Book Sale

Monday 18 March 2024

Palestinians Are Just Like Other Arabs?

 


One of the most consistent arguments made by Christians who believe that Israel is the favoured nation of God, is that Palestinians are just Arabs who should just move out of the land of Israel and become Jordanians, or Syrians, or Egyptians, etc, etc. I have heard this argument many times in my life, I even once was convinced by it when I was much younger, less informed and had not really considered the issue from every angle. Palestine is its own nation, this is an undisputable fact, I have written about this here, if you would like to see a more developed argument. But in this piece I would like to let a Palestinian make this argument for you.

Before the founding of Israel, indeed, before the 20th century, there was already a national understanding amongst the Palestinians that they were a people, who were tied to their land. As we read in the book The Hundred Years War On Palestine,

“This sentence is sometimes cited, in isolation from the rest of the letter, to represent Yusuf Diya’s enthusiastic acceptance of the entire Zionist program in Palestine. However, the former mayor and deputy of Jerusalem went on to warn of the dangers he foresaw as a consequence of the implementation of the Zionist project for a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine. The Zionist idea would sow dissension among Christians, Muslims, and Jews there. It would imperil the status and security that Jews had always enjoyed throughout the Ottoman domains. Coming to his main purpose, Yusuf Diya said soberly that whatever the merits of Zionism, the “brutal force of circumstances had to be taken into account.” The most important of them were that “Palestine is an integral part of the Ottoman Empire, and more gravely, it is inhabited by others.” Palestine already had an indigenous population that would never accept being superseded. Yusuf Diya spoke “with full knowledge of the facts,” asserting that it was “pure folly” for Zionism to plan to take over Palestine. “Nothing could be more just and equitable,” than for “the unhappy Jewish nation” to find a refuge elsewhere. But, he concluded with a heartfelt plea, “in the name of God, let Palestine be left alone.”

Herzl’s reply to Yusuf Diya came quickly, on March 19. His letter was probably the first response by a founder of the Zionist movement to a cogent Palestinian objection to its embryonic plans for Palestine. In it, Herzl established what was to become a pattern of dismissing as insignificant the interests, and sometimes the very existence, of the indigenous population. The Zionist leader simply ignored the letter’s basic thesis, that Palestine was already inhabited by a population that would not agree to be supplanted.”[1]

The idea that there were never any “Palestinians” or that they are just the same as other Arabs and should move on is debunked by the people’s own understanding of themselves as Palestinian in the quote shared above. These people saw themselves as indigenous to the land (something genetic studies also support), they felt a tie and kinship to each other, apart from Arabs in other parts of the Ottoman empire, and therefore they believed they should be respected in this self-determination. They had this understanding at least as early as the 19th Century. 

The Palestinian author being quoted above also predicts the many conflicts that would result, how this would cause conflict for Jews in other Muslim lands, and for all people in the land formerly called of Palestine, which is now re-established as Israel. His observations are insightful, but also really what should have been predicted. The only result of such colonization would be conflict. Also you can’t respond to a people who do not exist, and a people who do not exist do not resist their land being colonized. The international power brokers may have ignored the reality of these people living in the region who are of the region, but often when we try to ignore reality it jumps up and slaps us in the face. Reality always gets the last vote.

What also helps us establish that Palestinians are their own people is that Jordanians and Palestinians know they are separate nations, just as are the Germans and the French, even though the Franks were a Germanic tribe originally. Khalidi notes,

“Dr. Husayn knew that Ismail was going to Amman at the behest of the Arab-American Institute to see King ‘Abdullah of Transjordan, and he wanted to send him a personal but official message. When my father heard its contents, he blanched. On behalf of Dr. Husayn and the Arab Higher Committee of which he was the secretary, Ismail was to tell the king that while the Palestinians appreciated his offer of “protection” (he had used the Arabic wisaya, literally “tutelage” or “guardianship”), they were unable to accept. The implicit meaning of the message was that were the Palestinians to succeed in escaping the British yoke, they did not want to come under that of Jordan (which, given pervasive British influence in Amman, meant much the same thing). They aspired to control their own fate.

 My father weakly protested that passing on this most unwelcome news would ruin his visit, which was meant to gain the king’s support for the work of the Arab-American Institute. Dr. Husayn cut him off. Other envoys had brought King ‘Abdullah the same message repeatedly but he had refused to listen. Given the importance of family ties, he would be obliged to believe it coming from Dr. Husayn’s own brother. He curtly told Ismail to do as he had been asked and ushered him out of the office. My father left with a heavy heart. Respect for his older brother obliged him to transmit the message, but he knew that his visit to Amman would not end well.

King ‘Abdullah received his guest and listened politely but without great interest to Ismail’s enthusiastic report of how the Arab-American Institute was working to change American opinion on Palestine, which, even then, was overwhelmingly pro-Zionist and largely ignorant of the Palestinian cause. For decades, the king had attached his fortunes to those of Great Britain, which subsidized his throne, paid for and equipped his troops, and officered his Arab Legion. By contrast, the United States seemed far away and insignificant, and the king appeared manifestly unimpressed. Like most Arab rulers at the time, he failed to appreciate the postwar role of the United States in world affairs.

Having carried out the main part of his mission, my father then hesitantly conveyed the message Dr. Husayn had entrusted to him. The king’s face registered anger and surprise, and he abruptly stood up, compelling everyone else in the room to stand as well. The audience was over. Exactly at that moment, a servant entered, announcing that the BBC had just broadcast the news of the UN General Assembly’s decision in favor of the partition of Palestine. It happened that my father’s meeting with the king had coincided with the assembly’s historic vote on November 29, 1947, on Resolution 181, which provided for partition. Before stalking out of the room, the king turned to my father and said coldly, “You Palestinians have refused my offer. You deserve what happens to you.”[2]

A lot of Palestinians do live in Jordan. But they are not Jordanian, they are Palestinian. And before the founding of the modern state of Israel took place the Palestinians and Jordanians recognized each other as different, and even had their own separate goals for their interactions and nations. As this Khalidi notes, the Palestinians wanted to control their own fate, the right of self-determination, which is a right of all nations. This feels like pointing to the sky being blue, but in the case of Palestinians many Christians think the sky is green; that is they can’t see reality or they simply deny it, for ideological reasons.

A lot of arguments about the nature of Palestine and the conflict between Israel and the Palestinians people are based on ignorance - sometimes well-meaning ignorance - of both the facts on the ground, but also the concepts of nationhood, self-identity and self-determination.

As I noted in my article on the subject referred to above when the Palestinian people were conquered by Israel in 1948 this gave every one of them a national origin story, just as the did the Exodus for the Hebrews in the Scriptures. I’ll come back to this in a later piece. But it should be noted, that as with the Hebrews, they still had a recognition of their national identity before this, this catastrophe, the conquering of regions of Israel partitioned for the Palestinians, simply reinforced it.

Palestinians are Arab, just as Danes are European, but this is not their nationality. So, we should never let the error be stated that Palestinians are not a nation, or that they are just the same as other Arabs. Many nations make up the people group called the Arab peoples, just as many nations make up the people group called Europeans. Palestinians are no more Jordanians, than Italians are Swedes. We need to look at this topic not through surface level theology, but through the Biblical understandings of nationhood and nationality. Esau, and Jacob both had the same father, but they founded different nations. This happens throughout history. Australians are not English, or even British, though we stem from the British isles and have a unique kinship with Britian over other lands. Australian is no older an ethnic identity than the most modern Palestinian self recognition we observed above, yet people recognize how distinct Aussies are. Everyone can tell the different between a Brit and Aussie. So why can’t many do this for Palestinians?

The answer is because of ideology, not reality.

List of References



[1] Khalidi, Rashid . The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: The New York Times Bestseller (p. 5). Profile. Kindle Edition.

[2] Khalidi, Rashid . The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: The New York Times Bestseller (pp. 57-58). Profile. Kindle Edition.

Thursday 14 March 2024

Exactly as We Should Have Expected

 



The West was a rule of law civilisation, that is the concept that there is a higher law that all human laws should submit to and be consistent with.

When divine law became natural law and then simply man's law,

When the authority of rulers being given by God became authority given by the people for the people,

When the rule of law became one law for the elites and one law for the rest of us,

When the guidance of ancient institutions tested by centuries became guidance by the latest fad,

When social justice replaced justice, remember justice needs no qualifier it simply ought to be applied, and therefore justice was abandoned, 

When man had successfully transformed all of these things, the heart of the West being centered around a vision of Christ, however flawed in application yet still grand, was replaced by a society centered around the sinful nature of man.

Western man etched away at every foundation and found himself standing in a house of rubble.

We are exactly where we should be, having made all the changes to our civilisation that we did. You cannot reject every foundation upon which your civilisation stood, and not find your society in a state of thorough confusion and ever-increasing decline.

Tuesday 12 March 2024

Robbers, Robbers Everywhere.

 



You don't have to be a Calvinist to say Amen to this,  

"The characteristic of a true sovereign is, to acknowledge that, in the administration of his kingdom, he is a minister of God. He who does not make his reign subservient to the divine glory, acts the part not of a king, but a robber. He, moreover, deceives himself who anticipates long prosperity to any kingdom which is not ruled by the sceptre of God, that is, by his divine word. For the heavenly oracle is infallible which has declared, that “where there is no vision the people perish” (Prov. 29:18).”[1]

It should be noted that Calvin wrote this in the Institutes which were written and addressed to a king. That is based.

PREFATORY ADDRESS to

HIS MOST CHRISTIAN MAJESTY

THE MOST MIGHTY and

ILLUSTRIOUS MONARCH

FRANCIS, KING OF THE FRENCH

HIS SOVEREIGN JOHN CALVIN PRAYS PEACE AND SALVATION IN CHRIST.

SIRE—When I first engaged in this work, nothing was farther from my thoughts than to write what should afterwards be presented to your Majesty. My intention was only to furnish a kind of rudiments, by which those who feel some interest in religion might be trained to true godliness. And I toiled at the task chiefly for the sake of my countrymen the French, multitudes of whom I perceived to be hungering and thirsting after Christ, while very few seemed to have been duly imbued with even a slender knowledge of him. That this was the object which I had in view is apparent from the work itself, which is written in a simple and elementary form adapted for instruction.

But when I perceived that the fury of certain bad men had risen to such a height in your realm, that there was no place in it for sound doctrine, I thought it might be of service if I were in the same work both to give instruction to my countrymen, and also lay before your Majesty a Confession, from which you may learn what the doctrine is that so inflames the rage of those madmen who are this day, with fire and sword, troubling your kingdom. For I fear not to declare, that what I have here given may be regarded as a summary of the very doctrine which, they vociferate, ought to be punished with confiscation, exile, imprisonment, and flames, as well as exterminated by land and sea.”[2]

Much of the Church has forgotten that to disciple nations means to call Kings to submit unto Christ and submit their laws unto Christ’s law. Indeed, many Christians who would say they are Reformed, or Calvinist (which I am not myself) have forgotten that their most influential and respected scholar and teacher was willing to do this himself. May the church grow this courage again. May the weak men who fall down at every chance to do this be replaced by the kind of men that respect the sovereignty of kings, but the sovereignty of the King of kings above all others.

List of References

[1] Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion . Fig. Kindle Edition.

[2] Calvin, John. Institutes of the Christian Religion . Fig. Kindle Edition.

Monday 11 March 2024

Why is the Middle East So Devastated By War?




If you were to ask many right leaning conservative people why the Middle East is so devastated by war, you might get an answer like this: “Arabs are just a warlike people. They are uncivilized and have not really learnt how to handle issues like the Western nations have.” A more biblically switched on person might even say, “It was prophesied that Ishmael would always be against others.” This comes from Genesis 16:12, which says, “12 He shall be a wild man; His hand shall be against every man, And every man’s hand against him. And he shall dwell in the presence of all his brethren.” Putting aside the fact that the very same scriptures note that Jacob was a deceiver - would he always be that too? – and the fact that in Christ all curses are broken, these answers are simply lazy answers that do not account for the reality of the situation in the Middle East today and its history.

It is tempting for Christians with a Biblical worldview to over simplify and over apply something they learnt in the Bible or in a sermon in such a way that they do not use their minds in the diligent way that God would have us all do: “Do you see a man who excels in his work? He will stand before kings; He will not stand before unknown men” (Prov. 22:29), “It is the glory of God to conceal a matter, But the glory of kings is to search out a matter” (Prov. 25:2). God does not want us to simply brush aside real world events with overly simplistic answers, he wants us to investigate, consider, and reason about why things in the world that we observe are happening the way that they do. We should do this with the Middle East as well, and consider the opinions of those with knowledge on the issue.

For many centuries under the Ottoman Turks the Middle East was a relatively stable region. There were wars, wars with other powers like Russia, Prussia, and wars for dominance in the empire itself. But none of these wars were as remarkable or even as far reaching as the wars that happened in Europe. In the modern era the Ottoman’s did not have their own version of a Napoleon for instance. The Ottoman rule, as with many empires, brought stability and peace to region, and the diverse people within its borders were kept in relative peace by the strong hand of Imperial rule. In fact when you compare Western civilisation against Middle Eastern civilisation in the military conquest department, it is very hard to see any real distinction in their warlike natures. Both civilisations did embark on wars of conquest, the Ottomans famously battled with different European powers, especially Russia, both civilisations had civil wars, but no argument could be made that the Middle Eastern civilisation was more inherently warlike. In fact, western civilisation spread its military conquests all over the world, and it was not an accident that two largest wars in history were initiated by European belligerents, not Middle Eastern actors.

So, saying that it is because the Middle East is just filled with warlike people doesn’t take into account how warlike we Westerners actually are. It is a lazy answer and thoroughly incorrect. How many wars have the United States, Britian and Australia been engaged in in the last 80 years? Most places Australia has invaded did not attack our country, the same is true with the United States. I love the Jimmy Dore quote that goes something like this, “America, a bunch of capitalists, borrows money from China, a bunch of communists, to invade the Middle East, a Muslim region, to bring them democracy that they don’t even want.” It is just not an honest assessment of ourselves to say we are less warlike than the Middle East. And the theological answer does not take into account many other things which are said on the topic of war and the descendants of Abraham. So why is the Middle East so devastated by war?

Well, we get an answer in a report handed to Woodrow Wilson in 1919,

“Much earlier, the King-Crane Commission, sent out in 1919 by President Woodrow Wilson to ascertain the wishes of the peoples of the region, had come to similar conclusions as those of Jabotinsky. Told by representatives of the Zionist movement that it “looked forward to a practically complete dispossession of the present non-Jewish inhabitants of Palestine” in the course of turning Palestine into a Jewish state, the commissioners reported that none of the military experts they consulted “believed that the Zionist program could be carried out except by force of arms,” and all considered that a force of “not less than 50,000 soldiers would be required” to execute this program. In the end, it took the British more than double that number of troops to prevail over the Palestinians in 1936 through 1939. In a cover letter to Wilson, the commissioners presciently warned that “if the American government decided to support the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, they are committing the American people to the use of force in that area, since only by force can a Jewish state in Palestine be established or maintained.” The commission thereby accurately predicted the course of the subsequent century.”[1]

Why is the Middle East at constant war? Because as this commissioner predicted, it would take a continual military presence by first Britain and then the United States if they committed themselves to the Zionist project in Palestine. The entire region would rebel at the colonization effort, and therefore, a strong military presence in the Middle East would be required.

It is common for people to say about the Palestinian nationhood, “Too bad Palestine never existed!” But things that don’t exist don’t fight back.

The Middle East is at war so much because first Britain and then America decided that they should support a Colonial effort in the region and they asserted themselves as the dominant powers in the region, “if the American government decided to support the establishment of a Jewish state in Palestine, they are committing the American people to the use of force in that area, since only by force can a Jewish state in Palestine be established or maintained.” This was an American expert’s own assessment of what would be required, and we see by how the United States is fast tracking weapons to Israel using American tax payer money right now, that this assessment was correct.

The British understood the same thing,

“The Zionists’ colonial enterprise, aimed at taking over the country, necessarily had to produce resistance. “If you wish to colonize a land in which people are already living,” Jabotinsky wrote in 1925, “you must find a garrison for the land, or find a benefactor who will provide a garrison on your behalf….Zionism is a colonizing venture and, therefore, it stands or falls on the question of armed forces.” At least initially, only the armed forces provided by Britain could overcome the natural resistance of those being colonized.”[2]

It took, has taken, and will continue to take strong military investment, support and presence of western power in the region to sustain this enterprise. But we have no business being in that region in the first place. It is not a surprise that the continued western interference in the Middle East is causing Western powers to become over-stretched and helping internal decline back home. National leaders are responsible for their own countries, not controlling the world. Empires always collapse eventually, because it has not been given to them to rule the world.  

We could have a discussion about the flaws of Middle Eastern culture, and Islam, and how all of that relates to the instability in the region. But it cannot be an objective discussion as long as the West continues to interfere in the region in all the ways that it does. Foreign interference inherently creates instability. Until that interference ends, it needs to be considered a primary factor in why the Middle East is still so warlike. If the quote from Genesis about Ishmael still applies, the U.S. interference is still a primary cause because if you continually provoke a fighting man to combat, who is known for being against every man, what else do you think is going to happen but continual war?

List of References



[1] Khalidi, Rashid . The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: The New York Times Bestseller (pp. 51-52). Profile. Kindle Edition.

[2] Khalidi, Rashid . The Hundred Years' War on Palestine: The New York Times Bestseller (p. 51). Profile. Kindle Edition.

Saturday 9 March 2024

Why Can’t Many Christians See Obvious Evil?

 

Image: Unsplash


I was meditating on this question this morning: why can’t many Christians see obvious evil?

We see so many examples of this. A few years ago, in an American election year involving the most controversial President in modern United States history, a pandemic was used as an excuse to lock people in their homes, shut down economies and movement of people, place limits on how U.S. elections could function, and eventually coerce hundreds of millions of people around the world to take an experimental medical treatment most people did not want, and certainly most people did not need, and which large companies profited from greatly. This had so many stamps of evil all over it that to many of us were so clear, but to many more Christians they not only did not see, they supported it, and even fought against those who called it out. To this day many Christians refuse to see the coercive evil they supported and was right in front of them.

But an even more pertinent example now is the massacre of civilians happening in Gaza as I write this article. This has all the hallmarks of evil all over it. Some Christians will immediately jump in and say right now, “Woah, Woah!! Why are you supporting Hamas?” Which just shows how blinded people are. Defending innocent civilians caught up in collective punishment is not supporting Hamas. Bombing an entire civilian city to rubble, displacing over two million people, and killing tens of thousands of civilians is not justice, it is not a proportionate response, and has all the hallmarks of evil all over it. Over 39,000 civilians are confirmed dead, 14,622 of these are children, 8,986 are women, 73,300 are injured, which includes maiming and other cruel injuries, among many more atrocities.[1] These are just the confirmed numbers with thousands more believed dead under the rubble caused by the IDF campaign. Just because someone responds to evil (the Hamas attack) does not mean they are good. As Paul would tell us do not respond to evil with evil, but instead do what is honourable or good (Rom. 12:17). In no impartial eyes is what Israel is doing in the category of good. But thousands of Australian Christians are standing with Israel, and crying out against criticism of Israel, at a time when Israel is committing great evil. Yes Hamas did evil, but two wrongs do not make a right. No honest person would say Hamas should not be brought to justice for their crimes, but that is not what is happening. Not even close.

So why can’t so many Christians see the obvious evil that is happening?

Well, as I said I was meditating on this today, and my daily devotions, as sometimes happens, instantly answered this; it is because of a lack of spiritual training and discernment. I am currently reading through Hebrews, and this is part of what I read this morning, for my devotions, in chapter 5,

“12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe. 14 But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.”

“But solid food belongs to those who are full of age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” In other words, one of the marks of a well-trained Christian spirituality is that we learn, through practice, training, and Scripture to see the difference between good and evil. Again, in other words, Christians brought up on a light diet of Scripture and errant Christianity will not be able to properly discern good and evil. Could you give a better description of the quality of teaching in the modern church? It is remarkable that we have so many people who can see evil, considering the state of modern church doctrine.

I know some people are going to immediately see my comment as arrogant, but I don’t care. When you can’t see the slaughter of tens of thousands of civilians as the sacrifice unto Molech, or the Devil, that it is, then your senses to evil are blinded on the issue. Just men, just leaders, do not unleash hell on civilians over the actions of a relatively small group of criminals, they hunt down the criminals and punish them.

Tradition says that the letter of Hebrews was written to Jewish Christians likely by the Apostle Paul. However, there are traditions which also dispute this, and there is no indication in the book of Hebrews about who wrote it, nor is there a direct mention of who it was written to. But the assumption that it was written to Jewish believers is a good one, because the writer of Hebrews assumes that its readers will have a deep understanding of the Psalms, the Mosaic covenant, the priesthood, the early books of Moses, and much more of the Old Testament. It is perhaps the book of the New Testament which is most visibly steeped in references to the Old Testament, even though other books like Romans and Revelation are equally reliant on Old Testament teachings and imagery when more carefully examined. 

So, there is good reason to believe that this book was written to people who a) should have been mature in the faith, because of their deep understanding of God and his word, and b) should therefore have been teachers, not needing to be rebuked for their error which placed them in danger of “departing from the faith” (Heb. 2:1; 3:12. Etc). So, what had gone wrong with their theology? What had led them into the serious error which the writer of Hebrews seeks to address?

They had misplaced the position of physical Israel in the eyes of God. This comes through very clearly. Because of this the writer of Hebrews must show that Jesus is superior to the Old Testament prophets (Heb. 1), that Jesus is a more superior agent of God’s covenant than the angels (Heb. 2), that Jesus is superior to Moses (Heb. 3), that Jesus is a better Joshua (Heb. 3-4), that Jesus is a better high priest than Aaron (Hebrews 4-5), that Jesus is the head of a better priesthood than Levi (Heb. 7), that the covenant Jesus established is a better covenant than the Mosaic (Heb. 8), and that Jesus has secured a better temple with a better sacrifice, his once-and-for-all sacrifice (Heb. 9-10). It is very clear that the writer of Hebrews is addressing people who are being tempted to place the Old Covenant and, by extension physical Israel, into an incorrect place in their faith walk, and this had led them to serious error. In fact, it had led them to such serious error that they could not correctly discern good from evil.

We know that the Judaizers were the original and worst opponents of Christianity at its beginning. This continued for well into the first three centuries of the early church, where they stirred up through their influence many of the Roman persecutions against the Church, with this finding its culmination in the reign of Emperor Julian who even sought to rebuild the temple. But before the destruction of Jerusalem and the temple, they had a strong case that the Jewish people were the ancient stewards of the words of the God, the Old Testament, the central position of the presence of God in the world, through the temple, and the conveyors of the blessings of God, because their people had survived so many tumults and attacks over the centuries and retained their identity. But the Hebrews' writer would agree with Paul (in fact it may even have been Paul himself) that in comparison to Jesus this was all ‘skubala’, or dung, or rubbish,

“3 Finally, my brethren, rejoice in the Lord. For me to write the same things to you is not tedious, but for you it is safe.

2 Beware of dogs, beware of evil workers, beware of the mutilation! 3 For we are the circumcision, who worship God in the Spirit, rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh, 4 though I also might have confidence in the flesh. If anyone else thinks he may have confidence in the flesh, I more so: 5 circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of the Hebrews; concerning the law, a Pharisee; 6 concerning zeal, persecuting the church; concerning the righteousness which is in the law, blameless.

7 But what things were gain to me, these I have counted loss for Christ. 8 Yet indeed I also count all things loss for the excellence of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them as rubbish, that I may gain Christ 9 and be found in Him, not having my own righteousness, which is from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which is from God by faith; 10 that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection, and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death, 11 if, by any means, I may attain to the resurrection from the dead” (Phil. 3:1-11).

Paul was very clear that all of his achievements as an ethnic Jew under the Old Covenant, apart from Christ were nought but trash, compared to the revelation of Jesus Christ. Paul made sure people were taught strongly not to put physical Israel and the Old Covenant in the wrong place in their faith walk. Something many errant Christians do today.

It is very telling that we have an entire book of the Bible that warns people that if you misunderstand the place of the Old Covenant, and all that goes with that - which includes the land, the temple, the Mosaic law and more - in our faith walk, this will dampen your ability to discern between good and evil. And we see this at work in how many Christians view the modern conflict in Gaza; as if Israel were God’s team and should be uncritically barracked for and supported. 

Let me be clear here, I am not saying that this explains why so many other Christians cannot see so many other evils. I am not making that case. There are many reasons, and they all stem from people not being diligent enough in their study of the words of Scripture. What I am saying is that this error on physical Israel helps explain at least one of these situations. I know that many people would read my initial question and simply say, “Well they cannot discern evil properly because they are not real Christians.” But I do not believe this to be the case for all of these people, both from observation but also from Scripture. The writer of Hebrews is addressing believers,

“12 For though by this time you ought to be teachers, you need someone to teach you again the first principles of the oracles of God; and you have come to need milk and not solid food. 13 For everyone who partakes only of milk is unskilled in the word of righteousness, for he is a babe.”

These are not unbelievers, though some of them may prove to be of course. They are believers who are approaching the teachings of the Apostles and the rest of the Scriptures in an immature way. They are not rightly dividing the word of God, and this has caused them to misapply the Old Testament, misunderstand physical Israel’s place in God’s plan, and therefore they are deadened towards what is good and evil in a serious way.

I know many of the Christians who are supporting Israel have condemned other nations in recent years for doing far less. But their misunderstanding of the nature of the identity of God’s people only applying to those who believe in Jesus by faith and having nothing to do with genetics, causes them to overlook the clear evil intent behind the levelling of an entire city, and the devastation of the people in that city. Christians are partnering with Molech in a tragic way, and they cannot even see it. Although, I have noticed that less and less of these people are defending it, as time goes by, which is a good sign that the devastation Israel is causing is making them uncomfortable.

This should be a warning to all of us who claim the name of Christ that we need to be diligent and wary to the encroachment of unbiblical doctrines that rise to prominence in the Church. Any one of us that might consider ourselves mature could become slack in our study of the word, reliance on the guidance of the Spirit of God through his word and other believers, and fall into a place of immaturity. We should not speak to others blindness without being willing to examine our own blind spots. But that does not mean that we should not be concerned about how many believers appear to lack discernment between good and evil. This is deeply concerning and has genuinely negative impacts in our world. Bad theology is supporting a terrible foreign policy that has destroyed countless lives in the Middle East for 80 years or so.  

Many good Christians were hung out to dry during covid because the leaders of the church could not see the clear evil that was happening, or could but were afraid to speak out about it. Many good Christians have been hung out to dry on many issues. But who would have thought that so many believers would not be able to call a mass killing of people in a small, underdeveloped region of the world the evil that it is? Well, the writer of Hebrews, that’s who, because he was informed about the dangers of raising Christians on a bad diet of teaching, “14 But solid food belongs to those who are of full age, that is, those who by reason of use have their senses exercised to discern both good and evil.” May God shake his church to wake it up from its many slumbers, but especially this current blindness.

List of References



[1] Euro-Med Monitor, 2024, https://twitter.com/EuroMedHR/status/1765230242946285956, accessed 9/03/2023. 

Friday 8 March 2024

Learn From Russia

 




The fall of the U.S. Empire can be very good for Australia, for many reasons. For instance, look at how much Australia spends on welfare every year, it is a phenomenal amount. Many northern European countries do the same thing.

How can all of these countries afford to spend so much money on welfare, incredibly generous welfare programs? Well they really can't, because they use ever increasing debt to pay for a large chunk of it. But the reason they can siphon so much of the economy off to welfare programs is because Australia, and Europe, do not need to worry about their own defence.

Because the United States rules the seas, and patrols much of the world through something like 750 or more military bases, countries like ours can afford to be socialist, and spend far less than we should on things like defence and manufacturing because we can rely on the United States to fight our battles for us, and a few extra one on top of that. We also don’t need to work very hard to make sure our local manufacturing is strong, because we believe we can just get what we need, often built cheaper, from overseas. This system has worked for some time now.

Australians, therefore, are addicted to welfare, because our whole nation is on international welfare, being looked after by others, rather than by itself. This allows us to spend far more on things like domestic welfare than is wise, rack up lots of debt to pay out generous commitments, and it allows all sorts of other similar policies. How can the government expect people to stand on their own, when our own nation’s international policy is to make sure that it does not have to stand on its own? This culture feeds all the way down through society from the top.

As the United States declines more and more, the world will become less centrally policed, and nations will have to start looking after themselves again. Things like retiring 20 years before the average end of lifespan, maternity leave, the doll (jobseeker) and more will be luxuries we will not be able to afford. Of course, governments may try to keep them, but they will only be able to do that at the cost of leaving us exposed to a world that is far more dangerous to former British colonies that are no longer under protection from global powers, and other former European Colonial masters.

We British descended peoples like to see ourselves as the good guys. And we can make a case for many of the good things the British Empire has done in the world. But the truth is, we are not the final judge of our actions, God and the nations our ancestors invaded, conquered or were in conflict with, will be. And as the former nations colonized by Britain are rising, and the Anglo-Saxon nations are diminishing, we are moving into what may be a far more hostile or dangerous world for people descended from Britian, especially those far away from the centre of European power.


In this new world spending money on subsidizing people not having to work, or living larger than their work ethic should allow, will begin to fall by the wayside, and this will be good for us. It will be especially good if we prepare for it.

Australia needs to learn to stand on its own. As long as it is an imperial lapdog, it can't and won't. The decline of the U.S. and the rejection of globalism that will follow it, could be good for us, if we started planning for it now, as a nation. The reason that Russia's economy is booming is because a couple of decades ago they worked out that the American Empire was not going to play fair with them, and was only interested in strip mining their economy. They determined rather early that they should invest in making stuff at home, and build partnerships with other nations on more equal terms, so when more severe sanctions came they could not only survive, but grow far stronger. Talk about having leadership with foresight. If only we had such leadership in our country.

Australia should be looking to the future, not clinging to a previous age which is waning. We may have been able to hide under the shelter of larger Anglo-Saxon powers up until now, but it is time we put on our big boy pants as a nation and prepare for a much tougher world, where we will have to get used to doing things for ourselves.

Thursday 7 March 2024

Don't Tell Me The Odds

 

Fearing to get married, because it might fail, is like fearing to leave your house because you might have a car accident. Sure, car accidents happen to people every day, marriages fail every day. But the blessing you get from walking out that door and experiencing what God has created in this world far outweighs the risks. So, it is with marriage.

He who dares wins, as they say. With high risk comes high reward. Marriage can be a high risk endeavour in our modern society, but the rewards for getting it right make it far better than many other risks you are probably willing to take. Many young men take incredible risks for very little more than a momentary thrill, or a minor financial benefit. Marriage will pay off far better than any of these risks. 

So much of the manosphere is designed to discourage men to marry today. I have seen video after video of these men laying down the "facts" about how many marriages fail and how bad it can be for a man when they do. I have seen video after video of men complaining about how they have been railroaded by the system and the numbers on how many men this has happened to.

When it comes to your own choice to marriage though, who cares? As Han Solo would say, "Don't tell me the odds." Why? Because courage doesn't care about the odds and, plus, you aren't a statistic. It is foolish to think of yourself as 1 in 3, or 1 in for 4, or in any other such fraction. Your life will work out in line with the effort, thought and intention that you put into your life. You will not be able to control everything that happens to you, but you can make wise decisions that limit your chances of facing the kinds of failure that the internet loser is going on about in his 500th video on the topic. All that time spent mulling over how many ways a marriage could fail is time wasted where you could have been enjoying the person whom you married.

As the Proverbs say, "He who finds a wife, finds what is good and receives favour from the Lord" (18:22).

If you are listening to men who are telling you to avoid marriage because of the odds, slowly back away from their craziness. With great risk comes high reward. No greater rewards come to a man than those he will experience from marriage with a good woman.