Putin’s crackdown on Christian ‘dissidents’

President Zelensky's ban on Ukrainian Orthodox Church

East-West relations hit a new low.

The attempted assassination of Russian double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter in Salisbury last week has created dangerous worldwide repercussions.

Theresa May’s forthright condemnation of Russia as being responsible for the attack upon British soil has quickly led to the support of other Western nations, creating the possibility of an East-West split such as we have not seen since the end of the Cold War.

There were heated exchanges in the UN Security Council in which Russia strongly denied any involvement in the Salisbury incident that also left a policeman seriously ill. Russia demanded absolute proof of the material in the attack as claimed by Britain. Speaking on behalf of the United States, US ambassador Nikki Haley said:

Let me make one thing clear from the very beginning: The United States stands in absolute solidarity with Great Britain. The United States believes that Russia is responsible for the attack on two people in the United Kingdom using a ‘military-grade’ nerve agent.

Earlier, in the House of Commons, Prime Minister Theresa May had said that there were only two possible explanations for the nerve agent being used in the UK: either Moscow was directly responsible for the attack, or it has lost control of its stockpile of chemical weapons.

A Defining Moment

This is clearly a defining moment in East-West relationships as Britain is a member of NATO and under that agreement, an attack upon one member is regarded as an attack upon the whole organisation. The four major NATO nations - Britain, the USA, France and Germany - have jointly declared Russia to be guilty of the attack.

There is mounting anti-Russian propaganda in the Western press and on social media which could get out of hand and even escalate into war with Russia. I know this sounds highly improbable but we live in unstable times, and there are some very unpredictable politicians currently leading the nations.

This is a defining moment in East-West relations that could easily escalate.

President Putin has recently been boasting that Russia’s latest weaponry is capable of detecting and destroying American Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles and in an interview with NBC, and he said that nuclear retaliation would be immediate for any attack on Russia or its allies - nuclear or 'conventional'.¹ Fighting words! He has been raising the temperature of international relationships. All of this is highly dangerous in a world with so many nations having weapons of mass destruction.

Fears of Armageddon

Inevitably, fears of some kind of Armageddon are being raised. There are many warnings in the Bible of worldwide destruction. The Prophet Isaiah speaks of the earth being broken up: “The earth is split asunder, the earth is thoroughly shaken. The earth reels like a drunkard, it sways like a hut in the wind” (24:19).

In former generations, biblical scholars usually interpreted these scenes of mass destruction as being metaphorical, because it was unimaginable that destruction on such a scale could ever become a reality. Today we know that the weapons of mass destruction now in the hands of the nations, if they were actually used, could in a few minutes cause the widespread devastation described by Isaiah.

The Day of the Lord?

The difficulty we face is that there is no timeline linked to the eschatological passages in the Bible. Sometimes it is unclear whether descriptions of destruction refer to the time leading up to Jesus’ return, or God’s final act of wrapping up the whole of Creation at the end of Jesus’ thousand-year reign on the earth. This is the case for 2 Peter 3:

The day of the Lord will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the earth and everything in it will be laid bare…That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire and the elements will melt in the heat.

Historically, biblical scholars usually interpreted scenes of mass destruction in the Bible as metaphorical – but now weapons of mass destruction have made them a distinct possibility.

Jesus himself spoke of times of great distress in the period leading up to his own Second Coming when he will establish the Kingdom. He said “There will be signs in the sun and moon and stars. On the earth nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. Men will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world for the heavenly bodies will be shaken” (Luke 21:25). And this is elaborated in Matthew 24 where Jesus speaks of “nation rising against nation and kingdom against kingdom”.

What are we to make of all these predictions of worldwide destruction? The big question we have to face when dealing with biblical prophecy is whether or not the events revealed are given as foretelling facts that will undoubtedly happen, or whether they are given as signs to give human beings the opportunity of changing direction - in accordance with God’s promise in Jeremiah 18 – to avoid the massive devastation foreseen.

I personally believe that some of the threats of judgment such as Isaiah 2:12-22 and Isaiah 24 are given to us in the Bible as warnings of what could happen. My reason is because I believe in the sovereignty of God – that he holds the nations in his hands “as a drop in a bucket” as Isaiah says (40:15). Despite all human activity, God is still in ultimate control and he is “gracious and compassionate, slow to anger and abounding in love, and he relents from sending calamity” (Joel 2:13).

To the Ends of the Earth!

It may be that the times in which we are living, when there is increasing risk of the nations plunging into the horrors of World War III, God is saying something very special and very urgent to those of his people who are watching and listening.

God is drawing our attention to the warnings that he has given through the prophets and through Jesus and the apostles. And through the Holy Spirit, the Father is empowering us, his children, to warn the world of the direction in which it is heading and to bring a message of salvation that points to “a new and living way”. This is the message of the Gospel that has been entrusted to us, his people.

God’s stated intention is that his message of salvation should be taken to the ends of the earth. If ever there were a day when those who have accepted Jesus as Lord and Saviour should each be active in our own sphere of influence to declare the truth of the Gospel, it surely is today!

Author’s Note: I know that this brief excursion into biblical eschatology is far from adequate; but my major intention here is simply to open up the subject of the great threat that confronts our world today, to stimulate discussion among our readers in the hope that the Gospel message may reach many, including the leaders of the nations.

References

1 See the full interview transcript here. Excerpts are available on Youtube.

As this is the last issue this year of Prophecy Today and in a somewhat festive spirit, we thought that we would publish a humorous piece in contrast to our usual comment articles. We hope you find it thought-provoking!

In case you don't know what's happening in the Middle East...

President Assad (who is bad) is a nasty guy who got so nasty his people rebelled and the Rebels (who are good) started winning (Hurrah!). But then some of the rebels turned a bit nasty and are now called Islamic State (who are definitely bad!) but some continued to support democracy (who are still good).

So the Americans (who are good) started bombing Islamic State (who are bad) and giving arms to the Syrian Rebels (who are good) so they could fight Assad (who is still bad) which was good.

By the way, there is a breakaway state in the north run by the Kurds who want to fight IS (which is a good thing) but the Turkish authorities think they are bad, so we have to say they are bad whilst secretly thinking they're good and giving them guns to fight IS (which is good) - but that is another matter.

Getting back to Syria...

So President Putin (who is bad, 'cos he invaded Crimea and the Ukraine and killed lots of folks including that nice Russian man in London with polonium poisoned sushi) has decided to back Assad (who is still bad) by attacking IS (who are also bad) which is sort of a good thing?

But Putin (still bad) thinks the Syrian Rebels (who are good) are also bad, and so he bombs them too, much to the annoyance of the Americans (who are good) who are busy backing and arming the rebels (who are also good).

Now Iran (who used to be bad, but now they have agreed not to build any nuclear weapons and bomb Israel are now good) are going to provide ground troops to support Assad (still bad) as are the Russians (bad) who now have ground troops and aircraft in Syria.

So a Coalition of Assad (still bad), Putin (extra bad!) and the Iranians (good, but in a bad sort of way), are going to attack IS (who are bad) which is a good thing, but also the Syrian Rebels (who are good) which is bad.

Enter Britain...

Now the British (obviously good, except that nice Mr Corbyn in the corduroy jacket, who is probably bad) and the Americans (also good) cannot attack Assad (still bad) for fear of upsetting Putin (bad) and Iran (good / bad) and now they have to accept that Assad might not be that bad after all compared to IS (who are super bad).

So Assad (bad) is now probably good, being better than ISIS. And since Putin and Iran are also fighting IS, that may now make them good. America (still good) will find it hard to arm a group of rebels being attacked by the Russians for fear of upsetting Mr Putin (now good) and that nice mad Ayatollah in Iran (also good) and so they may be forced to say that the Rebels are now bad, or at the very least abandon them to their fate. This will lead most of them to flee to Turkey and on to Europe or join IS (still the only constantly bad group).

Sunnis vs Shias

To Sunni Muslims, an attack by Shia Muslims (Assad and Iran) backed by Russians will be seen as something of a Holy War, and the ranks of IS will now be seen by the Sunnis as the only Jihadis fighting in the Holy War. Hence many Muslims will now see IS as good (doh!). Sunni Muslims will also see the lack of action by Britain and America in support of their Sunni rebel brothers as something of a betrayal (mmm-might have a point) and hence we will be seen as bad.

A Helpful Summary

So now we have America (now bad) and Britain (also bad) providing limited support to Sunni Rebels (bad), many of whom are looking to ISIS (good / bad) for support against Assad (now good) who, along with Iran (also good) and Putin (also, now, unbelievably, good) are attempting to retake the country Assad used to run before all this started.

So now you fully understand everything, all your questions are answered!!