blog.Tribulationperiod.com

BELIEVERS SLEEPING WITH THE ENEMY WILL PAY A PRICE!

July 21, 2013

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

At times God does use other nations to judge and punish the Apple of his Eye, but woe unto the countries that hate his Apple, judging and betraying Israel out of pure hate since God chose Isaac rather than Ishmael as the seed of promise. And woe unto the churches of the Old World that long ago departed from THE faith once delivered to the saints.

The European Union (EU) has descended into bed with the Palestinian Authority (PA), Hamas, Muslim Brotherhood, and other Terrorist Groups, in the hope they will not commit acts of terrorism in their countries. The beliefs and character of the first New Testament Churches that eventually spread into Europe is quite different form what is taught in the Catholic Church today. And many Protestant Church groups are different in doctrine from the early New Testament Churches.

Many of the Old World Churches will have the Islamic faith followers persecuting them and will watch Muslims burn their spiritually dead church buildings.

Revelation 17:16-18 – And the ten horns which thou sawest upon the beast, these shall hate the whore, and shall make her desolate and naked, and shall eat her flesh, and burn her with fire. [17] For God hath put in their hearts to fulfil his will, and to agree, and give their kingdom unto the beast, until the words of God shall be fulfilled. [18] And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth.

The great city of Rome, through many legal and territorial changes and political events in the Empire from its founding in 27 BC by the Roman Emperor Augustus until the fall in the West in 467 AD and the transition in the East in 610, ruled over the known world at that period when John wrote the Book of Revelation.

Gaius Octavian, great-nephew and adoptive son of Julius Caesar, defeated Roman general Mark Antony and Egyptian Queen Cleopatra VII at the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, becoming the sole master of the Roman world. After a series of constitutional settlements between Octavian and the Roman Senate, Octavian was named “Augustus”: the first Roman Emperor. The Roman Empire, and the successors of Augustus, would rule the ancient world, stretching across three continents, for almost five centuries.

Excerpt from the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs/Daily Alert

The European Union – Hypocrisy, Hostility, and Blatant Prejudice

Ambassador Alan Baker

Vol. 13, No. 21

18 July 2013

The publication of guidelines by the European Commission on the eligibility of Israeli entities for EU cooperation is the culmination of a concerted policy initiative led by the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Catherine Ashton, directed against Israel’s settlements in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank] to press the Israeli government into making territorial and political concessions.

This unprecedented and hostile EU fixation with Israel and its settlements is based on a series of long-standing and deliberately misleading and flawed legal and political assumptions regarding the illegality of Israel’s settlements and the status of the pre-1967 armistice lines as Israel’s border.

Similarly, they negate the very positions supported by the European states that endorsed UN Security Council Resolution 242 from 1967 calling for “secure and recognized boundaries,” and negate the EU’s own commitments as signatory and witness to the Oslo Accords not to predetermine and undermine specific negotiating issues including the final status of the territories, borders, settlements, Jerusalem, and other issues.

Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949), often cited as the basis for the claim that Israel’s settlements are illegal, relates to deportations of over 40 million people subjected to forced migration, evacuation, displacement, and expulsion in World War II.

The vast numbers of people affected and the aims and purposes behind such a population movement speak for themselves. There is nothing to link such circumstances to Israel’s settlement policy.

The rigid fixation of the EU to assert that its agreements with Israel must reflect the non-recognition of Israel’s sovereignty over any territory beyond the 1967 lines stands out in contrast to European policy toward other conflicts.

The EU has many free trade agreements and understandings with countries whose territorial boundaries are in dispute. The EU has been negotiating a free trade agreement with India, yet its applicability to Kashmir is not under discussion. An EU fisheries agreement from 2005 allows European fisherman to operate in Western Sahara, even though the EU does not recognize Moroccan sovereignty in this territory.

The EU Targets the Settlements

The current dispute between the European Union and Israel emanates from the publication on June 30, 2013, of guidelines by the European Commission on the eligibility of Israeli entities, in territories administered by Israel since June 1967 as a result of the Six-Day War, for grants, prizes and financial instruments funded by the EU from 2014 onwards. The current commission notice reflects a number of decisions taken recently by EU bodies on how past EU-Israel agreements are to be applied.1

On December 10, 2012, the EU Foreign Affairs Council determined that “all agreements between the State of Israel and the EU must unequivocally and explicitly indicate their inapplicability to the territories occupied by Israel in 1967.”

The EU statement added that the determination also conforms to the EU’s long-standing position that “Israeli settlements are illegal under international law and with the non-recognition by the EU of Israel’s sovereignty over the occupied territories, irrespective of their legal status under domestic Israeli law.”2

Pursuant to the European Commission’s June 30 notice, the EU published a directive to its 28 member states, effective July 19, 2013, forbidding funding, cooperation, scholarships, research funds, or prizes to anyone residing in the Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. The regulation requires that any agreement or contract signed by an EU country with Israel include a clause stating that the settlements are not part of the State of Israel and therefore are not part of the agreement.3

The directive includes a territorial clause stating that all agreements will be valid only within Israeli borders recognized by the European Union, meaning the borders prior to the 1967 Six-Day War. It forbids cooperation by European Union members with private or governmental bodies located beyond the “Green Line.” The European Commission notice states that its aim is “to ensure the respect of EU positions and commitments in conformity with international law on the non-recognition by the EU of Israel’s sovereignty over the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967.”

This directive complements intensive activity by the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Catherine Ashton, devoted almost exclusively to the issue of Israel’s settlements, and repeated calls to EU foreign ministers to fully enforce EU legislation regarding the labelling of products from Israeli settlements, with a view to preventing such products from benefiting from lower tariffs, and to rendering them easily visible to European consumers and importers. As stated by Ashton: “Our consumers have the right to an informed choice; this initiative will help support our retailers to provide this. The correct labeling of products is necessary to ensure our consumers are not being misled by false information.”4

As such, the publication of the commission notice is the culmination of a concerted policy initiative led by Ashton, with active and substantive encouragement by the EU member governments and the official EU representation to Israel, directed against Israel’s settlements in Judea and Samaria [the West Bank], the aim of which is to press the Israeli government into making territorial and political concessions, by harming the products coming from the settlements.

Flawed Legal and Political Assumptions

This unprecedented and hostile EU fixation with Israel and its settlements, to the almost total exclusion of the other pressing issues in the Middle East, Europe, and throughout the world, is based on a series of long-standing and deliberately misleading and flawed legal and political assumptions regarding the illegality of Israel’s settlements and the status of the pre-1967 armistice lines as Israel’s border.

These assumptions are all the more misleading and misguided in that they totally negate or deliberately flout the historic and legal rights granted by the international community, including Europe, to Israel and the Jewish people in a series of international agreements and commitments. The assumptions totally ignore the indigenous rights of the Jewish people in the area, as protected by international declarations.

Similarly, they negate the very positions supported by the European states that endorsed UN Security Council Resolution 242 from 1967 calling for “secure and recognized boundaries,” and negate the EU’s own commitments as signatory and witness to the Oslo Accords, to honour the content of those accords, and not to predetermine and undermine specific negotiating issues including the final status of the territories, borders, settlements, Jerusalem, and other issues.

As such, the present EU policy, including the commission notice, specifically undermines the negotiating process by taking sides, and by pre-determining the negotiating issues of settlements, Jerusalem and borders. As such, this fixation prejudices and obviates any claim by the EU to impartiality, and precludes the EU from performing any function within the negotiating process.

Israel’s Right’s Cannot Be Denied

The legality of Israel’s settlements stems from the historic, indigenous and legal rights of the Jewish people to settle in the area, granted pursuant to valid and binding international legal instruments recognized and accepted by the international community. These rights cannot be denied or placed in question.

They include the declaration unanimously adopted by the League of Nations, including the major European states, in the 1920 San Remo Declaration, affirming the establishment of a national home for the Jewish People in the historical area of the Land of Israel as well as close Jewish settlement throughout.5 This included the areas of Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem. This was subsequently affirmed internationally in the League of Nations 1922 Palestine Mandate instrument,6 and accorded continued validity, up to the present day, by Article 80 of the UN Charter which determines the continued validity of the rights granted to all states or peoples, or already existing international instruments (including those adopted by the League of Nations).

The “1967 Borders” Do Not Exist

The “1967 borders” do not exist, and have never existed. The 1949 Armistice Agreements entered into by Israel and its Arab neighbors, establishing the armistice demarcation lines, clearly stated that these lines “are without prejudice to future territorial settlements or boundary lines or to claims of either Party relating thereto.” Accordingly, they cannot be accepted or declared to be Israel’s border.8

UN Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973) called upon the parties to achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East and specifically stressed the need to negotiate in order to achieve “secure and recognized boundaries.”9 The European state members of the Security Council approved that resolution.

The Geneva Convention Does Not Apply to Israel’s Settlements

The EU assumption regarding the illegality of Israel’s settlement policy is legally flawed, and ignores authoritative sources regarding the provenance and interpretation of Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention (1949). This article prohibits the mass transfer of population into occupied territory, as practiced by Germany during the Second World War. It was neither relevant, nor was it ever intended to apply to Israel’s settlements.

According to the authoritative and official commentary by the International Committee of the Red Cross, published in 1958,10 as well as opinions by prominent international jurists, Article 49 relates to deportations of over 40 million people subjected to forced migration, evacuation, displacement, and expulsion. The vast numbers of people affected and the aims and purposes behind such a population movement speak for themselves. There is nothing to link such circumstances to Israel’s settlement policy.11

One may further ask if this is not a misreading, misunderstanding, or even distortion of that article and its context.

Contradicting the Oslo Accords

In the 1995 Israeli-Palestinian Agreement on the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, Israel and the PLO undertook to negotiate inter alia the issues of borders, Jerusalem and settlements, and undertook not act to change the status of the territories pending outcome of the permanent status negotiations. The EU signed and witnessed this agreement, and as such cannot now undermine it or take a position that is clearly ultra vires the terms of the agreement.12

Israel and the PLO agreed in the 1995 Interim Agreement (together with the EU, Egypt, Jordan, Russia, the U.S. and Norway as witnesses) on a division of their respective jurisdictions in the West Bank into areas A and B (Palestinian jurisdiction) and area C (Israeli jurisdiction).13 They defined the respective powers and responsibilities of each side in the areas they control. Israel’s powers and responsibilities in Area C include all aspects regarding its settlements – all this pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations. This division was accepted and agreed upon by the Palestinians, and acknowledged by the international community, including the EU and the UN.

The Palestinians entered into the various agreements constituting what is known as the “Oslo Accords” in the full knowledge that Israel’s settlements existed in the areas, and that settlements would be one of the issues to be negotiated in the permanent status negotiations. Furthermore, the Oslo Accords impose no limitation on either side regarding planning, zoning, or construction of homes and communities in their respective areas of jurisdiction and control, pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.

The repeated use by the EU of the term “occupied Arab,” or “Palestinian territories” to refer to the area of Judea and Samaria has no basis in law or fact. Prior to 1967, there was no Palestinian state in the West Bank, which was under the control of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. The area has never been determined to be Palestinian territory. Thus the continued EU usage of the term runs against the very concept of negotiations to resolve the dispute regarding these areas, supported by the EU, to determine their permanent status.

The EU Fixation with Israel’s Settlements

The EU fixation with Israel’s settlements, and the action presently being taken against Israel pursuant to its directive, is clearly incompatible with the EU’s standing as a member of the International Quartet, and serves to neutralize any pretentions the EU might have to serve a useful function in the negotiating process between Israel and the Palestinians.

The EU cannot presume to come with clean hands and claim to be an impartial element in the negotiating process. The EU has taken sides and as such, in its actions against Israel, it is undermining the negotiating process. Moreover, the rigid fixation of the EU to assert that its agreements with Israel must reflect the non-recognition of Israel’s sovereignty over any territory beyond the 1967 lines stands out in contrast to European policy toward other conflicts.

The EU has many free trade agreements and other commercial understandings with countries whose territorial boundaries are in dispute. The EU has been negotiating a free trade agreement with India, yet its applicability to Kashmir is not under discussion. An EU fisheries agreement from 2005 allows European fisherman to operate in Western Sahara, even though the EU does not recognize Moroccan sovereignty in this territory. In Israel, EU policy is likely to be perceived as a case of double standards, according to which Israel is not granted the same rights as other states, in defiance of the principle of sovereign equality.

Finally, the position and actions of the EU against Israel are all the more unfortunate and regrettable in light of the tragic Jewish history in Europe, which cannot be ignored or forgotten. One might have expected that realization of this factor would guide the wisdom and logic of the actions of the EU.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

Israel IDF & Egyptian Army have common enemy, Muslim Brotherhood

Brotherhood will be Part of King of the North Army from Greater Syria

That drives Israel into the Negev and attacks Egypt vVa Sinai & Suez

Egyptian & Israel Military Are Engaged IN cleaning out Sinai Terrorists

But it cannot Stop Daniel 11 prophecies from Eventually being Fulfilled

Please read Archive Blog of July 14, 2013 following YNet News Excerpt

July 20, 2013

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin Excerpt from YNet News

Iron Dome battery deployed in Eilat as Sinai heats up

IDF moves anti-missile system to southern city fearing rocket attacks from Sinai as Egyptian army prepares to launch large-scale operation against terrorists in peninsula

Yoav Zitun

July 19, 2013

The IDF has deployed an Iron Dome battery in the southern city of Eilat as the Egyptian army launches a large-scale operation to purify the Sinai Peninsula of al-Qaeda inspired terrorist cells.

The battery was deployed at the height of the tourist season for fear the city would become the target of rocket fire. The IDF has arranged that the city’s siren system be connected to the alert systems installed on the Israel-Egypt border.

Related stories:

——IDF builds marine obstacle in Red Sea

——Operation Sinai: Egyptian army destroys 40 terror tunnels

——Watch: Salafis launch rockets at Eilat

Egypt’s military operation is expected to include two infantry regiments, special forces, armored units and combat helicopters.

Egypt’s interim president Adli Mansour said Thursday, “We will fight a battle for security until the end.”

Third Army Commander General Osama Askar stated on Wednesday that his forces captured 19 Grad rockets from Suez en route to Cairo, and added they are of the same make as those in Hamas ‘ hands, and he estimated they were sent to Cairo to aid the Muslim Brotherhood.

Over the last two weeks the Egyptian army destroyed dozens of smuggling tunnels between Sinai and the Gaza Strip, considered a significant lifeline for Hamas.

Meanwhile, in the first such incident in a month, two Qassam rockets, fired from the Gaza Strip, exploded Thursday in the Eshkol Regional Council. No injuries or damages were reported.

Begin Our Archive Blog of July 14, 2013

Egyptian Army and Israel want Egyptian Sinai Cleared of Islamists

July 14th, 2013

Egyptian Army and Israel want Egyptian Sinai Cleared of Islamist

Salafis Gangs, Muslim Brotherhood Raiders, And Hamas Terrorists

These Terrorist Mobs will be Attacking Egypt & Israel in Next War

July 14, 2013

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Israel will cooperate and work with Egyptian Army much better than with the Muslim Brotherhood. Peace between the Muslim Brotherhood & Israel is absolutely impossible prior to the 2nd Advent of Jesus Christ. The Muslim Brotherhood will be among those led south by Antichrist from Greater Syria against Israel, as well as against the Egyptian Army that the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood will join as they cross the Suez Canal to conquer Egypt

Daniel 11:40-43 – And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. [41] He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. [42] He shall stretch forth his hand also upon the countries: and the land of Egypt shall not escape. [43] But he shall have power over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the precious things of Egypt: and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall be at his steps.

SEE SERIES OF 13 BLOGS – AN EXPOSITION OF CHAPTER 11 OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL – A SERIES OF 13 EXPOSITIONS ISSUED BETWEEN 05/17/2011 AND 08/25/2011. THEY MAY BE FOUND UNDER “BLOG” ON OUR WEB SITE MENU DURING MAY, JUNE, JULY, AND AUGUST LISTED ON RIGHT ON OIR BLOG IN 2011. YOU MAY READ OUR ARCHIVE BLOGS BY SCANNING UP AND DOWN SINCE 2005 TO THE LAST PRESENT BLOG ON OUR WEB SITE.

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Begin Excerpt from DEBKAfile Special Report

Israeli green light for big Egyptian Sinai offensive, after Islamists fail to assassinate Egyptian general

DEBKAfile Special Report

July 11, 2013, 11:38 AM (IDT)

Israel Thursday July 11 approved a major Egyptian offensive for curbing the mounting aggression in Sinai of armed Salafis gangs, Muslim Brotherhood raiders and Hamas terrorists. A day earlier, Egypt’s Second Army commander, Maj.-Gen. Ahmad Wasfi, who is assigned to lead the offensive, escaped unhurt from an attempt on his life. Some of his bodyguards and soldiers were killed

Maj.-Gen. Wasfi arrived in Sinai just four days ago to set up headquarters in the northern town of El Arish. He was targeted for the first attempt by radical Islamists to murder a high-ranking Egyptian general. As a close associate of Defense Minister Gen. Fattah El-Sisi, Wasfi took part in the military coup which ousted President Mohamed Morsi in Cairo on July 3.Around 30 Islamist gunmen laid in ambush for his convoy Wednesday, DEBKAfile’s sources report. As the cars drove past Sheikh Zuwayed, southwest of El Arish, they came under a hail of RPG anti-tank rockets and explosive devices. A minivan then drove the length of the convoy shooting heavy machine guns and armor-piercing bullets, trapping the Egyptian troops and officers in the blazing vehicles and gunning down those who tried to escape

A fierce shootout ensued in which a number of attackers suffered losses, Egyptian military sources say. The minivan’s driver was captured and is under interrogation.

Tuesday, at the same location, two buses carrying Colombian peacemakers serving with the multinational force-MFO at the Sheikh Zuwayed base were also waylaid and shot up.

Of deep concern to the Egyptian and Israeli high commands is the Salafist assailants’ prior knowledge of the timing and route taken by Gen. Wasfi’s convoy in Sinai, because it means that Islamist terrorists have penetrated Egypt’s military apparatus in Sinai and gained an inside track on its activities.

With Israel’s consent (in line with the 1979 peace treaty), the Egyptian army last week withdrew substantial strength from the Suez Canal towns of Port Said and Ismailia and deployed the troops in Sinai ahead of the offensive.

On the other side of the Sinai border, Israeli Defense Forces are heavily deployed along the Sinai and Gaza border fences and in the southernmost sector of Eilat.
They are on high alert on intelligence that the armed Islamists plan to retaliate for an Egyptian assault by attacking Israel.

There is also concern that such attacks would draw in radical Palestinian Hamas fighters. They have nothing to lose after their Muslim Brotherhood patrons in Cairo were overthrown and have little to expect from the army. Indeed, the generals in Cairo suspect Hamas of abetting the Brotherhood’s declared “uprising” by organizing a center of armed resistance in Sinai as its launching base for a combined Islamist revolt against the new regime in Egypt.

Their suspicions were confirmed by the placards of Mohamed Morsi alongside black al Qaeda flags affixed to the armed minivans used by the Salafists.

For some days, Egyptian troops have been working non-stop to block the smuggling tunnels between Sinai and the Gaza Strip used hitherto to secrete weapons and fighters into Gaza. But now, the Egyptians are concerned to cut down the traffic of fighting men and weapons moving in the opposite direction to reinforce the Sinai Salafists.

A senior Egyptian official said Thursday that at least 150 Ezz a-Din al-Qassam operatives (members of the Gaza-based Hamas military wing) were seen heading into Sinai via the tunnels. Over the past few days, Egyptian security forces have killed and arrested around 200 militants in the Sinai Peninsula, killed 32 Hamas operatives and arrested another forty-five.

By joining up with fellow Islamists, DEBKAfile reports, Hamas hopes to salvage something from its debacle in Cairo. An attack on Israel or even the threat of terrorist operations may be used as the Palestinian radicals’ bargaining chip with the Egyptian army for improving their position.

By joining up with fellow groups, Hamas hopes to salvage something from its debacle in Cairo. An attack on Israel – or even the threat of terrorist operations – may be used as the Palestinian radicals’ bargaining chip with the Egyptian army for improving their position.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

A Post Obama Day is Coming when the Many Syrian and Lebanese

North – South Oriented Valleys From Mt. Herman to Mediterranean

Will be filled with troops, tanks, & high tech conventional Weapons

Led by King of the North moving south in a counterattack on Israel

July 19, 2013

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

Daniel 11:40,41 – And at the time of the end shall the king of the south push at him: and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and with horsemen, and with many ships; and he shall enter into the countries, and shall overflow and pass over. [41] He shall enter also into the glorious land, and many countries shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon.

Begin Excerpt from DEBKAfile Special Report

Syrian soldiers shoot at IDF Golan patrol after unidentified infiltrators move in

DEBKAfile Special Report

July 17, 2013, 12:40 AM (IDT)

The Golan saw a chain of unexplained incidents after midnight Tuesday, July 16: Unidentified gunmen stole into an unmanned IDF position in the demilitarized zone of the Golan to the east of the Israeli-Syrian border. An Israeli patrol near Tel Fares came under fire from Syrian soldiers when it went to investigate the infiltrated position. Israeli helicopters were then scrambled over the scene of action. No one was hurt. IDF officers suspect that the Syrian troops tried to use the mystery infiltrators to fire off shots at the Israeli patrol. Next, an explosion was heard in the Golan town of Katzirn, followed by an air raid siren, which the IDF tried to dismiss as a technical malfunction.

DEBKAfile reported earlier Tuesday:

Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon Tuesday, July 16, contradicted US claims that Israeli air strikes of July 5 were responsible for destroying Russian-made Yakhont SS-N-26 anti-ship missiles stored at the Syrian port town of Latakia.. Wiped out too were the system’s radar. The claims by Pentagon and other US officials were widely published by American and British media and Syrian rebel outlets. Yaalon spoke while visiting a defense plant near Acre.

Israel has consistently abstained from commenting on reports of this kind, ever since, six years ago, US administration officials named Israel as having demolished the North Korean-built plutonium reactor in northern Syria.

Neither does Jerusalem normally deny such reports – at all events, not until Tuesday, when the minister delivered Israel’s first comment on the Latakia episode. This deliberate denial is all the more striking given the wide media mileage of the American version, which looked like a move to draw Israel into involvement in the Syrian conflict.

Sunday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu in an interview to CBS TV declined to answer questions on the Latakia incident, only asserting that Israel stands by its policy of preventing advanced weapons reaching Syria from falling in to the hands of the Lebanese Hizballah.

So, clearly, in the last two days, official Israeli tactics appear to have shifted from non-response to denial. The defense minister also reiterated a point he has made before, that Israel is not involved in the Syrian civil war but reserved the right to hit back for any cross-border Syrian fire against its territory.

All the same, at around the same time as he spoke, 25 shells landed in the center of Israeli Golan as new fighting erupted between the Syrian army and rebel fighters around the town of Quneitra. Yet there was no sign he had ordered the IDF to respond.
Unlike in previous instances, when flying ordnance on Golan elicited IDF tank or missile fire, the army spokesman in Tel Aviv commented with unusual forbearance that they were almost certainly stray shells and not aimed at Israel.

This signaled another apparent shift in Israeli policy: Not only has a top official stepped forward to contradict a report by US officials, but the IDF is holding its hand against a volley of Syrian shells falling inside the Golan.

Interestingly, the only other denial of Israeli responsibility for the Latakia attack came from Damascus, where government officials attributed the explosions to al Qaeda. This sort of concurrence between Jerusalem and Damascus is so surprising that, who knows? the Syrians may have got it right after all.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

Temple will not be rebuilt until after 2nd Advent in the Millennium

July 18, 2013

http://www.tribulationperiod.com/

I have taught for 38 years that the Jewish Mount Moriah Temple would not be rebuilt until the Millennial Reign of the Lord Jesus Christ following His 2nd Advent.

ARCHIVE PROPHECY UPDATE NUMBER 79

August 3, 2002

Will The Temple Be Rebuilt in Jerusalem Before The Second Advent?

I long ago lost count of the number of men and women who have reminded me that the temple MUST be rebuilt before Jesus returns. A majority of believers are certain that it must be rebuilt because antichrist must set in it “showing himself that he is God.”

As a young man I believed that it would be rebuilt before Jesus returned. But as I studied the Greek language in Seminary, I began to say it would probably be rebuilt. I now do not believe it will be rebuilt until the Millennial reign of Jesus Christ. Why?

Much of what follows is quoted primarily from the “New Testament Greek-English Dictionary of the Complete Bible Library,” Volumes 13 and 14.

In the New Testament the word “hieron,” translated as “temple,” is found ONLY in the Gospels, in Acts, and in I Corinthians 9:13, where Paul’s ONLY use of the word appears as “temple.”

I Corinthians 9:13 – Jerusalem’s Literal Stone Temple

[13] Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple (hieron)? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?

“Hieron” refers to the entire temple including its precincts and the temple hill or, in a limited sense, any portion of the temple, such as the court of the women (Luke 2:37) where Jesus stood before the altar after his triumphal entry into Jerusalem (Mark 11:11), the court of the Gentiles out of which Jesus drove the money changers (John 2:15), or the temple proper where the veil separated the Holy Place from the Holy of Holies (Matthew 27:52). “Hieron” is ONLY used in a literal sense in the entire New Testament. This is in very sharp contrast to its closely related term “naos,” which is used both literally and figuratively in the New Testament. It is used figuratively at times to refer to the human body or a local church body.

I Corinthians 6:19 – The Human Body – Naos

[19] What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

I Corinthians 3:16,17 – The Local Church Body – Naos

[16] Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? [17] If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

(All the “ye’s” in this verse are plural, and the “in” of verse 16 may be translated with equal validity as being “among” you, because “you” is plural.)

Now, let’s take a look at the word “naos,” translated as “temple” in the New Testament. “Naos” denotes the “dwelling place of a god.” Consequently, the “naos” was the inner “sanctuary” of a temple where the image of the God was placed, or where he dwelled. It is frequently translated as “temple,” but the association with the word “sanctuary” should not be overlooked.

The following verses contain ALL the uses of the word translated “temple” in the writings of the Apostle Paul.

TEMPLE – HIERON – I CORINTHIANS 9:13

[13] Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things live of the things of the temple? and they which wait at the altar are partakers with the altar?

(This is absolutely referring literally to the great temple of stone in the city of Jerusalem)

TEMPLE – NAOS – I CORINTHIANS 6:19

[19] What? know ye not that your body is the temple of the Holy Ghost which is in you, which ye have of God, and ye are not your own?

(This is absolutely referring to the body of someone who has experienced the new birth as figuratively being a temple)

TEMPLE – NAOS – I CORINTHIANS 3:16,17

[16] Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? [17] If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

TEMPLE – NAOS – II CORINTHIANS 6:16

[16] And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols? for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.

(All the “ye’s” and the “them” and “they” are plural, and the two “in’s” may be translated as “among”)

TEMPLE – NAOS – EPHESIANS 2:21,22

[21] In whom all the building fitly framed together groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord: [22] In whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit.

(The “ye” in verse 22 is plural)

It is perfectly obvious in the verses in the two books of Corinthians and Ephesians that Paul was not referring to the literal temple in Jerusalem, and it is also equally obvious he knew the distinction between “hieron” and “naos.” That is why his ONLY other use of the word “naos,” occurring in I Thessalonians 2:4, is so puzzling. I am convinced that if he meant the literal stone temple in Jerusalem, then he would have used the word “hieron.”

TEMPLE – NAOS – II THESSALONIANS 2:4

[4] Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.

The precise meaning of “naos” in this verse is uncertain. I believe Paul pictures the antichrist sitting on the temple mount in a sinful body of flesh, with his inner soul and spirit claiming he is God to prove it to himself, and to show the world he is God. This would parallel his use of the word “naos” in I Corinthians 6:19. In any case, I Thessalonians 2:4 falls far short of proving that the temple must be rebuilt before Jesus comes.

The companion Old Testament Scripture often used to link with I Thessalonians 2:2 to prove the temple must be rebuilt is Daniel 11:45.

Daniel 11:45 – And he shall plant the tabernacles of his palace between the seas in the glorious holy mountain; yet he shall come to his end, and none shall help him.

However, the word translated “palace” is “appeden.” It is never translated as “temple” in the entire Bible. So it means, in the context of this verse, that antichrist returns to Jerusalem just before the battle of Armageddon, and puts up a command post palace pavilion on the temple mount, from which he plans to sit and direct the final battle. The tents (tabernacles – ohel) are the tents of all the troops from Europe, Eurasia, Asia, the Middle East, and Africa which have poured into Israel in answer to his call, and he will direct their final attack against Israel in the Negev from his “appeden” on the temple mount. I have heard about the rebuilding of this temple for some 54 years. For better or for worst, I do not believe the temple will be rebuilt until Jesus returns.

Begin Excerpt from YNet News

Poll: Israel’s Jews abandoning Temple

Survey conducted ahead of Tisha B’Av shows 66% of Israeli public see Western Wall as Jewish people’s holiest site, while only 29% give title to Temple Mount. About half of public believes Mount is under Waqf’s sovereignty, nearly 60% want site divided between Jews and Muslims

Kobi Nachshoni

July 16, 2013

The majority of the Israeli public is in favor of freedom of religion for Jews on the Temple Mount but is against building a synagogue or the Temple itself at the holy site, according to a survey conducted ahead of the annual Jewish fast day of Tisha B’Av, which takes place Tuesday.

The poll, commissioned by the Israel Independence Fund and the Joint Forum of Temple Mount Organizations, was conducted by the Maagar Mochot research institute in honor of the period of mourning commemorating the destruction of the first and second Jewish Temples.

The survey included 523 respondents – a representative sample of the adult Jewish population in Israel. The maximum sampling error was 4.5%.

Although the Western Wall draws its sacredness from the Temple Mount, 66% of respondents said it was the holiest place in the Land of Israel, while only 29% favored the Temple’s location itself. Two percent mentioned the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, another 2% chose the tomb of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai in Meron, and 1% – Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem.

A breakdown of the responses according to religious affiliation reveals that the secular and traditional public sees the Western Wall as the holiest site (67%), while the national-religious and ultra-Orthodox chose the Temple Mount (49-54%).

Secular and traditional Jews, by the way, visit the Western Wall once every few years (44%) while religious and haredi Jews arrive at the site several times a year (53-54%).

55% interested in visiting Temple Mount

As opposed to the Western Wall, there appears to be an inverse proportion between the affinity to the Temple Mount and respondents’ level of religiousness: The higher their conservatism – the more distant they feel from the Temple site. This stems from the halachic prohibition to get too close to holiness, which deters them from going up to the Mount.

Forty-nine percent of respondents believe it is important for Jews to visit the Temple Mount (including 45% of secular-traditional Jews and 78% of national-religious Jews), but 40% view it as unimportant (65% of haredim and those defined in the survey as “hardalim” – religious Zionist Jews inclines significantly toward haredi ideology). Among those in favor, 57% said it should only be done according to the rules of Halacha.

The survey participants were asked, “Will you be interested in visiting the Temple Mount as part of a tour of Jerusalem?” Fifty-five percent said yes (60% of secular-traditional Jews and 68% of national-religious Jews), and 38% said no (75% of haredim-hardalim). Yet 58% would not say a prayer even if it were possible (61% of secular-traditional and 70% of haredim-hardalim), and 34% would pray (including 73% of national-religious Jews).

About 50%: Muslim Waqf controls Mount

What about the establishment of a prayer house (or actual synagogue) on the Mount? Forty-nine percent are against the idea (47% of secular-traditional Jews and 85% of haredim), and 30% are in favor (52% of national-religious).

“May the Temple be built soon in our lifetime?” Only 30% are in favor of rebuilding the Temple today (43% of national-religious), while 45% are against it (45% of secular-traditional Jews and 62% of haredim).

Forty-nine percent of the public believes the Temple Mount is under the sovereignty of the Muslim Waqf, and only 19% think the State of Israel controls the site (others mentioned Jordan and the Palestinian Authority as well). Among those who claim there is no Israeli sovereignty, 47% said the State must take control of the holy site and 11% would put it in the hands of a Jewish religious authority.

59%: Divide Mount between Jews, Muslims

According to 48% of respondents (58% who had an opinion), the State must guarantee freedom of access and ritual on the Temple Mount for Jews as well, as required by the Protection of Holy Places Law (48% of secular-traditional Jews and 70% of national-religious Jews believe so). On the other hand, 35% agree with the ban on Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount (52% of haredim-hardalim).

Forty percent said that by allowing the current situation, in which there is no freedom of religion for Jews, the police were surrendering to violence and threats on the part of Muslims (64% of national-religious, 54% of haredim-hardalim and 34% of secular-traditional Jews said so), while 36% believe that the law enforcement authorities are simply maintaining law and order (39% of secular-traditional Jews).

So what is the solution? Fifty-nine percent are in favor of an arrangement dividing the Temple Mount between Jews and Muslims according to defined areas and times, as is the custom at the Cave of the Patriarchs (60% of secular-traditional, 65% of national-religious and 46% of haredim-hardalim). Twenty-three percent are against this proposal.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.

After Assad is Gone al-Qaeda linked Radicals shall Defeat Moderates

And From the Radicals Arises Assyrian Antichrist Within Greater Syria

Who Will Lead the ten Horns of Daniel 7 South Against Israel as Well

As Many Other moderate Islamic Nations that oppose radical Islamist

July 16, 2013

http://www.tribulationperiod,com/

Either by assassination, coup, or evacuation Bashar Assad will no longer rule what was once known as Assyria, but is now known as “Greater Syria.” After Assad the struggle will be between Islamic Terrorist Extremist Groups and Syrian Islamic Moderates, which will eventually be won by Islam Extremists.

From Extremists will rise the Mahdi Assyrian Antichrist, who shall be defeated by “this man,” Jesus at his 2nd Advent. During the last three and ½ years before Christ’s 2nd Event a vicious Middle East non-nuclear war will be fought under a protective nuke umbrella, during which Israel will be pushed into the Negev, and many less extreme Arab countries will fall to the Assyrian Antichrist

Micah 5:5,6 – And this man shall be the peace, when the Assyrian shall come into our land: and when he shall tread in our palaces, then shall we raise against him seven shepherds, and eight principal men. [6] And they shall waste the land of Assyria with the sword, and the land of Nimrod in the entrances thereof: thus shall he deliver us from the Assyrian, when he cometh into our land, and when he treadeth within our borders.

Revelation 12:6 – And the woman fled into the wilderness, where she hath a place prepared of God, that they should feed her there a thousand two hundred and threescore days.

Daniel 11:41,42 – He shall enter also into THE GLORIOUS LAND, and MANY COUNTRIES many shall be overthrown: but these shall escape out of his hand, even Edom, and Moab, and the chief of the children of Ammon. [42] He shall stretch forth his hand also upon THE COUNTRIES: and the land of Egypt shall not escape.

Begin Excerpt from BBC NEWS

Syrian rebel fighters’ Civil War within a Civil War

12 July 2013

Syria conflict

————Meeting ‘heart-eating cannibal’

————Harsh justice

————Fragmented future?

————Behind the battle lines

A senior rebel commander with the Free Syrian Army has been shot and killed by jihadis. As Paul Wood reports, the killing is part of an escalating struggle within the armed uprising between moderates and Islamists linked to al-Qaeda.

The Free Syrian Army commander, stocky, bearded, dressed in camouflage, oozed menace and seethed with righteous anger.

We were speaking about the biggest jihadi group in Syria, the Nusra Front, who had kidnapped his brother.

“I know the names of all their emirs [leaders]. They will have nowhere to hide. This will be all-out war,” he said.

He explained that he was now free to take his revenge because he had just paid $50,000 (£33,000) to get his brother out.

He had hated to do this because Nusra would just spend the money on weapons to use against the FSA.

He told me they had sent a suicide bomber to infiltrate his command post, killing 12 of his men.

They were able to do that, he complained bitterly, only because he had sent most of his troops to fight in Qusayr, which later fell to the regime.

‘Powerful players’

I met that particular commander in Turkey, not far from the border with Syria, 10 days ago.

He was describing a long-standing and often bloody enmity among those fighting the regime of President Bashar al-Assad – “secular” against jihadi, “moderate” versus “extremist”.

That struggle has now resulted in the loss of one of the FSA’s most senior figures, Kamal Hamami, who commanded an important brigade in his native north-western province of Latakia.

Continue reading the main story

“Start Quote

One word about this on Facebook can earn you a bullet”

End Quote Activist who spoke out about FSA looting

Even as the Syrian regime pushes back the rebels on several fronts, a civil war within the civil war is building on the opposition side.

A spokesman for the FSA’s Supreme Military Council said Mr Hamami had been driving through Latakia when they ran into a checkpoint run by the main group linked to al-Qaeda in Syria, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant.

The fighters at the checkpoint refused to let him pass, saying he would need to get permission from their emir. He told them they had to take their checkpoint down.

As the argument raged, one of the fighters – a foreign jihadi from Iraq, it is said – raised his weapon and shot Mr Hamami. The FSA men retreated with their mortally wounded commander.

According to the FSA, the emir gave a long list of reasons for the killing, one of which included the fact he was a member of the FSA’s Supreme Military Council.

The FSA said the Islamic State had threatened to kill all of the other members of the Supreme Military Council – another sign of the escalating struggle within the armed uprising.

This is partly a battle over spoils, partly ideological.

In truth, almost all of those fighting the regime are to some degree religious, including those FSA brigades commonly labelled “secular”.

The crucial difference, though, is that the “secular” FSA will accept a civil state while the jihadis are fighting to establish an Islamic theocracy.

A year ago, the jihadis were still operating almost underground in Syria. Now they are powerful and important players, in some places running whole towns, where they impose Sharia law.

“This is a disaster for us, a disaster for the revolution,” a female opposition activist told me.

She was complaining about Islamist gunmen telling her not to smoke, to cover her head, and to leave meetings where she was the only woman.

“We do not want these people,” she went on, referring to the foreign fighters who have joined jihadi brigades. “This is not Syria.”

She admitted that the jihadis had grown in popularity because of corruption and infighting among the FSA. Many rebel groups were preying on the people they are supposed to be fighting for, she conceded.

I spoke to another activist who had spent two years on the run from the regime, only to finally flee Syria because he spoke out against looting by the FSA. “One word about this on Facebook can earn you a bullet,” he told me.

The moral clarity of the early days of the uprising has been lost.

Then, people wanted to defend themselves against overwhelming and brutal force – and ultimately to replace a corrupt, one-party dictatorship.

Now many people tell me the revolution itself has become corrupt and, in rebel-held areas, they fear a different kind of tyranny: crime, kidnapping, gangsterism.

‘Starved of weapons’

By the laws of sheer demographics in Syria, President Assad should have been finished long ago. Three quarters of the country is Sunni and this is a predominantly Sunni uprising.

But now some who supported the revolution are even switching, however reluctantly, to the regime, as the lesser of two evils. The result is that the government is looking stronger than ever.

Syria

The town of Qusayr fell to a government offensive six weeks ago.

It looks very much like the last rebel pockets in the much bigger city of Homs will be next.

One of those pockets is Khaldiya. For two years the rebels held out here, but now government tanks are closing in.

An activist reached by Skype told us that most people have fled Khaldiya, just fighters and their families remaining, living in medieval conditions without power and running water.

In a video uploaded to YouTube, three FSA fighters stand looking at the camera and declare they will defend Khaldiya to their last breath.

“This is the only weapon we have left,” says one, pointing to a suicide belt he is wearing. “By God’s will, we can hold this place.”

The suicide belt is a sign of how Islamist ideology has spread even through the FSA, as well as of how desperate the battle against the regime has become.

The rebels in the Khaldiya suicide belt video are clear where the blame lies for what – despite their declaration – seems like an imminent defeat.

They have been abandoned by the outside world, they say, and even by their own leadership in the FSA. They say that, starved of weapons, they had little against a Syrian regime armed with tanks, artillery, jets and Scuds.

Too late?

For Western governments thinking about arming the rebels, there are many worrying questions: What if the weapons are used in a sectarian massacre of Shias and Alawites? What if the jihadis get hold of anti-aircraft missiles and use them in Europe or the US?

The car bombing in Lebanon this week is believed to be linked to the conflict in Syria

Against that, there is the risk that staying out will allow the Syrian inferno to light fires beyond Syria’s borders.

One in four Syrians have fled their homes, many into neighbouring countries. There is a risk of destabilising the whole region.

Sectarian violence has already spread to Lebanon. A car bomb in Shia, Hezbollah-controlled southern Beirut, this week was payback for Hezbollah’s involvement in the battle for Qusayr, it is said.

Jordan, straining with more than half a million refugees, is also said to be at risk.

To stop the killing, outside powers are trying to force both sides to the negotiating table.

President Assad will not go, presumably, unless he feels seriously in peril – that is one reason, it is argued, to arm the rebels.

But if the balance tips too far the other way, the rebels would not want to talk if they felt they were winning on the battlefield.

If Western governments do decide to step in, there are some rebels they might feel they could do business with, represented by the FSA’s Supreme Military Council, the body on which the murdered commander, Kamal Hamami sat.

At the top of the Supreme Military Council sits General Salim Idris, the FSA’s chief of staff. He talks, reassuringly for Western governments, not of revenge or of Sharia law, but of human rights and democracy.

The relatively secular rebel groups are in the minority. On many frontlines, they are not militarily as significant as other groups that Western governments would find problematic.

The hope in London, Paris and Washington, is that the “moderate” FSA will grow in power and influence with Western support.

The question is, as the regime’s offensive continues, is it too late?

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more detailed information go to:

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.

You may use material originated by this site. However, if you wish to use any quoted copyrighted material from this site, which did not originate at this site, for purposes of your own that go beyond ‘fair use’, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner from which we extracted it.