minister and get 61 votes for that. I have given my reasons for supporting Blue and White re: religious freedom and the persecution of Messianic Jews, the dangers of the non-working welfare supported Ultra-Orthodox Jews in Netanyahu’s camp, the marginalized status of so many Russian Jews, and the greater economic distributive justice for Israeli Arabs in government programs.

It is amazing that the Prime Minister of Israel is in danger of being convicted of crimes and removed from office while at the same time the American President has been impeached and will probably have a trial in the Senate if the impeachment papers are turned over to the Senate. However, the key person in Israel for this indictment was a Netanyahu supporter, the Attorney General Mendelblit of Israel. He is accused of clearly defined crimes according to criminal law. Whereas in the House of Representatives, it is the super partisan Democratic Party that impeached the President (this is like an indictment). There is no clear violation of any criminal statute. In Israel, since we do not have a New Year Holiday, the political process is continuing as I write. Issues of when to convene the Knesset committee that would hear the request could assure delay until the election. In the United States, Congress will reconvene next week. Stay tuned for a roller coaster ride in both countries. Is there something spiritual whereby both countries are in such political upheaval? Some want to compare it as two really good men chosen by God who are being under political attack. This is far too simple as this essay shows.

In the midst of all this, my biggest issue in Israel is the freedom of Messianic Jews to continue to share their faith, build their congregations and to receive citizenship when they make Aliya. This seems like a small issue to the world. Like the Chinese, we pray, “Lord, give us the government which will best enable the Gospel to go forth.”

The International Criminal Court Investigates Israel for War Crimes

In the decision to investigate Israel for war crimes the ICC discredits itself. They remind me of the most liberal judges in America’s courts that make the U. S. Constitution say whatever they want it to say; even the opposite! Let’s list some of the reasons.

The first point of investigation is that Israel’s settlements in Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) are illegal and a criminal violation of International Law. However, for that to be true, these territories by international law have to be the territories of a recognized state. Only the Security Council can recognize a state. To recognize a state there are criteria. One, there has to be a unified government with sufficient state institutions. The two governments, Hamas in Gaza, and the PA in the West Bank make this impossible! Though other nations have recognized the State of Palestine, they have broken international law to do so. These territories have never been recognized as part of a recognized state. This assumes a two-state solution as well, which is now impossible. It is best to have one state or go back to the Alon plan where the Palestinian areas are connected to Jordan and Jordanian citizenship and the Israeli areas are part of Israel.

Israel is being investigated for war crimes for civilian deaths in the last Gaza war. However, the rules for the ICC are such that investigations are to take place when a country maintains a serious independent investigative body for war violations. Israel does so and with great care. Objective observers say that no one could better wage an asymmetrical war with an enemy like Hamas that uses human shields better than Israel. This investigation can endanger the Prime Minister, the Defense secretary, and military figures when traveling.

This is a travesty when one considers the territorial violations of real countries. Note Russia’s violations in Ukraine and Georgia and Turkey’s occupying northern Cyprus.

It is secondly a travesty when one considers the crimes of Saddam Assad killing over 500,00 civilians, Russia’s killings in Ukraine, China putting its Muslim population in work re-education camps and more. It is a travesty in the light of the mass killings in Africa.

And when one talks about the right to a country, how much more do the Kurds show that they should be recognized?

Why does this happen? It can only be due to Anti-Semitism underneath it all. Israel is treated differently than others. The UN has passed resolutions in the General Assembly that does not recognize any Jewish connection to Jerusalem or the Temple Mount! One can see the Last Days on all this.

The International Criminal Court should be disbanded or changed to only investigate real genocide where thousands of innocents are slaughtered. It is now a rogue organization. There are great articles on all this in this weekend’s edition of the Jerusalem Post.

Is the Press Corrupt

I do seek to limit my posts on the issues of Donald Trump and the divisive political situation in the U. S. I have my view of Donald Trump. I will add a bit to this post for you to know.

Recently Chris Wallace said that Donald Trump’s attacks on the press as corrupt and fake news are very bad for the society. He argues that if the trust in the press is destroyed (and to a great extent it has been) then we are not as safe as a society. I have watched him for many years and do enjoy his fair and hard questions for both Republicans and Democrats. Yet in this case, I think he is wrong. We now have a partisan press. The legacy press is so in the tank for the Democrats and so anti-Trump that they have discredited themselves as corrupt. Make no mistake about it, though there is a conservative press when you add in all the news sites and social media, information is still by far to the left. Michael Goodwin, historically a Democrat who voted for Clinton is now blowing the trumpet on this corruption. He even notes an explicit change of policy at the New York Times to become partisan. Important news that could be seen as helpful to the President is suppressed. Whether economic news, progress in enterprise zones in the poor areas of the city, or prison reform and so much more is simply not reported. The most egregious example recently is that the legacy channels, NBC, CBS, and ABC, on their main news broadcasts did not report the huge story on the head judge of the FISA court rebuking the members of the FBI for their errors in seeking a warrant to wiretap Carter Page and thereby the Trump campaign. It got zero coverage on the day it came out. Indeed, how they reported the I. G. report on the history of the Trump Russia investigation was not an exoneration. His Senate testimony said so. It was only the predicate of its beginning that he noted was not provably biased, but the further errors as new warrants and wiretaps were sought left serious questions.

I do note that Fox News really does one thing that its detractors do not credit. Its hard news shows like Bret Baier, are quite factual oriented and not promoting a partisan agenda. Its panels have all sides. We saw such non-partisan reporting with Shephard Smith. When one watches the new channel form Israel, Channel 24, we can realize what a real news channel should be like. It is amazing. The press really has brought this on themselves. There needs to be a press reformation with new organizations that emphasize news and commentary and have a balance of conservative and liberal newscasters and commentary writers. The loss of journalistic standards goes back to our schools where objective reporting is rejected as impossible. All only project their views or so it is taught.

As for President Trump. For my friends, I have noted that I am troubled by the always Trumpers and the never Trumpers. I think both are really over the top. There are now two polarized narratives about the President, that he is almost all good or all bad. When there is such absolutist thinking on both sides, we can be sure that both sides are wrong. This is a principle of historical research and evaluation. Having said that, many Trump policies are very good in my view and some are bad. I have lists I have done and won’t copy them here. But on abortion, religious liberty, constitutionalist judges, prison reform, enterprise zones, getting NATO countries to pay their fair share, fighting crime, Israel, and so much he has been right. But in cozying up to ruthless dictator-murderers and complementing them he violates Scriptural principles about how we are to treat evil people. In speech that is personally demeaning people and name-calling, he violates James and other Scriptures which make this a cardinal issue of morality. It can bring a curse and open him up to demonic attack. Also, if he leaves Afghanistan to the Taliban, he will leave a blood bath that will be horrendous. He has to face that we are in a war for the foreseeable future against radical Islamic movements and need the help of other Islamic leaders to fight it.

I am in touch with the prophetic movement. Credible prophets have helped us know that Trump’s election was God’s doing. It is a time of respite. This is helpful to me. I felt great relief when corrupt Hillary was not elected. Yet this does not mean I lose my sense of proportion and the biblical norms for evaluating human behavior