Category: Politics

Abortion, the Pope and Donald Trump

Donald Trump today invited three responses when he said that abortion policy was up to the States by legislators or referendums. He got pushback against this from the left who were angry over the Supreme Court decision and wanted a national law making it legal with no restrictions to the point of birth. He got pushback from the right that want it to be nationally banned or greatly restricted. Neither is realistic.

Then in the same news cycle, the Vatican just came out with a profound document, five yours in the making on God’s creation order of male and female, marriage, abortion, transgenderism, in vitro fertilization (which Donald Trump supports), and more. Here is my take.

The Catholic statement was amazing. Magnificent, theological, and comprehensive. It is based on two premises: that God created human beings as male and female to be expressed for those not called to celibacy in a marriage where children can be produced. It looks at the agendas of transgenderism as profoundly wrong and seeking to overthink the goodness of God’s creation order. Secondly, it also rejects in vitro fertilization because though they understand the desire to have children, having children is not a right but a gift of God. This is consistent with the position of the Church that the life of the developing baby is sacred and to be preserved from the moment of conception until birth. In vitro violates this since the baby is not conceived in marital love and lab-fertilized eggs are destroyed.

Donald Trump was vilified by some on the right and even even former Vice President Pence. But I think we can defend what he did. Precluding abortion as a national stand is a losing position at this point in history. Yes, maybe after 15 weeks precluding could win, but a pro-life position can not accept abortion at any time, one week or ten or 8 months. What Trump did is require the people to take a stand in each state. Then each state faces God’s judgment for policy. The danger is that referendums from Democrats are radical and with no restrictions to the 9th month. They deceptively frame poll questions and referenda. At this point, the best way for Republicans to win is to change hearts through education and media efforts and to see states make restrictions as they have the political support to do so while still engaging in counseling and pro-life pregnancy centers. They have to do a better job of pointing out radical pro-abortion positions that the majority of people do not support. We have to both look at what we ideally want but also face what is politically possible even if this brings God’s judgment on states that do not fight for life.

Israel-Hamas War

The Jerusalem Post was filled today with evaluations of the state of the war with Hamas and what we should do.  Not all agreed, but there was a good deal of very good commentary.  My own reflections this week agreed with some of the commentators.  This week I was on a leaders’ retreat in the desert (Sde Boker) and also got the perspective of other leaders.

When Israel went to war after the terrible atrocities, Prime Minister Netanyahu declared that the goal was to end Hamas rule in Gaza and to dismantle the terror organization. Once this became the stated goal and was repeated numerous times (can anyone think it is less than 100 times?) anything less will be seen in the world especially the Arab world as a Hamas victory and will discredit Israel and empower Hamas.  Some years ago, Lee Smith wrote the book The Strong Horse on the mentality of the nations in this part of the world.  They want to bet on the strong horse and a weak-looking nation will not gain their alliance.  The Abraham Accords was a bet on Israel as the strong horse to counter Iran’s power.  New accords probably require Israel to defeat Hamas despite what these nations may publicly say.

However, I believe Israel’s leaders have fallen into a Hamas trap.  One of the world leaders in game theory, a Nobel Prize winner, saw this trap clearly.  By getting Israel to delay the war and focus on the hostages, the nation actually diminishes the chances of getting the hostages out and winning the war.  With the Hamas propaganda machine estimated to reach 100 million, the more time that goes by the more Israel is under international pressure to end the war, which would be a disaster.  Israel’s leaders originally said they had till January to win the war and then they would lose international support.  But here it is April. Wow!  And we are still dithering and talking about a cease-fire with only a third of the hostages released. 

If Bibi had in the beginning said that Israel would punish Hamas badly and then withdraw, he could have declared victory.  But now Israel is in danger of being the weak horse due to the claim.  But Bibi was right in the goals because Israel had to end Hamas rule and the periodic terror in the south from Hamas rockets.  But why did Bibi and his leaders think time was not on their side?  Because the pictures of the destruction and civilian casualties would move the world against Israel since it was Israel’s bombs.  Yes, Hamas is the real culprit and the one responsible for it.  Despite the lying narratives about Israel violating International laws of war, the truth is that Israel does not violate the actual written laws, and although we do not know the civilian casualty numbers (we only have Hamas reports), Israel receives the brunt of the outrage, not Hamas. It is wrong and unjust and as John Spencer, the retired West Point expert on Urban warfare argues, Israel’s program to protect civilians and the proportion for urban war especially with civilian human shields, is very good. 

Donal Trump tells Bibi, to get on with it, finish the job, and end Hamas rule.  That seems like good advice and only such an advance might lead to a pause with hostage release.

INTERNATIONAL HOUSE OF PRAYER, KANSAS CITY, A PERSONAL RESPONSE

Not long ago I signed onto a joint statement on the present situation at IHOPKC.  However, my main emphasis and reason in supporting this statement was again to call for an impartial judicial eldership board.  Only this can finally bring judgment and clarity at a level that will settle the controversy, for we now see people on both sides in social media pressing their views, though the larger number is anti-IHOP and Mike Bickle.  

I am not happy about how either side is handling this, either IHOPKC or the Advocates that have taken up the grievances against Mike Bickle and IHOP.   Both sides should have called for an objective panel of elders that was so credible that all sides would submit to their decisions on guilt, innocence, discipline, and restitution.  They would oversee an objective investigator if still needed. This is the main issue in my view. It shows how far the modern churches and ministries are from biblical standards of justice and judicial process (Deut. 1, 16, Matthew 16, 18 and I Cor. 6).  This was well established in many Protestant denominations and is also today found in some new church streams. 

In the statement that we put out, some misunderstood the idea that the accusers’ testimonies were credible.  Credible does not mean proven but sufficiently serious and with enough description and corroboration that they should be taken seriously and heard in a fair court.  But unless there is a court with cross-examination, we can have views, and can think something looks credible, but conclusive judgment requires a court.  Again, this was a common process in many historic Protestant denominations.   In civic law, an indictment does not mean the accused is guilty but that there is enough evidence to bring a trial, but the accused is still innocent until proven guilty in such fair court.  Therefore, we have written, called, and cajoled, but it is still not clear that this to finally be done.  

And what is happening now?  Trial by social media continues.  There is a contingent that is now on a feeding frenzy that is discrediting the prophets who were part of the early days of Kansas City Fellowship (the predecessor of IHOP) from 30-40 years ago.  Some who related to IHOP are in full confession mode, but their confession includes why they were sucked in, but at the same time their confession is full of severe judgments and accusations.  It does not seem only a confession.  Another contingent, smaller but also very strong, is blasting the accusers and seeking to discredit them.  One video that was sent was about a primary accuser being mentally ill and needing intervention.  If true, how sad, and if not true how painful to the accuser!  Actually, it is painful in either case!

We do know that Mike Bickle has repented of some serious things.  We know that IHOPKC has drawn conclusions on Mike’s sin as the overseers of IHOPKC today and their conclusions are credible and may be seen as having judicial weight.  However, there is much more that has not been disclosed including the life that Mike Bickle and some other leaders have lived over more than the last 20 years.  That is foggy.  IHOPKC has also admitted a woefully inadequate government structure of accountability.  

However, I want to speak to the feeding frenzy of attack against IHOP and its history.  First, the leaders’ falling into sin does not mean that mighty things were not done through IHOPKC and Kansas City Fellowship and through its leaders.  I do believe in New Testament standards for qualification and discipline but do want to say something about examples from the Hebrew Bible.  Did God work through Aaron, the brother of Moses, in the Exodus? He was the voice of Pharaoh. He was witnessed as an instrument of the most amazing signs and wonders, amazing prophecy, and more. Yet, he gave himself to make the golden calf and then was in denial as if it happened without his agency.  God nevertheless restored him after his repentance.  Did Mike Bickle sin more than King David?  Not only did David commit adultery but murdered her husband.   He was restored by God and made the preparations for the building of the Temple.  However, his sin was probably the cause of much of the division and civil war that ensued under his son Absalom.  Great tragedy was experienced!  Yet, David unified Israel and established so much and is the ancestor of the Messiah. I am not writing this to say that those who sinned and covered up should be restored. I am writing about what God obviously did through the Kansas City Fellowship and later through IHOPKC.   I personally experienced some amazing times of holiness there over 33 years ago including supernatural signs and wonders.  There was a holy fear of the Lord in His presence. 

Now there is a deep revulsion and rejection of the Kansas City prophets by those who were themselves involved with them.  This leads to the idea that no great work of God was done as a result of the leadership of Mike and his prophets.  I was there at the Vineyard Conference in Anaheim in January 1989 when John Wimber introduced Paul Cain.  His word to John before coming to visit John was an amazing supernatural word that John confirmed.  His ministry in January 1989 came with signs and wonders and a presence of God that was the greatest I ever experienced.  There was a holy Presence that gave rise to deep reverence and fear.  The Holy Spirit’s electricity in the air even set off the fire alarms. Should I deny this because Paul Cain later fell into sin and refused the directions that were given to him for repentance and restoration?   Then there were the other prophets, ones that to our knowledge never fell into sin who prophesied over our ministry and its future, Jim Goll and John Paul Jackson are two I will name.  I don’t think they have any skeletons in their closets.  John Paul wrote a great book on avoiding wrong ways and the casualties from wrong prophetic order.  Then there is the discrediting of Bob Jones.  Did Bob really prophecy that Mike Bickle’s ministry would focus on Israel and its greatest task and fulfillment would be raising 100 million intercessors for Israel?  Yes, he did. Did he do this before Mike had a clue about Israel?  Yes.  Did his later fall did discredit the amazing prophetic happenings and signs and wonders in the early 80s?  The history is in Anglican Bishop David Pytches’s book Some Said it Thundered. It is credible and happened.   The later sins of some did not discredit what happened.  I was a witness to some of this.  As for Bob Jones, he did not have a history of sexual sin to my knowledge, stepped down from ministry for a season, and was fully restored under a well-known national leader who does repentance, discipline, and restoration.   

For me, it is amazing how many forget that the greatest prayer meeting for Israel’s protection and salvation took place on May 28.  Are we forgetting this so quickly?  Without any knowledge of this date, my son led a gathering of leaders in January 2023 and called for fasting and prayer on May 28.  The words from Bob Jones from 40 years ago were amazingly fulfilled and that was some years after his death.  It seems to me that God allowed Mike Bickle’s sin to be hidden until this word was amazingly fulfilled.  IHOPKC and the early prophecy were key to launching great prayer worldwide for the salvation of Israel, prayer houses, integrated 24/7 prayer with congregations, and more.   The pattern of Zinzendorf’s Moravians was resurrected in many nations.  Some even have said they want to destroy IHOPKC.  I think that would be terribly wrong.  Shall God destroy the innocent with the righteous? Abraham plead.

Do I still want fair judgment for those women who are bringing the accusations against Mike Bickle and IHOP?  Yes!   Do I grieve over abuses?  Yes.  Do I want to see an opportunity for cross-examination if there is a desire for a defense to be made by Mike and the former leaders of IHOPKC who are charged?  Yes! Then he and others can be found guilty of what they did do and not guilty for what they did not do.   Do I want to see other charges of manipulation and the use of prophecy for controlling others to be heard with cross-examination?  Yes!  But that is a bit harder to prove.  Strong prophetic gifts can cause people to fall in line.  We too easily forget the responsibility of all believers in the New Covenant to hear the Spirit and to confirm prophetic words for their own individual lives and corporately as well.  Yes, we have to constantly emphasize this.  But none of this discredits that a mighty work was done worldwide through IHOPKC and Mike Bickle.  Again, prayer ministries have been raised up all over the world that pray for Israel and the Messianic Jews.  Also, let us not forget the many who for years served at IHOPKC.  They were not in gross sin, but morally righteous.  They served under a bad leadership structure according to IHOPKC’s present evaluation.  Some of these are now on the Advocates’ side in this battle.  Also, many were blessed, renewed in strength, and sent out to serve the Kingdom after leading to walk in the power of the Spirit. 

So here I am, like a voice in the wilderness. I am calling for two things.  Do not discredit what God did through the Kansas City Fellowship and through IHOPKC.   This is independent of the sin of leaders.  Secondly, let there be fair judgment.  And please stop the prosecution through social media from both detractors and supporters.  I wait and wait for IHOPKC to publicly declare themselves as committed to this objective fair eldership judiciary. 

FOR A BOOK THAT PRESENTS THE CASE FOR ELDERS AND THE WHAT, HOW AND WHY OF THEIR JUDICIAL FUNCTION, DO ORDER AND READ MY BOOK “DUE PROCESS, A PLEA FOR BIBLICAL JUSTICE AMONG GOD’S PEOPLE.”. 

 

Israel’s Strategy on a Temporary cease-fire and the Hostages

Israel is under enormous pressure from two directions. First, world leaders want a ceasefire in Gaza due to the number of civilian deaths in the Gaza War. They lie about what the International Laws of war say, and which laws Israel seeks to keep. They do not admit, as key analysts have noted that despite the level of human shielding, for an urban war, Israel’s percentage of civilian causalities is amazingly low. The world says that Israel should not go into Rafah. If she does not go, Hamas wins and can reconstitute and come into power again. 

 

The second pressure is from some of the hostage families. Not all of them agree. Their protests and the desire for some to see their family members released at any cost is rejected by the majority of Israelis, but their protests have led to awakening the pre-war protests against the Netanyahu government and are breaking down the strong national unity that characterized our nation back in November. 

 

However, could a temporary cease-fire and the release of hostages and Hamas murderers in Israel’s jails be the right decision to get the hostages back? Could such a cease-fire compromise Israel’s need to defeat Hamas? Maybe but maybe not. And these murderers could be killed in the onslaught after the cease-fire. Would that Israel have a death penalty for terrorist murderers? This would end trading for terrorists. 

 

The United States has pushed Israel not to invade Rafah, the last Gaza stronghold for Hamas, but there has been a “but.” The “but” is unless there is a credible plan to save the civilians whose number has burgeoned to maybe 1 ½ million in the very small area of Rafah. Israel could use the pause to get their plan in place to move most of the refugees in Rafah and other civilians back to the other areas of Gaza. They can set up checkpoints for all who return North, so no weapons can be taken with them. Until the actual cease-fire, they can clean up the other areas of Gaza so they can be re-occupied by civilians. Right now, it appears that Israel’s primary focus is now cleaning up the areas of Gaza outside Rafah. If Israel does adequate clean-up before the cease-fire, they can evacuate Rafah when the cease-fire ends. Yes, the war is drawn out, but maybe this is Israel’s strategy. 

 

The other big problem is Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel does need to clean out Southern Lebanon and push the terrorists beyond the Litani River in Lebanon as is the UN resolution 1701. Israel should have done this 15 years ago. Would she continue to fight in Lebanon if there is a cease-fire? Probably not, but this is a huge problem since almost 100,000 Israelis have been displaced due to Hezbollah rockets. I do not see a solution to this. Prolonging their displacement until after a six-week ceasefire will be infuriating to them. Stay tuned. 

Do sign up for my Twitter account, Daniel Calvin Juster, to make sure you do not miss my writings.

 

Two-State Solution

Some of my friends and followers here may be confused about the idea of a two-state solution, a Jewish state and a Palestinian state living side by side in peace.  Twenty years ago, the majority of Israelis were in favor of a two-state solution to preserve the Jewish majority in the Jewish state and a way for Palestinian Arabs to have their own state where they could live with full national identity among the nations.   Many Messianic Jews in Israel supported this solution, but many did not.  Many were optimistic that this would happen.

Some Messianic Jews agreed with the right-wing nationalist Orthodox who looked at the book of Joshua and saw that Israel had a mandate to take the whole land.  Only by exercising faith and taking all the land from the Jordan to the Mediterranean can we have the blessing of God on Israel.  Palestinians who desire to live in peace and live with some level of autonomy but not citizenship can stay, and those who do not want to live in peace on this basis would have to leave.

Other Messianic Jews rejected this view called maximalist.  Why?  Because Israel has not repented of sin and come to fully embrace the Bible’s teaching on morals and life.  We have not come to Yeshua but even more, the state supports abortion, the LGBTQ agenda and so much more. Of course, the Orthodox Jews do reject these orientations.  We Messianic Jews believe in Israel and the return to the Land, but a counsel of taking the whole Land now may not have God’s favor.  It might bring destruction as the Zealots in the first century brought Roman destruction on Israel.  This is still a debate among Messianic Jews in the Land.

However, today the majority of Messianic Jews and the great majority of Israelis reject the two-state solution, at least for now.  This is not as wrongly perceived in the West because of the domination of the right-wing national Orthodox.  Rather, the Israelis are disillusioned with the Palestinians and the two-state solution. It is not religious reasons that drive them.  Here are the reasons.

  1. Israel sought to have a two-state solution under Prime Minister Ehud Barak and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. What happened?   The first big attempt was during the time of Yassir Arafat.  He rejected the plan negotiated with President Bill Clinton.  When he walked away, Clinton said to him, “You have made me a failure.” Prime Minister Olmert negotiated even more generous terms, terms that no Israeli government could go beyond.  He offered 97% of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and East Jerusalem for a Palestinian State.  He offered land swaps for the 3%. He offered a right of return to near relatives of Arabs living on the Israel side of the new border, but other refugees could return to the new state.  Mohammed Abbas rejected the plan.  Again, later there was another violent intifada uprising. Israelis became convinced that the Palestinians did not really want a two-state solution, but it was only a game played for the West.  Maybe Abbas was afraid of the radicals like Hamas and thought if he accepted peace, he would be killed.  Remember Anwar Sadat of Egypt.
  2. Secondly, Israel under Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who was pro-settling Judea and Samaria, came to believe that two-states were necessary to preserve Israel.  He withdrew all Israeli settlements from Gaza and turned this completely over to the Palestinians. It was a grand experiment.  There was no blockade.  They were totally free and were encouraged to make Gaza a great place.  This was very controversial.  Sharon’s desire was for them to succeed. If they did then he could withdraw from most of Judea and Samaria except for the big settlement blocks needed for Israel’s territory depth for defense and security.  He said he wanted to draw the border.  Because he did not think the Palestinians would accept any agreement, he decided that unilateral withdrawal was the way forward.

Gaza then came under Hamas rule. They killed Palestinian Authority government leaders and took over.  The population supported Hamas. Hamas did not want a two state solution but wanted to destroy Israel.  They turned Gaza into an armed military camp with offensive weapons galore.  This is the background for the present war.

  1. After this, the left wing parties declined and never again came into power. Labor that had been so big dwindled to  be a tiny party.  Why?  As Israelis looked at this history, they came to believe that there was no real partner for peace.  Palestinian education was anti-Semitic.  The Palestinian authorities gave big support stipends to terrorists who were jailed or killed. This is called pay for slay.

Contrary to Western perceptions, Israel’s rejection of a two state solution was not due to the religious fanatics, but due to a hard evaluation of the history and the present situation.

Only a change of heart among the Palestinians can lead to lasting peace under any scenario.

The Disappointing Elections in the United States on Tuesday: A Israel-American Messianic Jewish Response

Conservatives and Evangelicals hoped to see great gains on election day in the United States, but the results were painfully disappointing.  In spite of crime, inflation that has been devastating for middle-class prosperity, and the open borders issue, the Republicans did not make significant gains in the key races.  All this despite President Biden’s polling with very poor approval ratings.

The most alarming and disappointing result for me was Ohio approving an abortion change to its state constitution that makes abortion legal through all nine months of pregnancy.  National liberal groups poured money into this contest.  While national polls previously showed that most would approve of abortion restrictions and preclude it after 15 weeks (closer to the European standard) this radical change to the constitution passed.

The second most disappointing election was in Virginia.  The governor, Republican Glenn Youngkin, was elected in 2021, on a platform to support parental rights in education and to see woke and LGBTQ indoctrination removed from schools.  He gained control of the Virginia Lower House of Representatives. The hope was that he would hold the House and gain the Senate.  He supported an abortion ban after 15 weeks which had not yet passed.  He lost both the House and the Senate.  The struggles over education continue locally with some materials in children’s libraries being pornographic and the transgender issue boiling where biological boys and teens are permitted to use girl’s bathrooms and locker rooms.  Louden County Virginia has become nationally famous for the struggle.  Younkin was backing the conservative parents in this battle.  This has certainly been a setback.

Some Republicans did win governor’s races, but a red state Kentucky (Republican) re-elected their Democratic governor.

Many thought that with election of Youngkin, Virginia was an indicator that the country was changing in a positive way, but now we realize that abortion is deeply ensconced in both blue states and purple states like Virginia that can go either Republican or Democrat.

This leads to comments on the law.  Some misunderstand the view of Christians who desire a return to the law that is more in accord with the Jude0-Christian heritage of the United States.  We see in this misunderstanding the alarm of some on the left due to the very strong Evangelical faith profession of the new speaker of the House of Representatives, Mike Johnson.  They think Christians want to impose their faith/values on the nation and paint them like fundamentalist Muslims. However, most of these folks want a return to some of the values in the country that prevailed historically.  This was not a radical harsh society.

It is well to respond with some reflections.  Unless there is a dictatorship or control by an elite that represses the rest of the population (more a potential of the left today than the right), the laws of a society reflect the moral consensus.  There can be tolerance for the dissenters but when there is truly a strong democratic aspect to a society, the minority cannot impose but has to win the consensus and become the majority in the society.  For example, the consensus 60 years ago was that abortion was terribly evil and should be illegal.  That consensus was lost and now it appears that legal abortion is the consensus.  The law now reflects that consensus.

There are some important takeaways from this election.

  1. Many are only now realizing how deeply committed the majority are to abortion in many states.  It trumps other issues, even the economy, crime, education, open borders, and more.  This is the reason many lost at the polls.
  2. That the people are so choosing for abortion is bringing their states and perhaps the country into judgment.  This is not something now imposed by the courts, but something chosen in elections, in referendums on abortion.  People voted for more pro-abortion politicians.  The United States is indeed in great peril of the judgment of God. God does judge nations by his most basic law standards. Abortion is the most painful manifestation of evil in our society.

This all raises a larger question on how to see reform in the United States.  Yes, we want to see our laws more in accord with the Bible, but how much can be gained by the political processes if there is not a change in the moral consensus of society first?  Yes, we should be involved in civic life and bring better laws where we can, but changing the consensus is the more crucial matter.  For me, that means that without a mighty revival and reversal of the decline in the Evangelical Churches of America (by this I include Pentecostals and Charismatics) there is not much hope.  These elections convince me more than ever that we will not see much progress before a great national revival in the Church that will affect the consensus of the society.

War and Moral Relativism

As Israel prosecutes the war in Gaza, we reflect on the terrible hatred and atrocity of Hamas. When Israel left Gaza (Sept. 12, 2005), they offered Gaza freedom and development if only they would live in peace with Israel.  Instead, Hamas came to power and murdered the leaders of the Palestinian Authority.  They turned from the offer of liberty and self-determination to create a terrorist state that would be armed to destroy Israel.  Israel had no choice but to blockade Gaza to prevent offensive weapons import.  That blockade now shows itself to have been ineffective. Patrolling the sea and the borders did not prevent the importation of missiles and the manufacture of missiles.  How amazing that the leftists and apologists for Hamas describe the problem as Israel’s occupation and ignore what happened when Hamas came to power!  There would be no blockade in a peaceful Gaza.

The recent attack of Hamas shows us people under an ideology of hatred that pursues atrocities.  Despite this, on American University campuses there are demonstrations supporting Hamas and blaming Israel for the occupation and the blockade.  Such moral blindness shocks the hearts of those who have a moral sense.  These folks talk about Palestinian children who died in past Israel wars against Hamas.  They cannot distinguish between an Israel that seeks to not kill civilians but has no choice when Hamas uses them as human shields.  Hamas is responsible for killing their own women and children and then using it for propaganda. There are videos where they even admit this strategy.  The moral issue of intentionality is ignored.  So how did we get to this place of moral blindness?

The U. S. has Palestinians living in the country who demonstrate for Hamas. The most glaring example of the moral obtuseness of some of these is Rashida Tlaib, a congresswoman from Dearborn.  In this case, the moral obtuseness is due to ethnic prejudice and hatred that knows no boundaries. This leads to gross moral blindness.

However, what of the leftist university students and leftists on the streets of our cities?   The issue is moral relativism.  Since moral relativism now dominates the university faculties, moral bankruptcy is the result.  I remember studying Nietzsche in College. I was 19 and had lost my faith.  Meaningless hit me hard.  I cried as I read.  My quest for the next three years was to overcome both historical relativism and moral relativism and to find a place to stand.  I found it again in the Spring of 1970.  In knowledge relativism, there is no true historical knowledge.  There are only warring narratives and power assertions.  What really happened in Gaza in 2005 does not matter.  There is no facticity.  The left has chosen to designate Israel as a colonial state that oppresses the indigenous Palestinian people.  Therefore they assert that the atrocities are understandable.

Wow!  I was amazed that President Biden showed moral clarity in this fight.  He gave a great speech supporting Israel.   But I am grieved that the universities have removed moral and historical knowledge and now affirm a bankrupt morality based on power.  I will be writing more on this in the future  But I would like every person defending leftist anti-Semitism and anti-Israel, antisemitic and antibiblical, and anti-American views to answer two questions.  Do they believe that there is a historical reality and that we can approach knowing the truth of what really happened in history?  Is there true historical knowledge?  The second question is whether or not there are objective moral norms.  If they do not believe in historical knowledge or objective moral norms, we should shame them and not listen to them at all.  They have undercut the ground for moral behavior.

   

Take all the Land Now

Some Christian Zionists and some Messianic Jews have a very strident position on possessing the Land promised to our people.  Their attitude is to take all the Land and don’t worry much about the Arab population in Samaria and Judea.  With Itamar Ben Gvir, leader of a very radical Otzma Yehudit party and Bazalel Smotrich, leader of the Religious Zionists, the heated rhetoric and actions toward “taking it all” have now become part of the landscape of the Netanyahu government.   Some Christians and a very small number of Messianic Jews applaud.

I want to argue that this is a foolish direction and akin to the first century Zealot Party that gained control of Judea and went to war against Rome.  Yeshua warned what would happen.  Jerusalem would be destroyed because they did not recognize their time of visitation (Luke 19:44).  Having not recognized Yeshua, even after his resurrection, propelled them into following a false way.  Let us recognize that we as a people still have not recognized that time of visitation.  Also, our lack of embracing the apostolic witness to this day, a witness given with great signs and wonders, is compounded history of antisemitism in the  historic churches.  Yet, the trajectory was set by the Sanhedrin and the post Jerusalem destruction Rabbis in Israel who did not turn to Him.  This is why I believe that this is not the time to pursue maximalist visions to take the Land.  The Religious Zionist party today is so different from its moderate predecessor, the National Religious Party (NRP).  This party with the Otzma Yehudit of Ben  G’vir is the return of the spirit of the Zealots.

When I teach on the return to the Land and declare myself a Biblical Zionist, it is based on Ezekiel 36:24 ff.  There we read that we will come back to the Land in significant numbers before we are given a new heart and before the Holy Spirit is given to us.  Until that day, and until we call upon Yeshua (Matthew 23:39,40), we may well be bringing a counsel that will bring harm to Israel if we council “Take it all.”  Let us remember that Israel has still not come to Yeshua.  Secular Israel fosters the most radical LGBTQ agendas.  Parades celebrate Israel as the most pro LGBTQ nation.  Abortion is rampant.  The Orthodox Jews still practice a faith that is partially right but which also blinds to Yeshua in a life of a plathora of commandments.  The spirit of the Talmud is mostly not in accord with the spirit of Yeshua.

My council is, let’s lovingly support Israel’s right to exist.  Let’s stand with Israel.  Let’s support the Jewish people in this Land.  However, let us not give counsel in agreement with the radical right wing views of “taking it all now.”  For this season, living with partial fulfillment of the Land promises I think is wise.  We also do care about the Arabs in the Land of Israel and want them to be treated with justice.

Are we moving to an amazing replay of first century Israel history?

It is commonly taught that we are seeing a lineup of nations against Israel, a setup that seems like a replay of the first century but with one amazing difference.  Instead of Jerusalem’s destruction, the last days’ final war against Jerusalem will lead to Israel’s full victory with the return of Yeshua.  Zechariah 12 and 14 make this very clear.

One aspect for those who do not live in Israel might seem quite amazing.  It is that the divisions in Israel seem in some ways quite analogous to the first century.  We have Jewish secularists who still desire to be Israeli Jews but are like those who were very Hellenized in the first century.  They like the Sadducees do not believe in angels, demons, or the inspiration of the prophets.  The Ultra-Orthodox are like the strict Shammai Pharisees who believed that living strictly in accord with myriads of multiplied laws would make us so holy that the Messiah would come and bring us victory.  We also have the Zealots of our day who want to take the whole Land now and push the Arabs out of the Land.  Recently, in response to a terrorist attack, some of these modern Zealots have rioted against the nearby Palestinian village, burning cars and houses and shooting at civilian innocents.  These folks and their leaders are not democratic libertarians. The Prime Minister spoke out against this anarchy, but two of the party leaders in his coalition support the reactive violence and are frustrated at him.  Yeshua warned that the Zealots would gain ascendancy and Jerusalem would be destroyed.  As in the first century, there are also religious Jews of a more open and tolerant stream like the Hillel Pharisees of old.  Will the nations unjustly invade, maybe in some kind of U. N. action in response to zealot policies?  Maybe. Or will it be a Muslim invasion of the surrounding nations supported by the rest of the nations (writers W. Shobat and J. Richardson)?  We don’t know.

However, as in the first century, there is a growing Messianic Jewish community.  In the first century, the destruction of Jerusalem did not lead to repentance and the embrace of Yeshua, though the prophecies He gave were clear and fulfilled.  However, this time, the witness of the Messianic Jews with the whole Body of Believers will lead to the embrace of Yeshua before Jerusalem is destroyed.  He will return to rule and reign forever.

Democratic Tyranny

My followers are usually very interested in Israel and know there is quite a controversy about judicial reform in Israel. The divide is intense. To put this in a better perspective, it is worthwhile to review the system in the United States.

The United States is not technically a democracy but a democratic republic. This means that the popular vote is not the all-powerful final say on everything, but there are checks and balances. The Founders had great concern with the corruption of power. They recognized that a demagogic leader could gain the popular vote and lead the nation to tyranny. Therefore, they incorporated many checks to power; the executive power, the President, the power of the Congress, the power of the Court and the power of the electorate.

They established the Constitution, which is hard to amend. Thus, the democratic electorate, the Congress, the Executive, and the Courts must function within the boundaries of the Constitution and its famous Bill of Rights. Secondly, they established a bi-cameral legislature with the most democratic institution, the House of Representatives, and the more limited democratic Senate whose senators were elected by the state legislatures and then later by the people of the states. This protected the less populous states from being controlled by the more urban populous states. Democrats today speak against this since these senators from more rural states sometimes frustrate their agenda, but this was as the Founders desired. Thirdly, the President was limited in his function according to the Constitution to carry out the rule of laws and the legislation of the Congress. He could not make laws. He was given greater freedom with regard to foreign policy, but Congress alone could declare war. He was elected, not by the popular vote, but by electors chosen by the States. In so many ways, there were limits to power. The Courts and the Supreme Court were to apply the laws and could review laws as contrary to the Constitution, as well as noting regulations contrary to the Law. The huge issue today is the recent history of the Supreme Court, which has legislated through a broad view of interpretation contrary to the intent of the Constitution. The biggest example was Roe vs. Wade on abortion, but there are many more examples.

In Israel there is no constitution. The reasons were several. Some thought Israel would be like England with a common law tradition rooted in western democracies. Many Orthodox Jews did not want a constitution but only the Law of Moses. Instead of a Constitution, Israel passed Basic Laws that were not to be changed. Other laws could only be accepted, if they were in line with Basic Laws. These Basic Laws became a quasi-constitution. The Supreme Court of Israel was to judge laws on the basis of Basic Law, and if found to be not consistent to Basic Law, they could declare those laws unconstitutional. However, they also decided that they could judge laws by the standard of accepted general understandings of rights and laws in the consensus of Western societies. They also judged on the criteria of reasonability. The right-wing leaders in Israel really push back on this idea since what is and isn’t reasonable could be subjective. Unlike the United States, judges are not appointed by the Executive with confirmation of a Senate. In recent years we have seen the weakness of the U. S. system since Democrats and Republicans will not vote for qualified people due to their judicial philosophy. In Israel, new appointees are made by a selection committee and not politicians, but heavily dominated by other judges and lawyers. In this way, many on the right think that the Court has too much power.

However, if the Court is to be a check on power, and one of the keys to separation of power, then the present proposals of M. K. Levine go way too far. He will open Israel to democratic tyranny since he proposes a simple one vote majority of the Knesset to overturn any Supreme Court decision. Basic Law is as well in flux. Why? Because only a majority was needed to pass Basic Laws, and a majority can cancel it. It would be far different if Basic Law was passed by a 2/3 majority and could only be changed by a 2/3 majority. Alas, that is not the situation. The present proposals also give the Knesset the appointment power and the overturning power for Court decisions. This could lead to democratic tyranny. The pendulum is swinging too far. Would that we could resurrect Jefferson, Madison and Adams to give wisdom to our leaders here.

We need to pray for Israel that they will embrace good judicial reform. First, to embrace a new foundational law that only 2/3 can establish or reverse Basic Law. This would require a special legislative semi-constitutional body that could establish this one principle for stability. Secondly, that the Court would be restrained on the reasonable standard, and that the Court could be overruled by 2/3s. Maybe it could be 2/3 on its Basic Law foundation for rulings and 60% for overturning the reasonable clause. Then judges could be appointed by some expert judges and by the Knesset together where there would have to be agreement by two bodies for appointment. Reform is needed, but minority rights and stability require that we avoid the democratic tyranny of the Levine plan. Can you imagine that every new parliament could, by majority, just reverse all that was passed as Basic Law by the previous parliament and could also reverse the reversals of the pervious government?