Two items in the news this week are significant for the future of the gospel in Britain.

The limits to God's patience.

“This is the word of the Lord to Jeremiah concerning the drought: ‘Judah mourns, her cities languish; they wail for the land, and the cry goes out from Jerusalem. The nobles send their servants for water; they go to the cisterns but find no water. They return with their jars unfilled; dismayed and despairing, they cover their heads.

The ground is cracked because there is no rain in the land; the farmers are dismayed and cover their heads. Even the doe in the field deserts her newborn fawn because there is no grass. Wild donkeys stand on the barren heights and pant like jackals; their eyesight fails for lack of pasture.’” (Jeremiah 14:1-6)

Jeremiah presents a terrible picture of a prolonged drought covering the whole land of Judah during the reign of Jehoiakim the ungodly king (son of godly king Josiah), in the final decade of the 7th Century BC. The drought was not confined to Judah; it covered the whole region of what we now know as the Middle East.

Climatologists say that this was a period of ‘global warming’ and historians note that it was probably one of the reasons why Nebuchadnezzar conquered neighbouring countries: to recruit an army of labourers to dig canals around the rivers Tigris and Euphrates to irrigate the land.

Jeremiah knew nothing of global warming, but he certainly saw the hand of God, the Creator of the Universe, in what was happening to the people among whom God had called him to minister. The Hebrew word for ‘drought’ used in this passage is plural, indicating a series of droughts that had now become so severe that all life was being threatened.

Rich and poor, young and old, city-dwellers and farmers were all suffering; even the wild animals were dying of thirst: “wild donkeys stand on the barren heights and pant like jackals”. In the cities the wells had run dry and in the countryside the streams and river beds were cracked and empty. It was a scene of desolation and death.

Jeremiah knew nothing of global warming, but he certainly saw the hand of God, the Creator of the Universe, in the drought around him.

God’s Rebuke

Jeremiah had been told to remind the people of the terms of the covenant (Jer 11:1), but they had not listened or heeded his words. The consequences of breaking the terms of the covenant were perfectly clear: “The sky over your head will be bronze, the ground beneath you iron” (Deut 28:23).

No doubt Jeremiah also was suffering and his vivid description of the effects of the drought led him to pray for the nation – one of the rare occasions when Jeremiah interceded on behalf of the whole nation and the land of Israel: “Although our sins testify against us, O Lord, do something for the sake of your name” (Jer 14:7).

His pleading with the Lord was met by a fierce rebuke: “This is what the Lord says about this people: they greatly love to wander; they do not restrain their feet. So the Lord does not accept them; he will now remember their wickedness and punish them for their sins” (14:10).

In order to stop him asking the Lord to break the drought and send rain upon the land, Jeremiah was told to stop praying for the wellbeing of the people because God would no longer listen to their pleas. In fact, he was told, “Even if Moses and Samuel were to stand before me, my heart would not go out to this people. Send them away from my presence! Let them go!” (Jer 15:1). This is an exact reversal of the message given to Moses when he was told to go to Pharaoh with a call to bring the people out of Egypt into the presence of the Lord.

Limits to God’s Patience

The reason for this harsh rebuttal of Jeremiah’s request on behalf of the nation was that God had forgiven the people time after time, but they had never kept their promises of faithfulness. The discovery of the ‘Book of the Law’ during the repairs to the Temple ordered by Josiah had led the king to rededicate the nation to God, re-affirming the terms of the covenant. But his son, Jehoiakim, had reversed all that and the people had rapidly returned to worshipping the Baals.

God’s patience had reached its limits after all the warnings had been ignored. The God of Israel was now exercising his power over Creation. The drought was the consequence of breaking the covenant in turning away from the Lord. The teaching that had been given to Moses was, “If you fully obey the Lord your God and carefully follow all his commands…blessings will come upon you” (Deut 28:1). But, conversely, disobedience would bring terrible curses on the land and on all its inhabitants.

Jeremiah’s pleading with the Lord was met by a fierce rebuke.

It is a serious thing to enter into a covenant with God. It carries awesome responsibilities. Once we acknowledge him as our God, we belong to him: we are his servants, as well as his beloved children.

There are wonderful blessings and benefits from the love and protection the Father gives to his children, but there are also responsibilities. Jeremiah was well aware of this and although prophecies of peace and prosperity were being given to the people by some of the official prophets linked with the Temple priests, Jeremiah knew that the nation thoroughly deserved judgment.

Declaration of Faith

Jeremiah ended this time of intercession with a declaration of faith in God: “Do any of the worthless idols of the nations bring rain? Do the skies themselves send down showers? No, it is you, O Lord our God. Therefore, our hope is in you. For you are the one who does all this” (Jer 14:22).

Surely this is a timely reminder to all the Western nations who have had the Gospel for centuries that there are inevitable consequences of turning away from the truth.

This article is part of a teaching series on the life and ministry of Jeremiah. Click here for previous instalments.

Maureen Trowbridge reviews ‘What’s Wrong with Human Rights?’ by David Cross (Sovereign World Ltd, 2018).

Do human beings possess certain rights simply because they are human? In this ground-breaking book, David Cross contends that they do not. Furthermore, he claims, contemporary human rights ideology has become a false religion.

Beginning with the US Declaration of Independence of 1776, Cross questions boldly the fundamental idea that humans can have certain ‘self-evident’, ‘inalienable’ rights (p16) without those rights being conferred by a higher authority. He explains that, biblically, rights are not automatic; rather, true rights can only come “through the terms of a specific covenant relationship with [God]” (p18).

Religion of Rights

The book does not primarily address legal entitlements granted by a government to its citizens or specific ‘human rights issues’; rather, it delves deeply into the belief system behind “the rights which have historically and progressively been assumed to belong to everyone, simply by virtue of their being born human” (p13).

Ever since the Enlightenment, when man declared himself the ultimate arbiter of truth, these so-called ‘basic’ rights have formed the basis for a secular humanistic “religion of rights” (p18), filling “the void left by progressive abandonment of [Europe’s] Christian heritage” (p18).

In ten chapters, Cross traverses this history to arrive at our present-day culture of entitlement and licentiousness, where the claiming of rights is emphasised over and above the acknowledgement of wrong-doing, and where those who dare to question the new religion’s mantras of “equality, inclusivity and liberty” (p20) find themselves accused of discrimination.

Biblically, true rights can only come through the terms of a specific covenant relationship with God.

Entitlement Culture

Cross explains that without the unchanging ‘plumb-line’ of biblical morality, which alone provides the foundation for true justice, the definition of human rights can only be based “on a moving pendulum of public opinion” (p13) – which in turn causes conflicts between competing interest groups.

Thus the West’s “culture of entitlement” (p20) has given rise to an ever-increasing plethora of self-proclaimed ‘rights’ such as “children’s rights, women’s rights, body rights, gay rights, workers’ rights, transgender rights, consumer rights” and so on – all of which lack an “external code of morality on which the concept of rights is based” (p20).

Ultimately, ignoring God’s sovereignty over human rights leaves us “vulnerable and confused” about where ultimate authority lies. Cross acknowledges that the human spirit is created to depend upon the sovereignty of our Creator; relying on the sovereignty of created humans makes us feels intrinsically unsafe.

Individual Value

At the end of the book Cross clarifies the difference between respecting a person’s right to live sinfully (which is unbiblical) and respecting their value as an individual (which is entirely legitimate and affirmed by God).

Ignoring God’s sovereignty over human rights leaves us “vulnerable and confused” about where ultimate authority lies.

These are complex theological, legal and ethical issues, but the author, who is also Deputy International Director for Ellel Ministries, has put them into a form which can be read by anyone – regardless of background or education level – who is interested in discovering the difference between what the world calls ‘human rights’ and what the Bible says.

Described by Andrea Williams, CEO of Christian Concern, as “a must read for anyone interested in today's culture wars”, this well-researched book will help lay believers and church leaders alike as they seek to deal biblically with secular humanistic ideology.

‘What’s Wrong with Human Rights?: Uncovering a False Religion’ (paperback, Kindle, 185pp) is available on Amazon for £11.99 (paperback). Click here to hear the author speaking about the book, and click here for an online preview.

Paul Luckraft reviews a selection of books on the making of modern Israel to round off our celebration of her 70^th anniversary.

‘The Legal Foundation and Borders of Israel under International Law’ by Howard Grief (732pp, Mazo Publishers, 2008/2013)

This is a weighty treatise on Jewish sovereignty over the Land of Israel, written by a legally-trained Canadian Zionist as the culmination of 25 years of serious study and analysis of Israel’s legal foundation and rights under international law.

Although as a whole this will appeal more to readers with specialised knowledge or interest, there are nevertheless certain chapters which will benefit anyone with a heart to know more about the legality of various claims.
Taking the Balfour Declaration and the subsequent San Remo Resolution as the origins of the legal title and sovereignty, he goes on to look at the continuation of these matters upon the termination of the British Mandate and discusses why these origins have become obscured and forgotten. Grief’s section on the meaning of Palestinian nationality during the British Mandate period and the Arab appropriation of the name ‘Palestinians’ will be helpful to the general reader, as will his overall approach and conclusions.

Available on Amazon in e-book, paperback and hardback forms, starting from £13.10.

Trilogy on the history of Israel, by Leslie Stein

‘The Hope Fulfilled, The Rise of Modern Israel’ (300pp, Praeger, 2003)

‘The Making of Modern Israel, 1948-1967’ (412pp, Polity Press, 2009)

‘Israel Since the Six Day War’ (440pp, Polity Press, 2014)

The first volume in this trilogy effectively starts with the first Aliyah in 1882 and covers the origins of modern political Zionism. Stein then works his way through the second Aliyah (1904-1914), the First World War and the Balfour Declaration and the early years of British Rule in Palestine (1917-1930). The difficult years from 1930 onwards leads us towards World War 2 and the post-war struggle for independence.

The second volume, as its title suggests, tackles the important two decades from independence to the Six Day War and its aftermath. Although some of this is extremely well known, other parts of this period are often overlooked. Stein does us great service by providing a continual commentary through these years, for instance focussing on the Sinai campaign and interlude between this and the Six Day War.

The third volume looks at the aftermath of the Six Day War and the prelude to the Yom Kippur War, and then brings us up to date through the 1980s and 1990s, culminating in the al-Aqsa (second) Intifada (2000). Overall, it is as a set of three volumes that Stein’s work is to be most appreciated, and would sit well on the shelves next to other writings on these themes.

Available on Amazon: here, here and here respectively, starting at £11.39.

‘A History of Israel: from the Rise of Zionism to Our Time’ by Howard Sachar, (887pp, Knopf, 1979/2007)

The late Howard Sachar, Professor Emeritus of History and International Affairs at the George Washington University in Washington, DC, has written many books on the Middle East and Jewish history, but this one is regarded as definitive.

Its full, single-volume account of the Jewish movement towards statehood and the period since was updated significantly in 2007, extending its comprehensive study up to the 2006 Lebanon war. This is a classic that is both readable and informative in its analysis.

Available on Amazon in paperback, hardback and Kindle forms, starting at £23.08.

‘Churchill’s Promised Land: Zionism and Statecraft’ by Michael Makovsky (368pp, Yale University Press, 2007)

For anyone with an interest in Churchill in general and his relationship with Zionism in particular, Makovsky’s book is a well-constructed and balanced study that will enable the reader to gain a clearer perspective of the role of this key figure at a vital time in the history of the Middle East.

Churchill’s political and intellectual response to the Zionist project is a complex one, and Makovsky manages to explore this in an honest and approachable way which will shed light on the man, his beliefs and the practicalities of politics.

Available on Amazon in paperback, hardback and Kindle forms, starting at £10.

The Ashers Bakery case goes to the Supreme Court.

This week, the Supreme Court left its usual place in London and has been sitting in Belfast to hear a case that has fundamental significance for the future of free speech in Britain. The Ashers Bakery case dates back to 2014 when an LGBT activist ordered a cake from the bakery with a message in the icing stating "Support Gay Marriage".

The owners of the bakery, Daniel and Amy MacArthur, who are committed Christians, refused to do this on the ground that it was against their beliefs. The initial judgment found that they were guilty of ‘discrimination’ and this was affirmed by the Court of Appeal. The case has now gone to the Supreme Court, but the Northern Ireland Attorney General, John Larkin QC, has already expressed his own opinion that the Court of Appeal was wrong in their judgment.

The case has attracted an enormous amount of interest because of its significance for our cherished freedom of speech. The central question is whether the law can force someone to make a statement that they do not believe.

The Law vs. Freedom of Speech

Does the law have the power to force a Catholic to make a statement criticising the Pope? Does the law have the power to force a Muslim to make a statement that is insulting to Mohammed? Does the law have the power to force any citizen to make a statement that is directly against his or her personal convictions?

This is a question that, for Christians, goes back 2,000 years to the time of the Roman Emperor Domitian in the year AD 95 when all citizens were required, on a certain day, to go to the local shrine dedicated to the Emperor and say "Caesar is Lord".

The case has attracted an enormous amount of interest because of its significance for our cherished freedom of speech.

Emperor Domitian.The Apostle John was in exile on the island of Patmos when he had a remarkable spiritual experience on the very day, known as ‘Lord's day’ (Rev 1:10), when he knew that many of his Christian friends would be signing their own death warrants by refusing to make a statement which would deny the Lordship of Jesus.

For the MacArthurs, being forced to make a statement declaring support for homosexual marriage, which the Bible declares to be "detestable” to God (Lev 18:22) would be equivalent to denying their faith in the God of Creation and the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. It would be the modern equivalent of saying "Caesar is Lord" and denying the Lordship of Jesus.

Significance for Equality Law

But there are significant legal aspects as well as moral aspects to this case, which is no doubt the reason why the five judges are not expected to announce their decision before the autumn and it may even be delayed to the beginning of next year. Their judgment has profound significance for the future of the Equality Commission and the interpretation of equality law in Britain.

This case is creating panic, not only among LGBTQ+ supporters but across the whole left-wing postmodernist philosophical camp, which has been driving the movement for social change and social engineering in the nation since the 1960s.

Suddenly, there is fear gripping the far-left political elite that they have gone too far, too quickly. They have had enormous success in achieving their objectives since the publication of the Gay Manifesto in 1972 declaring the LGBTQ+ intention of destroying the ‘family’ as the central pillar in the Judeo-Christian structure of the nation.

The judgment will have profound significance for the future of the Equality Commission and the interpretation of equality law in Britain.

The Idol of Equality

They have succeeded, probably beyond their wildest dreams, in persuading the nation that the supreme ethical values in society are ‘equality’ and ‘tolerance’ – that all ethical judgments should be taken at the bar of ‘equality’.

Hence, postmodernists have even succeeded in changing the legal definition of marriage by framing it as an issue of ‘equality’. This worshipping of equality is a recycling of Marxism, which falsely assumes that enforced equality will lead to justice and a better world. Jordan Peterson rightly calls postmodernism the “new skin that the old Marxism now inhabits”.¹

Marxism was totally discredited through the fiasco of Communism last century, but it didn’t disappear entirely - later reappearing under the guise of postmodernism, trying yet again to force upon the population the flagship lie of ‘equality’.

But forcing a Christian baker to declare his support for gay marriage may prove to be a step too far which could cause the whole of their false edifice of society to collapse. It is like pulling out a single brick from the base of the Tower of Babel, sending a shockwave right through its structure that brings the whole lot down!

Enough is Enough

The central tragedy of recent history over the past half-century is that neither Church leaders nor politicians have understood the philosophy of postmodernism, with its objectives of destroying Judeo-Christian civilisation. The great question facing us now is: will there be a great awakening of common sense among ordinary people in the general public before it is too late?

The central tragedy of recent history is that neither Church leaders nor politicians have understood that postmodernism seeks to destroy Judeo-Christian civilisation.

Will ordinary people arise and say, "Enough is Enough! We do not want to be driven by Big Brother political correctness. We cherish our freedom of speech and we will not let our children be educated in schools that brainwash them in the false values of ‘equality and tolerance’ and ‘political correctness’.”

Is it too late to reclaim the nation from the clutches of those who wish to destroy Western civilisation?

To the Church of Sardis

The Apostle John had a message for the Christians in Sardis who were facing persecution by the Roman Empire. He warned "You have a reputation for being alive, but you are dead. Wake up! Strengthen what remains and is about to die” (Rev 3:1-2). The alternative was that their names would be blotted out of the Book of Life.

The warning signs are there today for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear. If we do not wake up soon and challenge those who are driving the nation towards self-destruction, we and our children and grandchildren will perish in the forthcoming holocaust of social destruction.

That destruction has already begun, the evidence of which can be seen all around us, in the breakdown of the family and the consequent rise in crimes of violence, lawlessness and corruption. But this is only the beginning – unless we wake up!

References

1 Jordan B Peterson, Postmodernism and Cultural Marxism. Interview, The Epoch Times, 6 July 2017.

Call for a new law to protect religious freedom

The erosion of liberties experienced by Christians in Britain has rolled back the clock to the Dark Ages before Magna Carta.

Now Christian charity Barnabas Fund, generally focusing on the persecuted Church abroad, has launched a campaign (and petition) for Parliamentary protection of religious practice within the UK.

In Turn the Tide (Isaac Publishing), they spell out the urgent need for reclaiming religious freedom with a new law.

Liberally illustrated by a number of recent case studies demonstrating how far we have fallen down the slippery slope, the Barnabas book calls for an Act of Parliament designed to cover seven specific areas, including the freedom to interpret Scripture without Government interference.

Responding to the Casey Review

This is a response to the 2015 Casey Review set up to examine the proliferation of extremism but, in its 2016 report, effectively suggesting the implementation of a Government-approved version of Christianity.

The report defined extremism as views “at odds with those of mainstream society” – including traditional views of sexuality which amounted to “taking religion backwards”.

Barnabas Fund has launched a campaign for Parliamentary protection of religious practice in the UK.

Turn the Tide says: “The use of this pejorative term in a government report implies an attempt to impose a government-backed definition of ‘modern British’ Christianity.” They clearly also see the merit of doing the same with Islam. All of which is more akin to the sort of ‘Big Brother’ arrangement existing in China.

Barred from Office?

Related to this is the apparent re-introduction by stealth of the ‘Test Act’, which in past generations excluded non-conformists and others from certain professions.

And from the experience of the 2017 General Election, it seems that it already applies to Christians, who are effectively being barred from office because they do not subscribe to politically-correct dogma, particularly on sexual ethics. Some candidates were for this reason deemed by the media to be “unfit” for public office and Liberal-Democrat leader Tim Farron later felt forced to resign because he was unable to reconcile his faith with the views expected of his position.

Because of this, Barnabas insists that a new law must include “freedom from being required to affirm a particular worldview or set of beliefs in order to hold a public sector job or stand for election, work in professions such as teaching and law, or study at university.”

There have been a number of high-profile cases of people who have lost their jobs because they have dared to speak freely of their faith, or who have been taken to court because their consciences would not allow them to provide certain services, as in the case of Ashers Bakery, who refused to bake a cake with the slogan ‘Support Gay Marriage’.

We are witnessing the re-introduction by stealth of the ‘Test Act’, which in past generations excluded non-conformists from certain professions.

One of the most shocking cases was the recent suspension of Christian teacher Joshua Sutcliffe for calling a pupil a girl when she wished to be known as a boy. Quite apart from the obvious insanity of the ‘offence’ itself, the school had bizarrely conducted a survey of pupils’ religion which found that, out of 1,853 students, there were no – repeat no – Christians! And yet Mr Sutcliffe had been running a highly successful Bible Club at the school attended by over 100 pupils (bigger than most churches), which was subsequently shut down by the head.

You couldn’t make it up. I like the phrase I heard the other day: “We have become so open-minded that our brains are falling out.”

Recklessly Abandoning Freedom

As to the freedom we are so recklessly giving away, we are reminded that it started with the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215, Clause 1 of which states: “The English Church shall be free, and shall have its rights undiminished, and its liberties unimpaired.”

Though it took centuries to work through, with martyrs burnt at the stake in the process, religious restrictions were gradually lifted until we became the envy of the world, with the liberty enshrined so wonderfully within our shores in time exported around the globe.

In commending Turn the Tide and calling on people of faith to speak up, Democratic Unionist MP Sir Jeffrey Donaldson said:

I am alarmed at the gradual erosion of the religious liberties and values that we have sought to uphold in this country for centuries. We live in a society today where there is growing intolerance among the metropolitan liberal elites towards those of us who take a faith-based approach to life. They speak much of diversity and inclusion but promote laws that undermine the values dear to Christians and practise the exclusion of people whose religious views they find ‘unacceptable’.

For more information, and to sign the petition, visit OurReligiousFreedom.org.

Paul Luckraft reviews ‘Whose Land? Pt 1: Foundations’ (DVD, Title Deed Media, 2017).

This is the first of a two-part documentary looking at the legitimacy of Israel under international law. A wide range of highly qualified historians and international lawyers provide much of the information while presenter Colonel Richard Kemp anchors the whole presentation in a clear and skilful manner.

The aim of the production is simple: to tell the truth. With so much misinformation being spread around, either through fake history or deliberate misrepresentation of the current legal situation, simply telling the truth is the best weapon to counter the propaganda war being waged against Israel today.

How Lies Become Truth

In the dramatic opening we are shown several examples from the Palestinian media, proclaiming their rights to the land and their desire to destroy the Jews, who are portrayed as evil occupiers and usurpers.

Most striking is the clear indoctrination of children as part of this cause. The tactic is that if a lie is repeated often enough it will be believed without question and become a standard part of the education of the next generation. This belief that the Jewish people have no right to the land and are illegal occupiers is not only widespread throughout the Muslim world but, more alarmingly, is also finding a foothold in the West.

So what is the truth? The documentary starts by countering the claim that the Jews were never in the land in the first place, and that there was no Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. This is easily done, as many sources confirm a Jewish presence in the land from antiquity.

Simply telling the truth is the best weapon to counter the propaganda war being waged against Israel today.

It then goes on to demonstrate that a Palestinian claim to any part of the land has no historical validity, and phrases such as ‘occupied Palestinian territory’ and ‘illegal occupation’ have no basis at all. They are all part of a bogus set-up. Verifiable history is the key to meeting such claims, and this is well-presented in sufficient detail without becoming bogged down or over-repetitive.

Charting Historical Progression

The 12 chapters vary in length from 3 to 13 minutes but it is possible to view it all in one sitting, as the film runs continuously through without annoying breaks for the chapter divisions (though it is well worth having the DVD case to hand to see the chapter titles).

The film takes us through the Ottoman Empire and its rule over Palestine, and then charts the historical progress from Turkish rule through to the Balfour Declaration. Some overlap would be expected with other DVDs and similar material on this topic - and inevitably there are some similarities - but there is much here that is new and more detailed. The whole emphasis is distinct: that of exploring the role of international law, hence chapters on the Paris peace conference, the League of Nations, the San Remo conference, and, of course, much on the British Mandate itself.

Special mention is made of the role of Churchill, which provides fascinating details into the political scene in Britain at that time. There is a chapter devoted to the 1939 White Paper and its tragic consequences, and another on the formation of the United Nations as it took over from the League of Nations, and the new charter that came into being as a result.

Britain’s betrayal of their Mandate responsibilities is documented clearly but always through the main lens of international law and how it should have been implemented.

The whole emphasis of this DVD is distinct: that of exploring the position of Israel within international law.

Being Clear About the Facts

The whole film is very informative, with new things to learn for everyone. It will also provide a vital revelation for those who rely on the usual media outlets.

We all need to be clear in our understanding of what is often a deliberately confused situation. With the 70^th anniversary of the establishment of the State of Israel coming up next May we need to be prepared: to know what is binding in international law to this day and how to counter false views. This DVD is an excellent resource to that end and is highly commended.

The DVD also contains two previews, one of six minutes and another of ten minutes. It is not clear why two are necessary, but the longer one seems to contain things which will come up in Part 2 and so acts as a trailer for the whole. Included in the second DVD will be the wars against which Israel has had to defend itself since independence and the campaign to denounce and delegitimise the Jewish State. Part 2 (to be released in 2018) is eagerly awaited!

‘Whose Land? Part 1: Foundations’ (94 minutes, produced and directed by Hugh Kitson) is available from the publishers for £15 + P&P. Click here to visit the official website.

 Israel is responsible for the Law as well as the Land.

As the earth is ravaged by an unprecedented series of natural disasters, accompanied with threats of war and terror, world leaders have been presented with a heavenly vision.

In challenging the ‘fake history’ of those who deny Jewish links with Israel’s holiest sites, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin ‘Bibi’ Netanyahu has sounded a clarion call for the United Nations to acknowledge the divine authority of the world’s greatest book – the Bible.¹

Three times he referenced the Bible in a powerful speech to the UN in which he claimed that Israel’s right to exist and prosper as a nation is rooted in God’s word.

Referring to July’s declaration of Hebron’s Tomb of the Patriarchs as a Palestinian World Heritage Site, he said you won’t read the true facts of its history in the latest UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation) report.

Weightier Publication

“But you can read about it in a somewhat weightier publication – it’s called the Bible,” he mocked, adding that it was “a great read”, that he read it every week, and that they could purchase it from Amazon.²

Bibi must also seek to apply the Law – that is, the Lord’s teaching on ethical matters – to his domain.

How refreshing that at least one nation’s leader takes his stand on the Bible, though it is entirely appropriate as Bibi leads the people who gave it to us! As well as a sacred book written by divine authority, it is also an historical record which validates Israel’s claim to the Promised Land they now occupy. 

But in making such a divine claim for the territory, Bibi must also seek to apply the Law – that is, the Lord’s teaching on ethical matters – to his domain.

He is right in saying that the words of the Prophet Isaiah – that God called Israel to be a light to the nations – is being fulfilled as the tiny Jewish state becomes a rising power. But their call “to bring salvation to the ends of the earth” (Isa 49:6) must mean more than hi-tech innovation and being good neighbours through their search-and-rescue teams sent to disaster areas and medics tending to wounded Syrians on their northern border, though we praise God for all that.

Rife with Immorality

Israel is nevertheless rife with immorality – and I am thinking particularly about abortion, a killing of innocents that echoes previous turning points in Israel’s (and the world’s) history at the time of Moses and of Jesus. I appreciate that its practice in modern Israel is less prevalent than in most parts of the West,³ but some 650,000 children⁴ have nevertheless been denied life in a country that gave God’s law to the world, including the commandment ‘Thou shall not kill’.

Paradoxically, the killing of innocents has accompanied the greatest rescues mankind has witnessed.

In the UK, shockingly, nine million babies have been murdered in the 50 years since the passing of the Abortion Act, originally designed to prevent backstreet abortions and meant to apply only where a mother’s life was threatened. Now it is virtually a case of abortion-on-demand as further calls are made for relaxing the law. 

Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists President Lesley Regan believes terminations should be the same as any other medical procedure, requiring consent from only one doctor, just as if they were having a bunion removed. But the fact that 650 doctors have signed a petition against it is very encouraging.⁵

Massacre of Infants

Paradoxically, the killing of innocents has accompanied the greatest rescues mankind has witnessed. Moses survived the edict of the Egyptian Pharaoh calling for the slaughter of all Hebrew babies to lead his people out of slavery to the Promised Land. Yeshua, the Jewish Messiah, survived King Herod’s massacre of infants – ironically by fleeing with his family to Egypt in response to God’s warning – to bring salvation to the world through his sacrificial death on a Roman cross outside Jerusalem.

Moses also received the Law of God; now Jesus writes the Law on our hearts (Ezek 36:26; Jer 31:33). Moses was hidden among the bulrushes of the Nile and became the saviour of his people; Jesus was raised in the backwaters of Nazareth but became the Saviour of the world as he brought true freedom to all who would trust in his redeeming blood (John 8:36).

The Knesset was voting on an abortion law at the very same time that we were discussing Torah.

My colleague, Clifford Denton, tells me of a conference held in Israel in 1996 at which Messianic leaders gathered to discuss the Jewish roots of Christianity. “Unknown to me until afterwards,” he said, “it turned out that the Knesset (Israel’s parliament) was voting on an abortion law at the very same time that we were discussing Torah (the Law of Moses). In fact the Knesset was struck by lightning at that very time.”

Messiah’s Second Coming

With innocents around the world being butchered as never before, the Messiah is about to be revealed to the nations.

Jesus indicated that his coming again would be as in the days of Noah (Luke 17:26) when the world was full of violence (Gen 6:13). Today, terrorism stalks the planet as unbelievable cruelty mars even supposedly ‘enlightened’ societies, while nuclear holocausts have become a distinct possibility with both North Korea and Iran making ominous noises. And all this while nations reel under the ferocious effects of earthquakes and hurricanes – also spoken of as signs of the Messiah’s imminent return (Luke 21:25-28), especially when they follow in rapid succession and with increasing severity, as on a woman with labour pains (Matt 24:8).

The day is coming when the killing of the innocents will give way to the glorious return of the Son of Man.

Of the three major Jewish feasts, Jesus has fulfilled both Passover and Shavuot (Pentecost). Many Bible commentators believe he will soon fulfil the Feast of Tabernacles (shortly to be celebrated throughout the Jewish world) when he returns to reign from Jerusalem. The One who protects his people, and provides for them, as he did in the wilderness so long ago, will finally bring in the harvest of those who believe in him as he comes to ‘tabernacle’ (or livemake his dwelling) among us (see John 1:14).

The day is coming – very soon, it seems – when the killing of the innocents will give way to the glorious return of the Son of Man “coming in a cloud with power and great glory” (Luke 21:27) to avenge every wrong as he passes judgment on a cruel world.

Israel – you are truly called to be a light to the nations, and indeed you have impressed so far with many marvellous inventions. But the brightest light is the fulfilment of the Law through Yeshua HaMashiach (Jesus Messiah), who brings hope, not despair; and life, not death.

Notes

1 Christians United for Israel, 21 September 2017.

2 Ibid.

3 Among European nations, only Croatia has a lower abortion rate than Israel, according to the Jerusalem Post on 31 March 2015. And on 14 January 2014 the Times of Israel reported that, despite liberal policies on the issue, the nation’s abortion rate had been declining for the previous quarter-century, dropping 21% since 1990 to 20,063 in 2012 (or 117 for every 1,000 live births).

4 Johnston’s Archive compiled by Wm Robert Johnston, last updated 25 February 2017.

5 Daily Mail, 22 September 2017.

Our final study on the non-writing prophets in Scripture.

In 2 Kings 22, and in its parallel in 2 Chronicles 34, we read the account of how the ‘book of the Law’, or the ‘book of the Covenant’, was found in the Temple in Jerusalem.

Josiah the Reformer

The boy king Josiah, son of the reprobate Amon who had been assassinated by his own officials, came to a living faith in God when he was only 16.

By the time he was 20 he set out to reform the religious life of Judah, breaking down the high places where the Lord was worshipped illicitly, and destroying the pagan shrines that had proliferated under his predecessors.

At the age of 26, in the 18th year of his reign, he began to tackle the repair and purification of the Temple in Jerusalem. We should not underestimate the difficulty of this task. The Temple, now nearly 400 years old, was as much a heritage site as St Paul’s Cathedral or York Minster, and its sacrilegious additions were considered memorials to the history of the nation. The kings of Judah had been defenders of faiths, rather than defenders of the Covenant of God, since Solomon’s time.

To reverse all this required considerable courage from the King and his supporters, and no doubt he was regarded as much a bigot as any king would be today, were he to try to purify the Church of England. As 2 Kings tells, the holy city contained numerous shrines, some requiring human sacrifice. Even the Temple entrance contained horses and chariots (statues?) dedicated to the Sun, and there were two pagan altars in the very courts of Yahweh’s Temple. Traditionalists must have been appalled at their destruction.

No doubt Josiah was regarded as much a bigot as any king would be today, were he to try to purify the Church of England.

Re-discovering the Book of the Law

Then came the incident, so beautifully told, when the King sent his secretary to liaise with Hilkiah, the high priest on the rebuilding work. At the end of their business, the priest, a little diffidently, said, “I have found the book of the Law in the temple of the LORD.”

Most scholars agree, probably rightly, that what he found was essentially the Book of Deuteronomy, though the liberal stream built their whole structure of Old Testament criticism on the assumption that Hilkiah or his allies actually wrote the book. However, Deuteronomy is constructed like a typical political treaty, or covenant, document of a much earlier age. Like such secular treaties, a copy was ordered to be kept “as a testimony at the heart of the nation, that is beside the ark of the covenant” (Deut 31:26). Perhaps Hilkiah found it there, or perhaps abandoned in some storeroom of the Temple.

Shaphan, the secretary, was as reticent as the priest. He mentioned the book to Josiah almost as an afterthought to his report, though it is clear he realised its importance. Josiah’s response, however, was anything but laid back. Hearing Shaphan read the curses attached to the covenant, he tore his robes. He realised how angry God must be against the nation that had reneged on their treaty with the Lord, the consuming fire, the jealous God (Deut 4:24).

Huldah the Prophetess

The King sent a delegation, including the high priest and his most important officials, to consult the Lord through Huldah. She too instantly recognised the book of the Law as the word of the Lord. Her response is an oracle prophesying disaster to Judah, according to the warnings in the book, noting Josiah’s own humility and weeping, and promising that he himself would be buried in peace before this destruction. It is a short oracle and we hear no more of the prophetess. But there are important lessons here.

This incident raises important questions about the function of prophecy, and its relationship to Scripture. The book of the Law was the written word of God to Israel, as the Bible is to us. When it was re-discovered, the leaders of the nation, especially the King, recognised it as such. Its message was clear, as we can see by looking at Deuteronomy itself.

Josiah realised how angry God must be against the nation and responded in a spiritual way, by repentance.

God's laws and standards were explicitly set out in writing, as were the curses attached to them for disobedience. Josiah, with a heart set ’to seek the God of his father David' (1 Chron 34:3), understood its implications immediately, and he responded in a spiritual way by repentance. Why then did he feel it necessary to consult a prophet as well?

It was not for greater knowledge, for Huldah’s words added very little to the plain words of Scripture except some personal words of comfort to the King. It was not for practical application either, for she gave none — and Josiah’s further reforms appear to have been his own response to the words of the Law. The answer must surely be that the prophet was the one authorised by God to confirm the truth of God's words to the people of that generation.

The prophet’s anointing seems not so much to bring understanding of God's ways, as certainty about their application, and communication of that certainty to the people. The prophet may tell us what we have already seen in God’s word (and never anything that we haven’t), but in a way that truly confirms to us that it is God who has spoken in that word.

This has much to teach us about not only the prophet of today, but the preacher as well. Indeed, faithful ministry of the word of God is prophetic by its nature. The preacher should not be looking for something new to say, but to make what, in one sense, is clearly stated in Scripture speak with the voice of God to his hearers. This is why it is the word proclaimed, and not simply the word read, that is the central ministry of the Church of Christ.

Huldah’s oracle is a good demonstration that it is the word proclaimed, and not simply powerful proclamation, that makes for a prophetic ministry.

The prophet’s anointing seems not so much to bring understanding of God's ways, as certainty about their application, and communication of that certainty to the people.

Huldah the Woman

No examination of Huldah, especially in our times, can ignore the fact that she was female! It is unwise to speculate on how she received her prophetic gift. She was a woman of social standing - a royal official’s daughter-in-law. But status is not a necessary qualification for prophecy. We know that Old Testament prophets received their call direct from God, but we know precious little about how that call came to be recognised ‘officially’.

Nevertheless, it is remarkable that in such an epoch-making matter as the re-discovery of the Bible, the King should seek the counsel of a woman. It is all the more remarkable when one considers that both Zephaniah and the great Jeremiah were prophesying at this time.

My explanation is perhaps over-simple: Huldah was consulted because she was close by and other prophets were not. Clifford Hill says that Huldah was an older woman, much respected for her prophetic ministry, whereas at that time Jeremiah was a very young man, who had not long been in ministry. But she must have been equally respected, for it would not have been impossible to send for one of the others.

No particular comment is made about her gender in the text, and to the inspired writer it was clearly a matter of indifference: what mattered was her mantle of prophecy.

Huldah’s oracle is a good demonstration that it is the word proclaimed, and not simply powerful proclamation, that makes for a prophetic ministry.

From this passage in isolation, then, it would be easy to see support for the contemporary supposition that gender in ministry is not an issue, since “in Christ there is no longer male nor female” (Gal 3:28). The only problem is, this example is before Christ, whereas the ‘difficult’ biblical teaching on male authority is after Christ.

I will not attempt to cast much light on these questions here, not least because the story of Huldah is not actually about these issues. But one or two points may be worth noting for further study:

• It was the King who consulted the prophetess, and not she who sought him out, and she remained subject to him, as indeed to Shallum her husband.
  
• The words she spoke bore only God's authority, and none of her own.
  
• Her ministry to Josiah did not involve teaching him, for as we have seen, he had already understood the implications of God's Law for himself. Hers was a confirmatory word.

The implications of these points for the Church today are for others to consider, but one thing should not be controversial: the role of women in prophetic ministry is in this story given clear scriptural sanction. Only let us never forget, whether we are male or female, that our ministries are far, far less important than the message we bring, and its effects on the hearts of people.

This study was first published in Prophecy Today, Vol 15(6), 1999.

Can justice be done in a society that no longer accepts responsibility for its wrongdoing?

In a week that has seen the end of the 28-year campaign for justice on behalf of the 95 football fans who lost their lives at the Hillsborough disaster, it’s a good time to reflect on the issues of blame when something goes wrong.

Back in the 1980s and 90s when I was minister of a church in London, I used to exchange churches (and our house and car) for a month in the summer with the minister of a church in the USA. I would just preach once on a Sunday morning and in return we would have a holiday in California or Vermont or some other State. One year we took a church in the Bronx where there was a murder almost every day, which made us happy to get back to the East End of London where, at least, we understood the culture!

One of the things that surprised us was that Americans went to law over the slightest dispute. One of the church members in Los Angeles was sued by a delivery man who tripped on the front garden path which he claimed was uneven. Law firms would advertise to represent anyone who had an accident on a ‘no-win-no-fee’ basis, which encouraged people to sue their neighbours on the slightest pretext.

That ‘blame game’ culture has spread to Britain where law firms specialise in getting compensation for victims of road accidents – fake or genuine – with whiplash being the favourite complaint. It is because of the huge increase in such insurance claims that we all have to pay such high premiums. The Government is preparing legislation to try to deal with the blame game culture that is spreading in Britain.

Change in British Character

Is it my imagination, or has there been a fundamental change in the British character in recent years? We used to be known as a stoic nation. People coped with adversity and accepted personal responsibility when things went wrong. Nowadays when anything goes wrong we look round to see who we can blame! We certainly don’t accept any personal responsibility. If we have an accident our car insurance tells us never to say ‘sorry’, even if we know we were to blame. We must never admit we made a mistake!

American blame culture has spread to Britain and changed our national character.

It is this kind of culture that lies behind the saga that has followed the Hillsborough tragedy. If the policeman in charge of crowd control had immediately admitted that his decision to open the gate to relieve the crowd pressure outside the ground had caused the pressure inside the ground, we would never have had this 28-year enquiry. It would appear that he made an error of judgment, but he is now being charged with manslaughter, which will require proof that he deliberately sent 95 people into mortal danger.

Even if he is sent to jail, it will not bring the dead back to life, but will it give satisfaction to those who have lost loved ones? Is this really what they want – just to be able to blame someone and punish them for their human error of judgment? Of course, there were lies and ‘cover ups’ involved in this particular incident which have complicated the whole tragic affair. And the relatives of the dead are perfectly justified in demanding the truth and punishment of those who lied.

From Hillsborough to Grenfell

My concern about ‘the blame game culture’ is that it is going to be with us for a long time to come in settling the latest tragedy, the Grenfell Tower inferno. We are now learning that the heat inside the building was so great that those who lost their lives will never be found so that their relatives can have the satisfaction of burying them.

This is tragic for those who are grieving the loss of loved ones. There are bound to be calls for the punishment of those who were responsible for the construction and maintenance of the building, which only had one staircase. There was no emergency lighting on the night of the fire and the fire appliances did not have the capability of reaching the top floors to rescue those trapped.

There are so many things wrong with this terrible tragedy – and so many who could in some way be held responsible for it - that the enquiry now starting is likely to last a long time and be highly complex. But in calling for injustice to be exposed and those responsible to be held to account, we also need to temper the righteous public anger that is being widely expressed – lest justice be lost to vengeance and public order be lost to anarchy.

We need to temper the righteous public anger that is being expressed, lest justice be lost to vengeance.

There is a difference between seeking justice and simply trying to deal with deep anger and sorrow by finding someone to blame; but that is what is happening as the ‘blame game culture’ spreads.

Taking Responsibility

In Britain, our biblically-based personal and corporate values used to put God first, ‘others’ second and ‘self’ last. In our modern era, however, we have dropped God and reversed ‘others’ and ‘self’. We never admit to personal error. It’s always someone else’s fault when things go wrong.

Is it because we are so insecure that we cannot admit any personal failings? Do we lack the self-confidence to be able to say “Sorry, I messed up”? It takes what Christians know as ‘grace’ (loving-kindness and favour we do not deserve) to be able to deal with issues where we know that we’ve made a mistake, or done something wrong.

The reason that Christians can handle these things better than non-Christians is due to our relationship with God, whom we know is infinitely better than we are, which makes us humble in his presence. Additionally, we know that God is a loving Father who created each of us in our mother’s womb and knows us better than anyone else. He knows our weaknesses as well as our strengths and he loves us despite our failings.

It takes what Christians know as ‘grace’ to be able to deal with issues where we know that we’ve made a mistake, or done something wrong.

It is his grace that covers our wrongdoing. He holds us accountable for our actions but, when we confess wrongdoing, God is always willing to forgive us and to restore us to right relationships with himself and those whom we have offended.

Life-Changing Grace

This is basic Christian teaching – but it is what is lacking in our society today and what is at the root of the ‘blame game’ which is so damaging to individuals and to the whole community. It would be life-changing if we could each exercise grace and so reverse this culture that destroys our relationships.

We can begin by saying ‘sorry’ silently to God next time we make a mistake. He will then give us the courage and strength to say ‘sorry’ to others. Psalm 51 is our guide – verse 12 says “Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.”

Psalm 51

Have mercy on me, O God, according to your unfailing love;
according to your great compassion blot out my transgressions.
Wash away all my iniquity and cleanse me from my sin.

For I know my transgressions, and my sin is always before me.
Against you, you only, have I sinned and done what is evil in your sight;
so you are right in your verdict and justified when you judge.
Surely I was sinful at birth, sinful from the time my mother conceived me.
Yet you desired faithfulness even in the womb; you taught me wisdom in that secret place.

Cleanse me with hyssop, and I will be clean; wash me, and I will be whiter than snow.
Let me hear joy and gladness; let the bones you have crushed rejoice.
Hide your face from my sins and blot out all my iniquity.

Create in me a pure heart, O God, and renew a steadfast spirit within me.
Do not cast me from your presence or take your Holy Spirit from me.
Restore to me the joy of your salvation and grant me a willing spirit, to sustain me.

Then I will teach transgressors your ways, so that sinners will turn back to you.
Deliver me from the guilt of bloodshed, O God, you who are God my Saviour,
and my tongue will sing of your righteousness.

Open my lips, Lord, and my mouth will declare your praise.
You do not delight in sacrifice, or I would bring it; you do not take pleasure in burnt offerings.
My sacrifice, O God, is a broken spirit; a broken and contrite heart you, God, will not despise.

May it please you to prosper Zion, to build up the walls of Jerusalem.
Then you will delight in the sacrifices of the righteous, in burnt offerings offered whole;
then bulls will be offered on your altar.