How did you come to believe what you believe? Did you investigate and prove the doctrines taught by your church? Or did you just grow up in your church or denomination ASSUMING that its teachings were based on the Bible?

Making careless assumptions that may have no biblical foundation whatsoever is one of the greatest dangers facing modern religionists! Jesus said, "For many will come in my name, saying, I am Christ, and shall deceive many" (Matt. 24:5 KJV). Yet somehow most people think that Jesus' warnings apply only to the other guy's religion, and not to their own.

Jesus Christ also said, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God" (Luke 4:4). The key to correct understanding is to PROVE all religious ideas, concepts and doctrines from the Holy Bible.

The Apostle Paul clearly taught that the Scriptures are the standard by which all beliefs should be measured. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16-17).

Although commentaries, Bible "helps," and other religious books may be useful—the value of any such literature is directly proportional to its faithfulness in presenting the Bible's direct, intended message. The same thing goes for sermons or TV programs presented by preachers! All so-called "revelations" or religious theories by "respected," religious personalities had better stand the test of biblical PROOF. And it is amazing—if you will look into it—how many doctrines and ideas espoused by mainstream "Christianity" have NOTHING to do with the clear teachings of Christ and the original apostles!

The writers and editors of the World Ahead magazine deeply believe in the complete inspiration of the Bible. We believe that it is God's direct revelation to mankind—showing us why we are here, what is the purpose of life, and how to accomplish that supreme purpose. We intend to give you the keys to help you understand what true biblical Christianity is all about. We know that some will be offended by this, but Truth is TRUTH! With the help of Almighty God, we want to give you the full biblical Truth on every topic to the best of our ability.

When you read The World Ahead and the other literature that we publish (remember ALL our literature is absolutely free and without obligation), you need to conscientiously study whether our teachings come out of the Bible. Don't just take our word for it—PROVE it. For your own sake, be consistent and be sure to put every other group to the SAME test! God inspired Paul to write, "Prove all things; hold fast that which is good" (1 Thess. 5:21 KJV). And again, "Be diligent to present yourself approved to God, a worker who does not need to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth" (2 Tim. 2:15).

It is vitally important that you "rightly divide" the Word of Truth. This

takes real study! You must learn to conscientiously examine ALL the verses on any given subject. Notice the context of the passage or chapter in which each reference is located. Let the plain, CLEAR scriptures on any subject be your guide to understanding the more vague or unclear scriptures. And always go back to the clear example of Jesus Christ and the original apostles! What did they teach? What was their practice—their "regular way of life" as the original true Christians who obviously knew exactly what Jesus intended them to teach and do!

It is astonishing how far this world's so-called Christianity has strayed from that basic premise! As the respected scholar and teacher, Dr. Rufus Jones, wrote so many years ago, "If by any chance Christ Himself had been taken by His later followers as the model and pattern of the new way, and a serious attempt had been made to set up His life and teaching as the standard and norm for the Church, Christianity would have been something vastly different from what it became. Then `heresy' would have been, as it is not now, deviation from His way, His teaching, His Spirit, His Kingdom" (The Church's Debt to Heretics, pp. 15-16).

This magazine can open up a whole vista of truth and understanding if you will follow through. But you will indeed have to follow through and prove what we say out of your own Bible. Otherwise, Satan the Devil, the cares of this world or the cynicism and persecution of others will somehow suck the Truth right out of your mind! Your Bible shows that men were led astray by such means and such vanities even during Jesus' ministry: "For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God" (John 12:43).

So do your own studying with an open mind and be zealous to discover the Truth. Then exercise the faith and the courage to act on what God reveals!

Top of Page     Bottom of Page

by Roderick C. Meredith

You should not ASSUME anything about the course of world events. But there is a source that can give genuine understanding about specific events which lie just ahead. YOU NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT’S COMING!

Awesome changes in society and in your daily life are destined to occur within your lifetime! The changes I'm talking about are not those foreseen by most scientists. Even business and government planners do not begin to grasp these dynamic changes and their effects on your future. You can't afford to be ignorant of what is ahead. Knowledge is power. And you need to take action on this understanding—while you still have time!

Our Present Interlude

The 21st century will begin on January 1, 2001, in just over four short years. At that time, we will look back with longing on the 1980s and mid-1990s as a time of relative calm, peace and tranquility.

Today, most people assume that everything will just gently continue along the way it always has. Sure, they know there will be bumps in the road. Some of us remember World War II, Korea, Vietnam and other major upheavals.

But we survived them and just carried on like nothing ever happened. As a young man at the beginning of WW II, I can remember us singing: "We did it before and we can do it again!"

Back then, we young Americans just knew that God would again deliver the U.S. and its allies from vicious enemies, just as He did in WW I. It never occurred to us that a moral revolution in the aftermath of WW II would profoundly alter our society. Life, today, is remarkably different from 50 years ago—mostly for the worse.

But the changes coming in the 21st century will utterly transform your normal, daily routine. GARGANTUAN changes are already occurring on this planet. NOTHING will ever be the same again!

Not long ago we had conservative, family-oriented leaders such as President Ronald Reagan and Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. But today's leaders are different. Society has "progressed" to the point that we don't care about the personal character of our leaders. It doesn't matter to most voters now if a candidate is accused of sexual indiscretions, corruption or violence. Hedonism, illicit sex, crime and violence are considered, today, as the stuff of good entertainment. We, the Western, peace-loving democracies, are witnessing the steady breakdown of our societies.

Even in this comparatively calm period, the groundwork is being laid for a massive upheaval in murder, rape, sodomy, kidnapping, race riots and general disorder the likes of which Britain, Canada and America have never experienced! Liberal politicians and judges are forcing cities and states to hire admitted homosexuals as teachers of your children! In fact, many of the larger, more "respected" Protestant churches are now seriously discussing the ordination of admitted sex perverts into their own ministry!

Blasphemy? Of course it is—if you go by what the Bible clearly states. But most theologians don't do that anymore.

What we have now is a sort of tranquil interlude—a calm before a coming storm of national and world crises. Even as I write, several international powder kegs are just waiting to blow up: The arms buildup in Iraq and Iran may soon lead to a conflict of major proportions triggering U.S. intervention and leading to another international oil crunch; the Arab-Israeli hatred will probably erupt into another full-scale Middle East war.

And we, the heavily indebted, degenerate Anglo-American powers, will surrender the world domination that we have held for two centuries to a revitalized European superpower whose economic, religious and political power will overwhelm us. Europe—resurrected in the spirit of the Holy Roman Empire—is definitely prophesied to SHAKE the entire Western world to its foundations!

This rising force in Europe will lead directly to the most traumatic world cataclysm that humanity has ever experienced! But most political scientists, economists and government planners are not anticipating this. Everyone will be astonished!

How Do We Know?

How do we KNOW these things will occur? There is a SOURCE of knowledge and understanding of such matters, which is infallible. When honestly and properly understood, it always predicts with great accuracy the basic course of human events and their ultimate outcome.

My staff and I, co-workers in this spiritual Work, have absolutely proven to ourselves that the Holy Bible is the inspired revelation from God. By acting on the Word of God, we have tested the way of God and find that it works.

The great Creator is working out a purpose here below. He intervenes in the affairs of men and nations. About one fourth of the Bible is prophecy! Yet it is the most neglected part of God's revelation to man. The Apostle Peter wrote, "We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed" (2 Peter 1:19 KJV). Jesus Christ said, "Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word of God" (Luke 4:4).

Jesus Christ was not merely a reporter of what had already happened. He foretold situations yet to occur. Having the divine power of the Almighty Creator, Jesus now orchestrates prophesied world events according to His will. Speaking of the generation that would witness the beginning of those prophesied endtime events, Jesus said, "Assuredly, I say to you, this generation will by no means pass away till all things are fulfilled. Heaven and earth will pass away, but My words will by no means pass away" (Luke 21:32-33).

So when we write with a ring of authority in The World Ahead, it is with a deep sense of awe and recognition of God that we must honestly and faithfully proclaim His inspired Message. And we must faithfully preach those same inspired prophecies, which will so deeply affect all our lives.

What Jesus Prophesied

In His famous Olivet prophecy, Jesus Christ was asked to detail the specific events preceding His Second Coming and the end of this present age (Matt. 24:3). He predicted that there would be false ministers, wars, famine, disease epidemics and earthquakes (vv. 4-7).

Jesus then warned about a coming, great persecution of His true followers (vv. 9-10) and described a time of lawlessness and chaos. Yet, He said the warning Message of the coming "Kingdom" or government of God would be preached to all nations as a witness (v. 14).

In Luke's account of this same Olivet prophecy, Jesus foretold, "For these are the days of vengeance, that all things which are written may be fulfilled" (21:22). If you simply lift this statement out of the Bible by itself, it has little meaning. But if you honestly look at God's prophecies to see which nations God intends to punish in the latter days and why, then the message has electrifying relevance.

Continuing in Luke: "There will be great distress in the land and wrath upon this people" (v. 23). God's true Church has never owned or controlled a country. This is speaking nationally, and involves both the Jewish people and the House of Israel (Lost Ten Tribes), which God is going to punish together just before Christ's return.

Jeremiah's Prophecy

When the Prophet Jeremiah wrote (more than 100 years after ancient Israel was taken into captivity), his prophecies concerned a future punishment that would yet strike both Israel and Judah (Jer. 30:4).

In verse 7, God describes a time of absolute terror soon to fall upon these peoples. "Alas! For that day is great, so that none is like it; and it is the time of Jacob's trouble, but he shall be saved out of it."

Here is clearly delineated the Great Tribulation! For there cannot be two such "worst ever" times of trouble. Jesus specifically said, "For then there will be GREAT TRIBULATION, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be" (Matt. 24:21).

The Tribulation will fall on God's "birthright" people-the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic-descended peoples who have shared the promises of national greatness and material wealth—but who have FAILED to honor God for the blessings He has conferred! (For historical and biblical proof of the link between the Anglo-American nations and the ancient, Lost Ten Tribes of Israel, request our free brochure, America and Britain in Prophecy.) Continuing in Jeremiah 30: "`For it shall come to pass in that day,' says the LORD of hosts, `that I will break his yoke from your neck'” (v. 8). A terrible yoke of national slavery is prophesied for our nations unless we truly repent and turn to God!

After being released by the returning Christ, the birthright peoples, along with the Jews, "shall serve the LORD their God, and David their king, whom I will raise up for them" (v. 9). It is the time of the resurrection! King David will once again rule over the reunited peoples of Israel and Judah (cf. Ezek. 37:16-24).

Again, in Jeremiah 3:18, God describes the time after Christ's return. "In those days the house of Judah shall walk with the house of Israel [two presently SEPARATE peoples], and they shall come together [reunited at that time] out of the land of the north to the land that I have given."

Nearly all of the prophecies describing Israel and Judah at the Messiah's return show them in a condition of literal slavery from which He will deliver them. He will then reunite them and teach them His ways, which they had forsaken (cf. Hosea 1:11; Zech. 8:13; 10:6-9)!

Fundamental Prophecy

The Anglo-American nations are soon headed for national punishment such as has never been meted out before! It will clearly be ended only by the Second Coming of Christ, the King of kings and Lord of lords. But what about the events of the years leading up to the awesome Great Tribulation?

A little-understood, foundational prophecy in Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28 speaks to the descendants of both Israel and Judah.

In Leviticus 26:3-12, God pronounces the BLESSINGS we could have if our peoples sincerely turned to God, kept His commandments and served Him from the heart. But in verses 14-16, God warns our people: "But if you do not obey Me, and do not observe all these commandments.... I will even appoint terror over you, wasting disease and fever which shall consume the eyes and cause sorrow of heart. And you shall sow your seed in vain, for your enemies shall eat it."

The era of world wars began for Britain, America and the Northwest European democracies in the Great War of 1914-1918. It was indeed during and right after that war that the terrible "flu epidemics" and similar outbreaks caused millions of fatalities in addition to the war deaths. But did our nations REPENT and truly begin to seek the Living God?

While viewing a massive, impressive old church building on the east coast of England, I asked my guide when the last time this structure, which held over 2,000 worshippers, was filled with people. The old gentleman got a faraway look and a glint of tears in his eyes as he answered, "Why, it was on the Sunday right after Dunkirk. People poured into the churches everywhere in England because they knew it was a miracle."

"How many people now attend here?" I asked.

His eyes saddened. "Oh, only about seventy-five to a hundred on average."

"Mainly old women?"

"Yes, that's right."

My friends, do you think God is impressed by people who cry out to Him only when they are in terrible trouble? Think about it!

Our National Paralysis Prophesied

After prophesying dire circumstances such as befell our peoples in World Wars I and II, God says, "And after all this, if you do not obey Me, then I will punish you seven times more for your sins. I will break the pride of your power; I will make your heavens like iron and your earth like bronze" (vv. 18-19).

God decreed that if we did not truly repent after the sufferings of two world wars, He would continue to humble our peoples. Notice! He did not say He would immediately take away our power. God said He would take away our "pride" of power, our courage, our national will and resolve to USE the power we still have!

Amazing! That is precisely where we are now in biblical prophecy. America and its allies still have great power, but are afraid to use it!

Countless articles in the media all attest to that fact. In his insightful book, The Real War, the late Richard Nixon was moved to comment that while the Soviet Union continued to

expand, "the United States appears lost in uncertainty or paralyzed by propriety that it is either unable or unwilling to act" (p. 3). Later in this same book, Mr. Nixon wrote, "America's failures of will in recent years have been partly the product of weariness after nearly forty years of bearing the burdens of world leadership. They clearly result in part from the traumas of Vietnam and Watergate. But more fundamentally, they reflect the failures of America's leadership class. Too many of those who profess to be the guardians of our ideals have instead become the architects of our retreat" (pp. 7-8).

A Worsening Scenario

Reading carefully this foundational prophecy of Leviticus 26, you will notice that after each series of events God apparently pauses to see if we will repent. If not, then He adds further and STRONGER punishment!

So in verses 21-22, God says He will add plagues in addition to our national paralysis of will and worsening drought and famine—which may already be starting with the awesome damage to America's grain crops this past summer!

Still no repentance? Then the severe famine and disease epidemics begin—together with scattered wars and increasing destruction of some of the cities, property and lives of the Anglo-Saxon-Celtic peoples of the House of Israel (vv. 25-26). Will this include the expulsion of the whites in South Africa? The invasion of Australia and New Zealand by vast hordes of impoverished, land-hungry peoples from the north? The fracturing of the United States due to ethnic strife?

Referring to these endtime prophecies, Jesus Christ said, "Watch therefore, and pray always that you may be counted worthy to escape all these things that will come to pass, and to stand before the Son of Man" (Luke 21:36).

Finally, God says in Leviticus 26:28 that if we still won't repent, "I also will walk contrary to you in fury." The famine will then become so intense that some of our Anglo-Saxon-Celtic peoples will turn to cannibalism (v. 29)! Our cities will be destroyed (v. 31 ) and our people will be taken into slavery by the conquering invader.

This prophecy of utter destruction foretold for the cities of Israel is repeated in Ezekiel 6:6. It was given long after the House of Israel's first captivity. So this must refer to a future destruction that will take place in OUR DAY in the form of nuclear bombs, rockets or perhaps "direct energy" weapons now being feverishly developed in several nations.

Interestingly, when the House of Israel was conquered and taken captive about 734-721 B.C., the Assyrians did NOT destroy their cities! Rather, King Shalmaneser placed certain Gentiles from Babylon in their cities where they continued to dwell for hundreds of years (cf. 2 Kings 17:24).

The Big Picture

These are the events, then, that WILL begin to occur in the 21st century: a continuing paralysis of our national will, especially in the United States; the continuing process of breaking the pride in our power; then, ever-worsening drought, famine and disease epidemics—with massive earthquakes devastating many nations on an unprecedented scale.

"The LORD will strike you with madness and blindness and confusion of heart" (Deut. 28:28). Unwilling to seek the knowledge of the true God and the meaning of the horrifying events beginning to occur, countless men and women will simply go insane!

Meanwhile, perhaps the most hideous, evil empire in human history will begin to rear its ugly head in Europe. It will place the yoke of slavery upon our peoples (v. 48).

Isaiah reveals that the "virgin daughter" of ancient Babylon will put this yoke of slavery upon Israel—God's "inheritance," His birthright people (Is. 47:1-6). This modern "Lady of Kingdoms" (v. 5) says in her heart, "I shall not sit as a widow, nor shall I know the loss of children" (v. 8). Notice God's description of her in Revelation 18:7: "I sit as queen, and am no widow, and will not see sorrow." And in Revelation 17:18: "And the woman whom you saw is that great city which reigns over the kings of the earth." She is indeed the same Lady of Kingdoms described in Isaiah 47!

This coming church-state system is called "MYSTERY, BABYLON THE GREAT, THE MOTHER OF HARLOTS AND OF THE ABOMINATIONS OF THE EARTH" (Rev. 17:5).

It will ultimately be composed of ten kings or leaders of ten nations all yielding their power to one super-king or dictator! This will become the ascendant force in the 21st century. This power will probably arise because the Central Europeans and their allies will have lost all confidence in the vacillating, inept leadership of the United States.

This European empire will no doubt come together as a result of some crisis: a major threat from the East; a total cut-off of Middle East oil; a major depression. But at the fateful moment a clever, scheming leader will be there with "the answer. " He will be aided and abetted, for a time, by a great religious leader—whom the Bible calls the False Prophet.

Together, in their deceived condition, these nations will end up fighting Jesus Christ at His Second Coming (Rev. 17:14)! For, though containing many sincere—but deceived—religious people, this system will be filled with, and directly influenced by, DEMONS and by Satan himself (18:1-4)!

As the last trumpet sounds and the enemies of God are crushed, the returning Christ will capture this coming, final Hitlerian-type leader and the False Prophet, and will cast them alive into the lake of fire ( 19:19-20).

Christ will also remember His enslaved people, Israel and Judah. "I will strengthen the house of Judah, and I will save the house of Joseph. I will bring them back, because I have mercy on them. They shall be as though I had not cast them aside; for I am the LORD their God, and I will hear them" (Zech. 10:6).

Perhaps most will not listen now. But when these events come to pass—and they will just as surely as tomorrow's sun rises—then those who survive this coming time of trouble will remember that we tried to WARN them now, ahead of time. "Shout among the chief of the nations; proclaim, give praise, and say, `O LORD, save Your people, the remnant of Israel!'” (Jer 31:7). Those who survive will come back weeping and repenting, seeking God with all their hearts (vv. 8-9).

We are destined soon to enter the most awesome and cataclysmic period of all human history. Jesus Christ's feet will stand again on this earth! Today the important thing is whether you will let God speak to YOU through His Word and through His servants! Imperfect though we are, The World Ahead is written and published by dedicated men and women called by God to reach you with this Message. You need to realize—for your good—that from no other source but God can you learn the details of prophecy, the real understanding of the awesome PURPOSE for your life, and the WAY to achieve that purpose.

Write us, call us, let us help while there is still time.

Top of Page     Bottom of Page

by John H. Ogwyn

In the first such mass ceremony conducted in an American city, San Francisco Mayor Willy

Brown Jr. pronounced almost 200 homosexual couples virtual spouses this past spring. "We're leading the way here in San Francisco for the rest of the state and the rest of the nation to fully embrace the

diversity and legitimacy of people in love, regardless of their gender or sexual orientation," the mayor stated. Though a number of other cities allow homosexual couples to register as "domestic partners," none have gone so far as San Francisco in recognizing same-sex unions.

The United States Supreme Court this past May overturned Colorado's 1992 law that barred counties and cities from including homosexuals as a protected group under any equal protection clauses enforced in that state. The equal protection clause has been used traditionally to protect ethnic minorities from adverse discrimination by employers and landlords. Now, as the American presidential election nears, the battle over whether marriage should be considered yet another "gay right" is sure to become increasingly politicized.

What is the struggle for gay rights all about? It's a quest for the right to adopt and raise children. It involves seeking protection against job or housing discrimination because of sexual orientation and practice. It's a struggle for guarantees of the right to serve in the military, and to convey spousal benefits

from an employee's health or life insurance to a homosexual partner. In short, the gay rights agenda is about being accepted as normal and treated just as traditional heterosexual couples.

The issue isn't one that is going to go away. It strikes at the core values, mores and norms espoused in American, Canadian and British life, as well as virtually every other society in the world. Who has the authority to define marriage and family? Can definitions change from generation to generation? Who should determine what is normal and what is deviant? What about the morality of certain behaviors? Is there anyone who can claim the role of universal moral arbiter? If, as many "experts" now allege, homosexuality is solely a matter of genetics, who can blame someone for simply doing what

Is It Always Wrong to Discriminate?

Webster’s New 20th Century Dictionary defines the word “discriminate” as: “to distinguish,” “to make a difference between," "to differentiate." Every choice that is made involves making distinctions. Choice necessitates discriminating between one alternative and another. The gay marriage policy choice is about discriminating in favor of it—or against it. Yet will the basis of society’s discrimination be valid? All values were not created equal. Those who argue for gay rights are making a discriminating decision to reject Judeo-Christian values, which have guided Western society for centuries. There is no question that society's values and norms change. The issue of divorce and remarriage is a prime example. Two generations ago, in 1936, King Edward VIII of England was forced to abdicate his throne because he was unwilling to forego his plans to marry a divorcee. One generation ago Gov. Nelson Rockefeller lost the California Republican primary, and with it the 1964 Republican nomination, largely because he had divorced his wife of many years and remarried. Yet, by 1980 Ronald Reagan, who had previously divorced his first wife, was elected president of the United States.

Ironically, in the 1996 political sweepstakes many of the greatest proponents of "family values," such as presidential candidate Bob Dole and House Speaker Newt Gingrich, are now with second wives. Each divorced his first wife several years ago. This sort of thing; once a political kiss of death, has become so commonly accepted that it is rarely raised as an issue.

Today, there are few openly acknowledged homosexuals holding political office. Why? Homosexuality is still sufficiently controversial m many districts so as to be seen as a significant political liability. However, times are changing.

Entertainers can now openly acknowledge their homosexuality or bisexuality without fear of serious harm to their careers. In fact, society’s opinion on this issue has evolved to the point that there is a growing acceptance of homosexual school teachers and scout-masters. Society’s family values have shifted significantly in this century—and more shifting is yet to come.

In 1993 Hawaii’s Supreme Court ruled that any law based upon distinctions of sex or gender was inherently suspect because of the equal protection clause of the Hawaiian constitution. This. particular case reversed a denial of a marriage license to a homosexual couple The case is being retried later this year. In the meantime, two recent federal Supreme Court rulings have further buttressed the idea that distinctions on the basis of gender are inherently wrong. One of that court's rulings overturned a Colorado statute that legally permitted an employer or landlord to take into consideration the sexual orientation of a potential employee or renter. The other court ruling outlawed the use of gender as one of the criteria for admission to the Virginia Military Institute, a state-supported college that was formerly restricted to male students.

If the premise is accepted that distinctions based upon gender are inherently wrong, then it is no great leap in logic to say two people of the same sex should be able to legally marry. Clearly there are a host of financial advantages at stake—ranging from favorable income and estate tax treatments to retirement, life insurance and wrongful death benefits—which are only available to those who are legally married.

Is marriage merely a legal entity created by the state and subject to redefinition on the basis of popular opinion or judicial review? Are distinctions based upon gender merely arbitrary human contrivances or do they have a far higher origin?

Homosexuality—Destiny or Choice?

Two questions underlying the debate over homosexual rights and homosexual marriage are: "Do they have any choice?" and "Aren't they born that way`?" Is homosexuality purely a matter of biological destiny, the same as eye and hair color? Some scientific studies in recent years have been at the center of this controversy. But, many of these studies have been misinterpreted and misapplied.

In 1991 Simon LeVay, a neuroscientist at the Salk Institute of Biological Studies in San Diego, found that certain groups of nerve cells in the hypothalamus were twice as large in heterosexual men as in their homosexual counterparts. U.S. News & World Report raised an important issue about the interpretation of the LeVay study by noting, “In any event, the study could not answer whether a smaller hypothalamus was either the cause or the result of homosexuality, and critics argue that the marvelous complexities of human sexuality cannot be reduced to a few nerve cells in the brain” (Sept. 9, 1991). Commenting on the LeVay study, John Hopkins University psychologist John Money said, “Of course it [sexual orientation] is in the brain. The real question is, when did it get there? Was it prenatal, neonatal, during childhood, puberty?” (Newsweek, Feb 24, 1992). ..

The lesbian community greeted the LeVay study with less than enthusiasm. As the same Newsweek article observed, "Many of thern say that their choice of lesbianism was as much a feminist statement as a sexual one, so the fuss over origins doesn't concern them."

A further study published in the journal Nature Genetics in November 1995 linked a region of the X chromosome to the occurrence of homosexuality. However, this didn't establish that it's all a matter of biological destiny.

Neurologist Marc Breedlove of the University of California at Berkeley emphasized that 30 years of research "have made it clear that experience can dramatically alter the structure and function of the brain" (Newsweek, Nov. 13, 1995).

In interpreting all of the studies that purport to show a difference between the brains of homosexual and heterosexual males, the question that must be faced is this: Couldn't sexual orientation and practice affect brain structure? Kenneth Klivington of the Salk Institute points to a growing amount of evidence that shows the brain's neural networks reconfigure themselves in response to experience. One study about people learning to read Braille after becoming blind showed that the area of the brain controlling the reading finger grew larger.

An extensive study of twins, the Bailey-Pillard Twin Study, showed that when one of a pair of identical twins is homosexual, only about half the time as the other sibling homosexual—not all the time as purely genetic programming would dictate. Using the seven-point Kinsey sexuality spectrum, the study found that when one identical twin was homosexual and other was straight, the twins usually scored at opposite ends of the Kinsey spectrum. How could two individuals with identical genetic make-up find themselves at opposite ends of the spectrum so much of the time? Genetics, as June Reinisch, director of the Kinsey Institute says, can only give us “a range of outcomes” (Newsweek, Feb. 24, 1992).

If it isn’t all a matter of biological destiny, then where does homosexuality originate? There are a variety of factors that contribute. The influences of family, community and individual experience, as well as inherited temperament, all interact to make us what we are. Today, there are many young people in the throes of gender and sexual confusion because they never developed a healthy gender identity. There are also jaded adults who, ever seeking some new thrill to satiate the senses, turn to bisexuality or homosexuality for a new kick.

Marriage and the Family

In both the Hebrew and Greek Scriptures marriage between one man and one woman is presented as the basis of the family. The family, in turn, is the basis of society itself. Did this presentation in the Bible simply reflect the cultural prejudices of the time? Not at all. Apart from the fact that these statements are presented as the revelation of God Himself, we find that surrounding cultures, which influenced Israel, had far different views of human sexuality. As UCLA professor James Q. Wilson put it in the March 1996 issue of Commentary magazine, "In many cultures—not only in Egypt or among the Canaanite tribes surrounding ancient Israel but later in Greece, Rome and the Arab world, to say nothing of large parts of China, Japan, and elsewhere—homosexual practices were common and widely tolerated or exalted."

Genesis describes the creation of the first humans, Adam and Eve. They were created "male and female" not only for the purpose of reproduction, but also so that they might become "one." Becoming one involved not only the act of sexual union itself, but also leaving the parental home and joining with one another to establish a new family unit (Gen. 2:24; Matt. 19:4-6). Neither was created self sufficient, but rather each needed the other.

The Creator designed the marital roles necessary to produce a healthy society, and He equipped men and women so that each might uniquely fill his or her role. The characteristics associated with sexual and gender identity were designed to equip men and women for success in their respective spheres. The intact farnily, produced by the "till-death-do-us-part" union of a man and . a woman, is the social unit designed to shape and prepare the next generation.

Strongly condemning easy divorce, which was commonplace in Jewish society during the fifth century B.C., the Prophet Malachi explained why God takes marriage commitment so seriously. Why did God intend to make one permanent union from two individuals? “And why one? He seeks godly offspring” (Mal. 2:15). Healthy families are a major key in shaping the next generation into functional adults capable of achieving their God-given potential. The potential involves being productive in this life as well as developing a relationship with the Creator; which prepares us to be a part of His divine Family forever. But easy divorce corrupts with selfishness any society that allows it. (The Bible allows divorce, but only for strictly delineated reasons.)

Guarding the Family

Because of the vital importance of the family—both to the individual and the community—God warned in the strongest possible language against such destructive conduct. In Leviticus 18, He warned ancient Israel through Moses about sexual activities that would "defile the land” and result in national destruction. The Israelites were specifically warned not to emulate the degenerate practices of the Egyptians or the Canaanites (v. 3). Israel was admonished regarding the evil of incest: "None of you shall approach anyone who is near of kin to him, to uncover his nakedness" (v. 6). In verse 22 they were told, "You shall not lie with a male as with a woman. It is an abomination."

The human sexual drive was designed by God to help bind one man and one woman together for life in a unique relationship. It was intended to promote the kind of love and closeness necessary to cement a permanent social unit, the family. The misuse of sex, which results when the pursuit of pleasure is viewed as the ultimate good, is horribly destructive. It is destructive to individuals, to families and to nations. Those who are caught up in the ongoing pursuit of ever-new sexual thrills will never know the joys that can only exist in a happy marriage based upon God's laws.

Society can label good as "evil" and evil as "good” if it wishes, but that doesn’t make it so! God’s laws are living laws producing sure results. Violation of the divine laws intended to channel sexual desire into that which produces love, peace and joy can only result in horrible penalties. These may come either in the form of physical disease or in the emotional and psychological pain of empty, tormented lives (Rom. 1:26-27).

The so called "gay" community is anything but gay. It contains some of the most unhappy, unfulfilled people on earth The emotional, spiritual emptiness within the human heart and mind can never truly be filled by the, pursuit of momentary, hedonistic thrills and excitement. The suicide rate among homosexuals is far higher than the norm. That alone should tell us something. To label homosexual relationships as simply an alternative form of marriage and family is a destructive act of self-delusion.

The Apostle Paul never sought to minimize or rationalize away the sinfulness of homosexuality, which was rampant in the Greco-Roman society of his day. However, he did hold out help and hope for individuals willing to repent of that or of any other sin. "Do you not know that the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived. Neither fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor homosexuals, nor sodomites... will inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you. But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God" (1 Cor. 6:9-11). There is genuine hope for individuals who want the help of their Creator to change and become what He would have them be.

Why is there even a debate on homosexual marriage? Why do television sitcoms increasingly treat it as virtually normal? Speaking of the present state of affairs in our modern Western nations, the Prophet Isaiah thundered, "And they declare their sin as Sodom" (Is. 3:9). The real reason behind all of this is recorded by an early contemporary of Isaiah, the Prophet Hosea. Speaking for God, this forgotten prophet wrote, "My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge. Because you have forgotten the law of your God, I also will forget your children. The more they increased, the more they sinned against Me" (Hos. 4:6-7).

Our nations have cast aside, their former moral underpinnings in favor of a "new morality." Regardless of what it's called, it's not new and it's certainly not moral. The terrible consequences of this experiment have been written in the stories of long-ago civilizations These consequences will prove devastating to both individuals and nations alike. The good news is that there is help and there is hope. God’s laws are for our good and hold the key to peace and fulfillment both now and forever.

Top of Page     Bottom of Page

by Jeffrey H. Patton

Across the face of the globe cultures clash. While shopping in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, an American woman wearing a short-sleeved top—revealing her elbows—elicits a public tongue lashing from an Islamic religious policeman. "You should cover your arms! Does your husband know you are going about like this?" (Los Angeles Times, "U.S. Women Bear Brunt of Saudi Culture Clash," June 28, 1996).

Perhaps it seems silly to you to get bent out of shape over the racy nature of feminine elbows, but how about other elements of cultural divergence around the world such as slavery, infanticide, torture, female genital mutilation, rape, prostitution, feuding, eating stray dogs and cats, suicide or homosexuality? If a society deems one or more of the above as appropriate due to circumstances or longstanding tradition, who has the authority to say such a practice is not okay?

Is it possible to achieve a just, moral, uplifting system of social organization that works equally well anywhere in the world for all the human family? Is it possible to have a universal ethic—a uniform moral standard—by which the practices and beliefs of all peoples can be evaluated and judged accordingly, regardless of cultural background?

An astounding number of today's scholars and government leaders don't think so! Many of our academic and political elites don't see that any existing ethical system can get equally good results among all ethnic groups. This opinion holds that no single way of life or belief system is superior to another. All cultural practices, according to this perspective, are relatively beautiful according to the cultural eye of the beholder! Because of this idea, many Western leaders are quite willing to let go of some of their peoples' cherished, traditional beliefs and practices—especially the Judeo-Christian ethic!

Losing Their Culture and Identity

The belief in cultural relativism is having an increasing impact in the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, where activists of the multiculturalist movement dominate much of the debate at university campuses and government agencies on the subject of appropriate social policies. "Multiculturalism... is primarily a conceptual framework for challenging the cultural hegemony of the dominant ethnic group in the United States and the United Kingdom by calling for equal recognition of the cultural expressions of non-hegemonic [minority] groups within the educational system" (Multiculturism, A Critical Reader, "Anthropology and Multiculturalism: What Is Anthropology that Multiculturalists Should Be Mindful of It?" 1994, p. 407).

"In calling for the formal equality of all cultures within the purview of the state [U.S., Canada and the U.K.] and its educational system, multiculturalism represents a demand for the dissociation (decentering) of the political community and its common social institutions from identification with any one cultural tradition. This denial of a privileged role as the unique idiom of social consensus to the hegemonic Eurocentric subculture is the point of the multiculturalist program that most outrages its conservative critics" (p. 421).

Dennis Prager, a well-known conservative commentator in the Los Angeles area, writes: "Many people have forgotten what is distinctive about America and can't

convey a sense of Americanness to their children.

"Also, 'the ideal of multiculturalism has replaced the ideal of the melting pot. While Americans always regarded themselves as multiethnic, much of the country now adheres to a vision of America as multicultural. America's motto is being transformed from E pluribus unum—`From many, one'—to `not one, many.'

"Among many well-educated Americans, American ritual has either corny or sinister connotations. The very term `flag-waver' connotes a person flirting with fascism. Compare the elite's reaction to someone wearing a flag pin with someone wearing an AIDS ribbon" (Los Angeles Times, "The Importance of Being Ritualistic," July 16, 1996).

Prager warns, “We have abandoned ritual, and without ritual there is no memory. This understanding of the indispensable role that ritual plays in remembrance is the secret to the survival of a much smaller people than Americans: the Jews."

In Canada also, the traditional cultural values that unified that country's inhabitants are also undergoing profound, multiculturalist revision. "God may soon have no place in the nation's courtrooms.... The assumption that all witnesses should be willing to bind themselves by Christian oaths is `clearly less and less appropriate in the face of changes in Canadian society in recent decades,' says a consultation paper by the working group on multicultural and race relations in the justice system.... [The paper] says the idea of swearing on a Bible is rooted in a time when religious belief was central to cultural and social institutions—an age when few questioned the belief in God or the prospect of an afterlife.

"`In general, religious beliefs are neither as widespread in modern society as they once were nor as strongly held, and they certainly cannot be assumed to play the same unifying role as they may have played in the past"' (Kingston Whig-Standard, Apr. 22, 1996).

In the United Kingdom, a few leaders have recognized the dangerous erosion in that nation's once-common moral standard. "Religious and political leaders are calling on Britons to take a hard look at their moral values and return to active religious belief. In a speech to the House of Lords July 5, the Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, warned that the country is in danger of `squandering its Judaic-Christian moral inheritance' and `descending into chaotic gangsterism'” (Christian Science Monitor, July 9, 1996).

But Carey's speech drew hostility from the United Kingdom's educational establishment, which denied responsibility for causing a moral decline by "failing to impart a sense of moral duty to young people."

"A Gallup poll published last week showed that 72 percent of British adults believe `we leave it too much up to individuals to behave in terms of their own moral code.' The survey also showed that 47 percent of British adults say adultery is wrong in all circumstances. Nearly as many (44 percent) say it can be `justified occasionally.' Only 20 percent of those questioned thought Britons exhibited `a common set of moral standards'.... Carey's linking of morality with a return to Christianity is likely to stir controversy among non-Christians.... Karen Pappenheim, director of the National Council of One Parent Families, says, `Clearly, back to Christianity is not going to work. Non-churchgoers can't be left out of the frame.'”

But does it really matter if the U.S., Canada, the U.K. and other Western nations forsake a plain, clear acknowledgment that their cultures are rooted—however hypocritically—in the Judeo-Christian ethic? "Many would surely be troubled by the idea that the political systems of Iraq, Hitler's Germany, or the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia were, or are, as good as those in, say Norway, Japan, or Switzerland. And they would probably react with disbelief to the assertion that there is no scientific basis for evaluating another society's practice of genocide, judicial torture or human sacrifice, for example, except as the people in that society themselves evaluate these practices. Yet that is exactly what the principle of cultural relativism asserts, and this principle continues to be widely and strongly held" (Robert B. Edgerton, Sick Societies, The Free Press, 1992, p. 2).

Noble Savages Living in Primitive Harmony?

Perhaps one of the most enduring ideas in the Western world is, as Robert Edgerton writes, "the belief that primitive societies are more harmonious than modern ones, that savages are noble, and that life in the past was more idyllic than life today" (Edgerton, p. 2). Our Western culture popularized the praise of the Noble Savage in the writings of the philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau. And it continues to celebrate this perspective with films like Dances with Wolves. These smaller, indigenous groups—untainted by Western contact are perceived as practicing various cultural traditions that are better adapted to the environment and more attuned to the needs of the communities' members.

"Indeed, there is a pervasive assumption among anthropologists that a population's long-standing beliefs and practices—their culture and their social institutions—must play a positive role in their lives or these beliefs and practices would not have persisted. Thus, it is widely thought and written that cannibalism, torture, infanticide, feuding, witchcraft, painful male initiations, female genital mutilation, ceremonial rape, headhunting, and other practices that may be abhorrent to many of us must serve some useful function in the societies in which they are traditional practices" (p. 8).

A classic example of an anthropologist pushing cultural relativism is Ruth Benedict. In 1934, her remarkably popular book, Patterns of Culture, sold two million copies. Edgerton writes, "Ruth Benedict proclaimed that all ways of life were of equal value and that all standards of behavior were relative. She praised cannibalism and often went to great lengths to put seemingly maladaptive institutions in a positive light" (p. 33).

To their credit; a number of anthropologists refused to accept such a position and advocated using some universal ethical standard to evaluate the various practices and beliefs of all of mankind's cultures. George Peter Murdock, a leading anthropologist in the 1960s, wrote that "Benedict's relativistic idea that a cultural element has no meaning except in its context was `nonsense'” and that this assertion that "all cultures must be accorded equal dignity and value was `not only nonsense but sentimental nonsense.' He added that it was an `absurdity' to assert that cannibalism, slavery, magical therapy, and killing the aged should be accorded the same `dignity' or `validity' as old age security, scientific medicine and metal artifacts. All people, Murdock continued, prefer Western technology and would rather be able to feed their children and elderly than kill them" (Edgerton, p. 35).

Amazingly, the position of Murdock and other antirelativistic anthropologists, who favored adopting a universal ethical standard to evaluate all societies, was not then—and still is not—accepted by the majority of their colleagues.

While the academic majority believes that witchcraft can be socially "adaptive" (that is, it plays a positive, beneficial role in a community), anthropological writer John G. Kennedy has strongly argued against such a position. Kennedy called witchcraft beliefs "irrational and dysfunctional." He asserted that those societies that have incorporated witchcraft into their culture have "institutionalized irrationality" because the obvious effect of such beliefs is to spread fear and aggression. Igniting a firestorm that still burns in academic circles, Kennedy controversially concluded, "We should seriously entertain the possibility of the existence of `sick societies' or pathological institutions and culture patterns, rather than making the a priori relativistic assumption that all groups automatically find a healthy, balanced level of functioning" (The International Journal of Social Psychiatry, "Psychosocial Dynamics of Witchcraft Systems," 1969, vol. 15, p. 167, as cited by Robert Edgerton).

What does this debate among university professors have to do with you? "Historically, anthropology has made important contributions to the critical decentering of Eurocentric biases both in the academic disciplines of social thought and in popular consciousness: anthropological cultural relativism is a direct ancestor of critical multiculturalism" (Multiculturalism, A Critical Reader, p. 411 ). When the multiculturalist agenda is fully realized, the common cultural ideals and standards of the U.S., Canada and the U.K. will be extinguished—shattered like a mirror into a myriad of subcultures each with its own reflections about what is right or wrong. The Judeo-Christian ethic will have been replaced by a babylon of differing voices—each insisting on its own rightness. Abortion, euthanasia, homosexual marriage, witchcraft or cannibalism—who is to say what is right or wrong in any particular individual's or community's circumstances? It is the ultimate, "do-your-own-thing," social nightmare.

Who Will Set a Universal Standard?

How did humanity sink into this societal confusion where every different group, and now every individual, feels they have the authority to make up their own ideas about what's right and what's wrong? Not surprisingly, mankind elected to follow cultural relativism right from the beginning!

Just as most anthropologists and social scientists have chosen to believe in biological evolution to explain man's origins, so in parallel manner they explain the social evolution of human culture. This point of view sees that whatever is done as traditional, long-standing practice must have been "good," that is adaptive or beneficial for that group of struggling humanity. Nevertheless, widespread traditional practices such as witchcraft and cannibalism can be demonstrably shown to be "bad," that is maladaptive or having negative consequences for any society that adopts them.

The true origin of cultural relativism was at the garden of Eden—the beginning of mankind's narrative. "Now the serpent was the sliest of all the wild creatures that God Yahweh had made. Said he to the woman, `Even though God told you not to eat of any tree in the garden...' The woman interrupted the serpent, `But we may eat of the trees in the garden! It is only about the fruit of the tree in the middle of the garden that God did say, "Do not eat of it or so much as touch it, lest you die!'” But the serpent said to the woman, `You are not going to die. No, God well knows that the moment you eat of it your eyes will be opened and you will be the same as God in telling good from bad'” (Gen. 3:1-5, The Anchor Bible Commentary's Genesis, Doubleday, 1987, p. 21 ).

The Moffatt translation renders the last part of verse 5: "...and you will be like gods, knowing good and evil." In essence, the serpent was encouraging the first human family to ignore the Creator God's instructions and disobey, deciding for itself what was good and evil. "Then said God the Eternal, `Man has become like one of us, he knows good and evil. He might reach his hand now to the tree of life also, and by eating of it live for ever!' So God the Eternal expelled him from... Eden" (vv. 22-23 Moffatt).

The end result of Adam and Eve's choice was that they took to themselves the right to establish their own traditions, which seemed most adaptive to their circumstances. God reacted to this choice for cultural relativism. He drove humanity's progenitors out of the garden of the LORD ("Eden," Gen. 3:24)—because such people could not be trusted to eternally live in harmony with Himself!

Adam and Eve's self determination of good and evil was passed on to their children, Cain and Abel. The result was murderous (cf. Gen. 4:8). While mankind could know good, they mostly preferred evil. "When Yahweh saw how great was man's wickedness on earth, and how every scheme that his mind devised was nothing but evil all the time, Yahweh regretted that he had made man on earth, and there was sorrow in his heart.... The earth was corrupt in the view of God, and it was full of lawlessness" (Gen. 6:5-6, 11, The Anchor Bible).

The Hebrew word that the Anchor Bible translates as "lawlessness" is also translated by Strong's Exhaustive Concordance of the Bible as "violence, violent, cruelty, wrong, false, cruel, damage, injustice, oppressor, unrighteous." Would any of these descriptions apply to "adaptive" traditions like "cannibalism, torture, infanticide, feuding, witchcraft... female genital mutilation, ceremonial rape, headhunting"?

Jesus Christ also had His run-ins with those who preferred to live by their "adaptive" traditions rather than obey and live by every Word of God (cf. Matt. 4:4). In one such conflict, He and His students were accused of not following certain traditions. Jesus responded, "Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: `This people honors Me with their lips, but their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.' For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men.... All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition" (Mark 7:6-9).

For many individuals and nations it is going to come as a horrible shock to learn that the God who devised the original, genuine Judeo-Christian ethic is prophesied to one day enforce it as a universal ethical standard for all humanity. "And the LORD will become king over all the earth; on that day the LORD will be one and his name one" (Zech. 14:9 NRSV). "Thus says the LORD; heaven is my throne and the earth is my footstool... All these things my hand has made and so all these things are mine, says the LORD" (Is. 66:1-2 NRSV).

But God says of those who push cultural relativism: "These have chosen their own ways, and in their abominations they take delight; I also will choose to mock them, and bring upon them what they fear; because, when I called, no one answered, when I spoke, they did not listen; but they did what was evil in my sight, and chose what did not please me" (vv. 3-4 NRSV).

To properly instill a knowledge and remembrance of His universal ethics, God is going to revive ancient, abandoned practices. "From new moon to new moon, and from sabbath to sabbath, all flesh shall come to worship before me, says the LORD" (v. 23 NRSV).

"Then all who survive of the nations... shall go up year after year to worship the King, the LORD of hosts, and to keep the festival of booths [or tabernacles]. If any of the families of the earth do not go up to Jerusalem to worship... there will be no rain upon them. And if the family of Egypt do not go up and present themselves, then on them shall come the plague that the LORD inflicts on the nations that do not go up to keep the festival of booths. Such shall be the punishment of Egypt and the punishment of all the nations that do not go up to keep the festival of booths" (Zech. 14:16-19 NRSV).

All traditions and cultural practices are NOT, relatively, of equal value. This is not to say that all societies need be Eurocentric, to use the academic jargon. But all cultures and societies MUST be THEOcentric—GOD-centered!

Top of Page     Bottom of Page

by Douglas S. Winnail, Ph.D., M.P.H.

Perhaps you have been too busy to notice, but the concern about our global food supply is real! Major news magazines are reporting that "after a quiet few decades, talk of a world food crisis is again in the air" (The Economist, Nov. 25, 1995, p. 41). Government leaders, economists and scientists are seriously pondering such sobering questions as: "Does the world face a global shortage?" and "Will the world starve?" There is a growing sense of urgency.

In November 1996 the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) will convene a World Food Security Summit in Rome. The conference was called due to growing concerns that shrinking world food reserves, rising prices and the declining production of food grains could be the precursors of "an imminent food security crisis" (USDA, Agricultural Outlook, Apr. 1996, p. 14). Dr. Jacques Diouf, the FAO Director-General, has stated, "The very survival of humanity depends on world food security" (International Agricultural Development, Mar.-Apr. 1996, p. 3).

Just what does the future hold for humanity? Will there be enough food to go around? What does a look at all the evidence indicate? And how will this issue affect your life in the months and years ahead?

How Long Before the Cupboard Is Bare?

Numerous sources document that "global supplies of rice, wheat, corn and other key commodities have dwindled to their lowest levels in years" (Business Week, Feb. 12, 1996, p. 37—see chart). The U.N. "recently warned that food stocks stand far below the minimum needed" to provide for world food security (p. 37). A report presented recently to the U.S. Congress pointedly asserts, "The world's grain harvest has not increased in any of the last five years, and since 1992 world grain consumption has exceeded production... this year—for the first time since World War II—there are basically no surplus stocks in government-owned reserves. The tight supplies have led to steep price increases for wheat, rice, and corn" (Congressional Record, Nov. 15, 1995). Grain stockpiles have "fallen particularly fast in the U.S. and the European Union" as a result of agricultural reforms that have focused on reducing overproduction and selling off surpluses—primarily to China—to gain revenue from exports (The Economist, p. 41). Bad weather and a string of poor harvests in grain-producing areas of the world have also contributed to the dwindling reserves.

A Crisis Ahead?

Opinions are sharply divided over what the future may hold. Lester Brown, president of Worldwatch Institute based in Washington, D.C., opined, "The world's food economy may be shifting from a long-accustomed period of overall abundance to one of scarcity" and that "Food scarcity will be the defining issue in the future" (The Economist; Christian Science Monitor, Apr. 3, 1996). Brown has also written, "The lack of growth of the world grain harvest since 1990 coupled with the continuing growth in world population and the increased likelihood of crop-damaging heat waves in the years ahead at least carries the potential of severe food shortages" (State of the World, 1996, pp. 17-18). U.N. sources suggest that with grain stocks dangerously low serious food shortages could result if there are major crop failures in 1996 (International Agricultural Development, July-Aug. 1995, p. 3).

These pessimistic predictions for the future are countered by voices claiming to be more rational and optimistic. They argue that present shortages in food reserves are merely a temporary blip on the food charts and that relief will probably come with this year's harvest. The optimists believe returning idled land to production will assure enough food for growing populations. They also have faith that biotechnology will develop new varieties of plants, boosting production. Julian Simon, a business professor at the University of Maryland, downplays doomsayers and the fears of famine. In Simon's opinion, "For some 25 years they have been wrong, and they have not changed their minds. Why should they be believed?" (Insight, Apr. 1-8, 1996, pp. 17-18). From Simon's perspective the record of history is progress, and life has never been better.

Who should you believe? Is there really an impending global food crisis? Has anything changed in 25 years since the doomsayers began sounding the alarm? Are there reasons for concern?

Population Pressures Increase

A prime concern is that, in spite of falling grain reserves and the leveling off of production, worldwide grain consumption continues to grow. This increase is driven by two factors: growing populations and improving lifestyles. Both are placing increasing strains on world food supplies.

Since 1950 world population has more than doubled—surging from about 2.5 billion to more than 5.8 billion people. Globally, "it continues to grow (by any historical benchmark) with extraordinary speed" (The True State of the Planet, 1995, p. 10). As populations grow, "demand is certainly rising fast. Every year there are 90 million more mouths to feed in developing countries. As consumers become richer, they develop a taste for meat, and it takes a lot of grain to fatten livestock" (The Economist, p. 41 ). The basic question is: Will we be able to feed 90 million more people each year when grain production seems to be leveling off? Keep in mind this is in "addition to the biblical scale of hunger that exists already" (p. 41 ). About 800 million people in poorer countries are chronically undernourished right now!

Shifts to Dependency

Another worrisome trend is described by Stanford University biologists Paul and Anne Ehrlich. Fifty years ago "most regions of the world were self-sufficient in food production, and many exported grain. Since then, for various reasons, the pattern has dramatically changed; more than 100 nations now import grain from the United States, Canada, Western Europe, Australia and a few other surplus producers.... Nearly all developing nations have become dependent on grain imports to keep their populations adequately fed.... This growing worldwide dependency on a mere handful of suppliers for basic foodstuffs could itself spell trouble for global food security" (Healing the Planet, 1991, pp. 195-196).

This shift to dependency has ominous implications for the future. As nations industrialize, people move from rural farms and villages to the cities, leaving fewer laborers to produce food. Agricultural skills are lost and more people become dependent on distant food supplies. Prime agricultural land is permanently lost to urban development, reducing the acreage available to grow food. In just two years, "China turned from exporting grain to Japan [8 million tons] into the world's second largest grain importer [16 million tons]" (World Press Review Mar. 1996, p. 38; cf. State of the World, 1996, p. 38). Some are concerned that, if this ominous trend is not reversed, "China would need to import virtually all the grain available for export in the world" (World Press Review p. 38)!

Technology—a Played-Out Savior?

Optimists are quick to point out that a major reason why pessimists were wrong in their predictions for widespread famine in the 1960s was their failure to anticipate the arrival of the "green revolution" with its new strains of high-yield seeds, chemical pesticides, increased use of fertilizers and improved irrigation. These four factors kept grain production ahead of the doubling population. The predicted worldwide famine did not materialize. But were the doomsayers wrong—or only premature?

Paul and Anne Ehrlich, among others, suggest that "yield increases from green-revolution technology may now be playing out" (Healing the Planet, p. 197). Worldwide fertilizer use, which increased over 1,000 percent during the green revolution years, has been declining for several years in a row (Vital Signs, p. 40). Insects are developing resistance to pesticides. Underground aquifers used for irrigation are being depleted (State of the World, 1996, p. 9).

While plant scientists talk of continuing to boost grain production through biotechnology, the Ehrlichs—both biologists—suggest, "No promising new technology appears on the horizon that could carry the process [green-revolution technology] further on a global scale" (Healing the Planet, p. 201 ). From their perspective, "a big jump in agricultural productivity resulting from advances in biotechnology during the critical few decades just ahead is not foreseen" (p. 202).

With the green revolution apparently running out of gas, numerous observers are warning that the globe is on the brink of a new era of food scarcity. In fact, the growing dependency on bioengineered crop varieties may contain the seeds of our own destruction.

Fragile Food Chain

Today our food supply depends upon a few hybridized varieties of a very limited selection of plant species—primarily wheat, corn, rice and potatoes. These plants are genetically bred for uniform qualities of color, size and texture while other traits are eliminated. What many do not realize is that "reducing the genetic base in this way may boost efficiency, but it also increases the risk that one type of pest will infest a whole harvest" (The Economist, Apr. 20, 1996, p. 72). When entire fields or regions are planted with just one hybrid variety of a single crop—such as Russet Burbank potatoes that McDonald's prefers to make french fries with—you have a potential disaster waiting to happen. It has happened before!

The Great Irish Potato Famine in the late 1840s developed during a series of wet growing seasons when a fungus from Europe spread through many fields planted with a single variety of potato. The collapse of this crop was catastrophic. Over a million Irish died and millions more emigrated to escape the horrible conditions spawned by a "sinister trend toward monoculture," oppressive political decisions and unusual weather (Natural History, Jan. 1996, pp. 24-35). Now a new strain of this same fungus has reappeared in the 1990s and is "sweeping through potato fields in much of Europe and North America and parts of South America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East" (p. 31 ). The aggressive new strain is resistant to commonly used pesticides and has been called "one of the worst crises to ever strike the U.S. potato industry." It has the potential of causing serious problems to our food supply if wet weather develops (cf. USDA, Annual Crop Summary, Jan. 1996, p. B-15).

However, the potato blight is only one part of a very disturbing picture. Karnal bunt fungus has turned the 1996 durum wheat harvest in the southwestern U.S. into a nightmare. A soybean fungus, for which there is no known treatment, has appeared in Hawaii (Farm Journal, May-June 1996, pp. 26-27). Reports are also surfacing that "genetically engineered plants designed to withstand herbicides can pass those new genes to nearby weeds" (Los Angeles Times, Mar. 7, 1996). The European Union recently refused to approve the sale of a genetically engineered variety of corn, fearing the genes for antibiotic resistance might be passed on to cattle and humans (New Scientist, July 6, 1996, p. 8).

The impressive methods of modern grain production rest on a very narrow and fragile genetic base. Our future harvests could be likened to delicately balanced houses of cards—highly susceptible to sudden changes. However, there is one more unpredictable factor that is capable of dramatically affecting the size and quality of global food supplies.

Weather—a Wild Card!

What is seldom stated is that optimistic forecasts for increasing grain production are based on "critical long-term assumptions" that include "normal [average] weather" (USDA, Agricultural Outlook, Apr. 1996, p. 5). Yet in recent years this has definitely not been the case. Severe and unusual weather conditions have suddenly appeared around the globe. Some of the worst droughts, heat waves, heavy rains and flooding on record have reduced harvests in China, Spain, Australia, South Africa, the United States and Canada—major grain growing regions of the world—by 40 to 50 percent (Time, June 10, 1996, pp. 44-50). As a result grain prices are the highest on record. Worldwatch Institute's president, Lester Brown, writes, "No other economic indicator is more politically sensitive than rising food prices.... Food prices spiraling out of control could trigger not only economic instability but widespread political upheavals"—even wars (State of the World, 1996, p. 18).

The chaotic weather conditions we have been experiencing appear to be related to global warming caused by the release of pollutants into the earth's atmosphere. A recent article entitled "Heading for Apocalypse?" suggests the effects of global warming—and its side effects of increasingly severe droughts, floods and storms—could be catastrophic, especially for agriculture (Time, Oct. 2, 1995, pp. 54-55). The unpredictable shifts in temperature and rainfall will pose an "increased risk of hunger and famine" for many of the world's poor, according to Robert Watson of the Global Climate Commission.

With world food stores dwindling, grain production leveling off and a string of bad harvests around the world, the next couple of years will be critical. Agricultural experts suggest "it will take two bumper crops in a row to bring supplies back up to normal" (Business Week, Apr. 22, 1996, p. 36). However, poor harvests in 1996 and 1997 could create severe food shortages and push millions over the edge.

Is it possible we are only one or two harvests away from a global disaster? Is there any significance to what is happening today? Where is it all leading? What does the future hold?

Famine Prophesied

Although most articles on food shortages stop at this point, there is another critical category of evidence that needs to be considered to see the subject in its total perspective. This information, usually overlooked or ignored by both optimists and pessimists alike, is found in Bible prophecy. The Scriptures contain information inspired and preserved by Almighty God, who informs and warns mankind about critical turning points in human history. Prophetic Bible passages warn of a coming global food scarcity that is truly sobering.

The focal point of much of Bible prophecy is the return of Jesus Christ to this earth. While it is commonly assumed that no one knows when Christ will return—maybe tonight, maybe in 500 years—the Bible is not so vague.

Jesus was asked by his disciples, "What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the age?" He responded by urging them to watch for a specific series of events. Those events are outlined in whole chapters in the New Testament (Luke 21; Mark 13; Matt. 24). In three gospels we read of an escalating series of four major events—activities of false prophets, wars, famine and disease epidemics—that will dominate world headlines just before Christ's return.

These same events are pictured by the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse described in Revelation 6. They are described by Jesus as "the beginning of sorrows" (Matt. 24:7-8). God compares them to the labor pains a woman experiences before the actual birth of a child (cf. Jer. 30:6). The clear implication is that things will get worse before they get better. Revelation 6:8 indicates that wars, famine and disease will affect the lives of billions of people!

Although famines have occurred at various times in the past, the famines Jesus spoke of will happen during a time of unprecedented global stress—times that have no parallel in recorded history—at a time when the total destruction of humanity would be possible! Notice Christ's words in Matthew 24:21-22. "For then there will be great tribulation, such as has not been since the beginning of the world until this time, no, nor ever shall be. And unless those days were shortened, no flesh would be saved; but for the elect's sake those days will be shortened."

Is it merely a coincidence that we are seeing a growing menace of famine on a global scale at a time when the world is facing the threat of a nuclear holocaust, a resurgence of new and old epidemic diseases, and the demands of an exploding population? These are pushing the world's resources to its limits! The world has never before faced such an ominous series of potential global crises at the same time!

However, droughts and shrinking grain stores are not the only threats to world food supplies. According to the U.N.'s studies, "all 17 major fishing areas in the world have either reached or exceeded their natural limits. In fact, nine of these areas are in serious decline" (Vital Signs, 1994, p. 32).

As Lester Brown comments, "The realization that we may be facing a shortage of food from both oceanic and land-based sources is a troubling one" (State of the World, 1996, p. 16). It's troubling because seafood—the world's leading source of animal protein—could be depleted quite rapidly. In the early 1970s, "the Peruvian anchovy catch—the largest in the world—collapsed from 12 million tons to 2 million in just three years" from overfishing (p. 16). If this happens on a global scale we will be in deep trouble. This precarious situation is also without historical precedent!

Some wonder: Why would God let such terrible things happen? God’s overall purpose for mankind is that we learn certain lessons and come to see how important it is to follow the instructions He has revealed in His Word. In Leviticus 26 and Deuteronomy 28, we read that if we obey God’s instructions our blessings will include agricultural abundance. However, if we insist on going our own way—violating the laws God has designed to govern this planet—we will reap the consequences.

Moses wrote, “If you do not obey the voice of the LORD… cursed shall by your basket and your kneading bowl…. Your heavens which are over your head shall be bronze, and the earth which is under you shall be iron…. A nation whom you have not known shall eat the fruit of your land and the produce of your labor…. You shall carry much seed out to the field and gather but little in, for the locust shall consume it” (Deut. 28:15, 17, 23, 33, 38). Hosea adds, “Even the fish of the sea will be taken away” (Hosea 4:3). These escalating conditions will result in famine and even cannibalism (Lev. 26:26-29).

The Scriptures teach that God intends His servants to warn humanity of the significance of approaching world calamities (Amos 3:7). Some, however, will not find such a biblical warning to their liking. Jeremiah calls such people false prophets—those who speak “lies in My name…. [They] say, ‘Sword and famine shall not be in this land’—‘By sword and famine those prophets shall be consumed’” (Jer. 14:14-15).

Unprecedented events are facing mankind. The threat of famine looms on the horizon. Are Bible prophecies being fulfilled? Time will tell. Nevertheless, the Bible admonishes us to watch and be ready (Matt. 24:42-44).

Top of Page     Bottom of Page

by Raymond F. McNair

While touring the Golan Heights a few days after the Six-Day War in June 1967, my Israeli guide warned us to beware of Syrian mines that Israel hadn't yet destroyed in the wake of its stunning victory. Today, many Israelis feel as though they are walking through a different kind of deadly minefield in pursuit of lasting peace in the Middle East!

Recently, Israeli leaders granted Palestinian Arabs on the West Bank a certain measure of local "self rule." But, since becoming prime minister of Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu has said categorically that there will be no Palestinian State on the West Bank—and that Jerusalem will not again become a divided city!

While outlining the aims of his government to the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) on June 18, Netanyahu emphasized, "We will guard and strengthen Jerusalem, the eternal capital of the Jewish people, undivided under the sovereignty of the State of Israel."

Previous articles in The World Ahead have highlighted two of the major problems confronting world leaders in their search for a peaceful solution to today's Mideast impasse—ancient racial enmity and a question of political control over Palestine.

Today's Arabs and Jews are the descendants of two different sons of the Patriarch Abraham. The Arabs' lineage is partially through Abraham's son Ishmael, whereas the Jews trace their ancestry through Isaac, the younger son.

There has been ethnic hatred and bloodshed between the two "family" groups through the centuries. In 636 A.D. "the Arabs burst into the land—after having destroyed the large and prosperous Jewish populations of the Arabian Peninsula root and branch. The rule of the Byzantines [the eastern Roman Empire] had been harsh for the Jews, but it was under the Arabs that the Jews were finally reduced to an insignificant minority and ceased to be a national force of any consequence in their own land.

"The Jews initially vested their hopes in the `ISHMAELITE CONQUERORS,' as they were known in contemporary sources, but within a few years these hopes were dashed as Arab policy became clear. Unlike previous conquerors, the Arabs poured in a steady stream of colonists. . . [and] finally succeeded in doing what the might of Rome had not achieved: the uprooting of the Jewish farmer from his soil. Thus it was not the Jews who usurped the land from the Arabs, but the Arabs who usurped the land from the Jews" (Netanyahu, A Place Among the Nations, p. 25).

Except for a 192-year period of rule under the Crusaders (1099-1291 A.D.), the Muslims ruled Palestine from 636 until 1917, when Britain's General Allenby conquered Jerusalem and subsequently brought all of Palestine under British rule.

Can divergent Jewish and Arab claims to Palestine ever be reconciled? According to President Carter, "the basic cause of continuing bloodshed in the region is the struggle for land" (The Blood of Abraham, p. 10).

To whom did Britain promise the land of Palestine following the Great War? "Allied politicians meanwhile, had promised Palestine to: [ 1 ] France; [2] to the Arabs under Husein Ibn-Ali; and [3], in the Balfour Declaration of 1917, to the Jewish. people for a '' national home" (Collier's Encyclopedia, vol.15, p. 389). Inevitably, this led to irreconcilable Jewish and Arab claims!

Claims of the Palestinian Arab's

Palestinian Arabs believe they should possess and politically control Palestine—including all the territory of the modern states of Israel and Jordan. Arab claims to Palestine are based primarily on the fact (freely admitted by the Israelis) that Arabs have been a majority of the inhabitants of this land since the Romans expelled most of the Jews from Palestine in the first and second centuries A.D.

"The Arabs claimed the right to be the sole rulers of Palestine by virtue of Mohammed's conquest of that country in the seventh century and by virtue of constituting a majority of the population at the end of World War I" (Max I. Dimont, Jews, God and History, p. 416). Furthermore, "the Arabs could not see any valid reason why they should give up their national patrimony" (Encyclopedia Americana, "Palestine," 1960)!

Moreover, Arabs claim that Britain's promises to them included all of Palestine, and were made before Britain promised this same land to the Jews in the Balfour Declaration. The Arabs claim that "the world's leaders [at the end of WW I] . . . erred in believing that they were `giving a people without a land [the Jews] a land without a people [Palestine]'” (Netanyahu, p. 17).

PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat claims that when the Jews wrested Palestine from the Arabs—who were then a majority—Arabs had lived in that verdant land since their conquest of the Jews in the seventh century A.D. "The Jewish invasion [by immigration] began in [ 1882] . . .. Palestine was then a verdant area, inhabited mainly by an Arab people in the course of building its life and dynamically enriching its indigenous culture" (Address to the U.N. General Assembly, Nov. 13, 1974).

Israeli Counterclaims

The Israelis, however, claim that Palestine was anything but a "verdant area" when Jewish immigrants began arriving there in 1882. To prove their point, Israelis often quote famous writers who toured this land during the late 1800s.

Mark Twain visited in 1867 and recounted his experiences in The Innocents Abroad. He says, "Palestine sits in sackcloth and ashes. Over it broods the spell of a curse that has withered its fields and fettered its energies.... Palestine is desolate and unlovely.... It is a hopeless, dreary, heartbroken land.”

The Jews assert that only after the Holy Land became invigorated by the industry and expertise of many thousands of Jewish immigrants did it begin to blossom and hum with activity! Benjamin Netanyahu writes, "In the twelve centuries of the Arab presence in Palestine before the return of the Jews in modern times, the Arabs built only a single new town—Ramleh" (p. 44).

By stark contrast, he adds, "Beginning with the first wave of Zionist immigration in 1882 and continuing through successive waves before and after WW I, the country was rapidly transformed. The Jews built roads, towns, farms, hospitals, factories, and schools. And as Jewish immigration increased their numbers, it also caused a rapid increase in the Arab population. Many of the Arabs immigrated into the land in response to the job opportunities and the better life afforded by the growing economy the Jews had created" (p. 36).

World Book Encyclopedia confirms this. "The long series of conquests and increasing neglect [by the Muslims, 636-1917] turned Palestine into almost a wasteland. Cities crumbled, and swamps formed over rich soil. The population was mostly Arabs. There was also a small number of Jews. All of them were miserably poor. In 1882 the first group of Jews from Europe came to settle in Palestine. That was the start of the Zionist pioneering movement that led to the creation of the State of Israel [in May 1948]" (vol. 15, 1972, p. 86).

Netanyahu says that when modern Jewish immigrants arrived in Palestine, "they joined the Jews of Hebron, Safed, or Jerusalem who down [through] the ages had kept an uninterrupted vigil over a ruined land. As a consequence, there was no period during which the land was devoid of Jews. (In the villages of Peki'in and Shefar'am in the Galilee, Jews have lived continuously from ancient times until the present.)" (p. 33).

The Israelis believe God gave Palestine to them—not to their Arabic cousins, nor to any other descendants of Abraham. "Jews consider the covenants made by God with Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and Moses [granting ultimate possession of Palestine] to apply exclusively to them" (Carter, p. 8).

They think it only right that they continue to occupy, and politically rule, all the land that is now under their control. These conflicting claims to the land of Palestine constitute the main source of tension between these blood relatives. And this conflict has been a perpetual thorn in the side of those nations that try to mediate the Middle East dispute of who will control Jerusalem and all of Palestine (cf. Zech. 12:1-3).

"The Jews claimed the right to Palestine by virtue of their conquest of that country in the twelfth century B.C., and by virtue of having been a majority in that country far longer than the Arabs" (Dimont, p. 416).

The Israeli claim to Palestine is partly based on the simple fact that it has been the homeland of the Jews from around 1400-1200 B.C.—long before the Arab conquerors took over Palestine in the seventh century A.D. They claim that, though most of the Jews were either slaughtered or taken into slavery by the Romans (66-135 A.D.), nonetheless a remnant has lived continuously in Palestine for thousands of years!

Modern Roots of Conflict

What ignited the endemic hatred, violence and bloodshed between Arabs and Jews during this 20th century? Why such bitter enmity between these Semitic cousins who, in the words of Jimmy Carter, share the "blood of Abraham"?

Despite their turbulent history, modern Jews and Arabs lived in comparative peace in the Holy Land until the early 1920s. As long as Jews were an insignificant minority among the Arab population of Palestine there was no problem. But when the stream of Jewish immigrants reached flood tide, the Arabs began to be alarmed. "As early as 1855 an estate was purchased near Jaffa for Jewish settlement, and from that time onwards Jewish immigration, mainly from Russia and Rumania, increased steadily... the Jewish population of Palestine had increased by 1914 to nearly 100,000" (Chambers' Encyclopaedia, vol. 10, p. 369). Today, there are about 4.3 million Jews living in the land.

How did Britain become embroiled in this vexing Jewish-Arab Palestinian controversy? Many Americans and Britons don't know that God's prophecies had predicted they would be "vexed" by the Jews—and would be "caught in the middle" between the Jews and Arabs, unable to please either side.

But to understand the biblical prophecies concerning this thorny problem, you must first know that, according to the Bible and secular history, many of the British peoples are descendants of an Israelite patriarch, Ephraim. Bible prophecy says the time is coming when "Ephraim [Britain] shall not envy Judah, and Judah shall not vex Ephraim" (Is. 11:13 KJV). (For more on this topic, please write for our free brochure, America and Britain in Prophecy )

A Promise to the Arabs

How did Britain become enmeshed in the Jewish-Arab struggle for control of Palestine? During WW I, Britain wanted to bring both the Arabs and Jews into the Allied cause against the Central Powers (Germany, Austria, Turkey). In order to win both Arabs and Jews to her side, Britain made numerous promises, which later proved to be both contradictory and impossible to fulfill.

To secure Arab support in 1915-1916, Britain promised them a large Arab state, which some Arabs took to mean all the Arab lands (except British-occupied Aden) in the Arabian Peninsula—from Egypt to the Persian Gulf. This supposedly included Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Arabia, Jordan—and Palestine!

"During WW I, Jews and Arabs outside Palestine collaborated with the Allies and bid for a postwar place in Palestine when it should be liberated from the Turks. Various and conflicting commitments were made with respect to Syria and Palestine. In the first place, Great Britain gave through Sir Henry McMahon, the high commissioner for Egypt and the Sudan, a pledge of Independence (Aug. 30, 1915) to Sherif Husein Ibn-Ali of Mecca.... Neither Palestine nor Jerusalem was mentioned by name or specifically excluded. The Arabs therefore came to believe that all of Palestine was to be included in the pledge; whereas the British maintained (when the mandate was eventually established) that only... Transjordan [modern Jordan] had been included" (Encyclopedia Americana, 1960, vol. 21, p. 201 ). However, Britain said she did not include the West Bank (modern Israel) in her promise to the Arabs!

Britain's Prime Minister Lloyd George was outraged by later Arab accusations that the Treaty of Versailles, which granted Britain a mandate over Palestine in 1922, had treated the Arabs unfairly: "No race has done better out of the fidelity with which the Allies redeemed their promises to the oppressed races than the Arabs .... [in particular] the Palestinian Arabs" (Jamahiriya News Agency of Libya, Apr. 19, 1989).

South African Field Marshal and Prime Minister Jan Smuts, who served in Britain's War Cabinet in World War I, explained the views of the British Cabinet, which favored a national home for the Jews in Palestine: "It was naturally assumed that large-scale immigration of Jews into their historic homeland could not and would not be looked upon as a hostile gesture to the highly favoured Arab people... [who] largely as a result of British action, came better out of the Great War than any other people" (Abu Iyad on Radio Monte Carlo, Mar. 4, 1989).

Clearly, Britain's Balfour Declaration promises to the Jews have been a source of deep Arab hostility toward Britain since 1917. The Arabs have felt this to be a breach of the promise Britain made to them! But, since WW II, America has inherited most of that Arab hostility—because it has continued to champion the cause of a secure national home for the Jews in Palestine.

A Promise to the Jews

Near the end of WW I, Britain issued the Balfour Declaration, which promised a Jewish State in Palestine. The Balfour Declaration was, in fact, a letter written on November 2, 1917, by Britain's Foreign Secretary, Arthur Balfour, and was addressed to Lord Rothchild, a prominent Jewish financier and supporter of Zionism. Balfour wrote, "His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of the existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine."

Lord Balfour's assistant foreign secretary, Lord Robert Cecil, clearly laid out Britain's policy when the official Declaration was made in 1917: "Our wish is that Arabian countries shall be for the Arabs, Armenia for the Armenians, Judea for the Jews."

The Jews immediately interpreted the Balfour Declaration as a firm promise by Britain to assist them in establishing a sovereign Jewish state in Palestine. Following WW I, the victorious Allies met in San Remo, Italy, in April 1920, and hammered out an agreement under the auspices of the League of Nations. "At the San Remo Conference in 1920, the Balfour Declaration was ratified by the Allied Powers. Prime Minister Lloyd George sent Chaim Weizmann [Israel's future president] on his way with the words: `Now you have your State. It is up to you to win the race!' Two years later the Balfour Declaration was embodied in a Mandate of the League of Nations entrusting Britain with the government of the country" (Abba Eban, My Country, pp. 30-31).

"The Authors of the Balfour Declaration and the Mandate envisaged that an autonomous, distinctive Jewish society would evolve until it was strong enough to establish an independent government.... The British Royal Commission in 1937, having examined the documents, stated clearly that the plan was for the Mandate to be succeeded by Jewish statehood, and if the Arabs `secured their Big Arab State outside Palestine, they would concede little Palestine to the Jews'” (p. 32). And at Versailles, American, French and British leaders were sympathetic to the idea of a national home for the Jews in Palestine—though the precise geographical limits were always vague!

Winston Churchill particularly favored creation of a Jewish State in Palestine. "Churchill took office as a man of outspoken sympathy for Zionism. In February 1920, he sent chills down the spines of government Arabists [in London] by telling the Sunday Herald that he envisioned `a Jewish State by the banks of the Jordan... which might comprise three or four million Jews'” (Netanyahu, p. 60).

In 1921 Winston Churchill eloquently reaffirmed his staunch belief in the concept of Jewish statehood in Palestine: "It is manifestly right that the scattered Jews should have a national centre and a national home to be reunited, and where else but in Palestine, with which for three thousand years they have been intimately and profoundly associated? We think it will be good for the world, good for the Jews, good for the British Empire, but also good for the Arabs who dwell in Palestine.. . [because] they shall share in the benefits and progress of Zionism" (p. 48).

However, Churchill's memorandum of 1922 says that the creation of a "wholly Jewish Palestine" was never contemplated by Britain. In other words, British officialdom explained that the East Bank (Jordan) was never promised to the Jews!

And yet, according to Netanyahu and many other prominent political leaders, Transjordan was also originally included in Britain's promise of a Jewish state. The Jews know that both the East and West banks of Palestine were included in their ancient ancestral home—the Promised Land!

In May 1921 Anti-Zionist Arab riots resulted in 46 Jews being killed and 146 wounded. "Impressed by Arab opposition, the British government issued in a white paper in June 1922 an interpretation of its concept of the Jewish national home. The intention was not that Palestine as a whole [including Transjordan] should be converted into a Jewish national home, but that such a home should be established in Palestine.... In September 1922 Trans-Jordan, although included in the British Mandate of Palestine, was excluded from the scope of the Balfour Declaration under protest from the Zionists, and on September 29, 1923, the Mandate came officially into force" (Encyclopaedia Britannica, "Palestine," 1970).

And so we have seen that the ancient roots of conflict over control of Palestine—competing claims by different blood-related "families"—has a modern parallel. Britain, which administered this territory after WW I, made contradictory promises to both the Jews and Palestinian Arabs. These ill-advised promises rekindled nationalist rivalry in both these peoples, leading to much hatred and bloodshed!

The next installment in this series on the Middle East will examine how Britain broke these promises and the ensuing bitterness and turmoil that has led to the current Mideast minefield.

Top of Page     Bottom of Page

Many children’s books, in an effort to teach the value of spoken honesty, tell the folk tale about a boyhood misdeed of America’s first president, George Washington. When confronted by his father, young George admitted, “I cannot tell a lie; I chopped down the cherry tree.” For generations the story of George and the cherry tree was recounted to young minds. Perhaps its wide circulation demonstrates the value that most free peoples have traditionally placed on honesty and integrity.

Nevertheless, lying has become pervasive in our modern society and is now more sophisticated than ever. Spin-doctors and slick advertising fool millions. Today the Internet provides rapid, global distribution of cyberspace lies. Gossips never had it so good!

Of course exaggeration and distortion are not new phenomena. In 1959, American author Norman Mailer wrote, “Each day a few more lies eat into the seed with which we are born, little institutional lies from the print of newspapers, the shock waves of television, and the sentimental cheats of the movie screen” (Advertisements for Myself).

But today the level and magnitude of lying has increased dramatically. “The press has caught Mad Lie disease, marked by a loss of appetite for the truth and projectile regurgitation of anything fed to it” (Time, July 15, 1996, p. 12). Too often the news media slants or covers up vital information to push a particular political or social agenda. “When it was revealed in April 1992 that Clinton had lied everywhere he went on the campaign trail by claiming he never received a draft-induction notice, each network buried the story in a sentence previewing the next day’s New York primary” (Insight, “Does Media Coverage of President Clinton Reveal a Liberal Bias?” July 22, 1996, p. 24).

But lying is not just a tool for the media or politicians. In our daily lives, it is all too easy to lie. The Washington Times quoted philosophy and legal studies professor Peter Wenz as saying, “Most of us are not tempted to do the worst kinds of things, like murder, but are tempted to do less serious things that we know are wrong… We tend to rationalize the behavior to make it seem right….

“When it comes to the truth…. Ninety-one percent of those surveyed say they fib regularly. One out of five say they can’t get through a single day without a premeditated white lie. Almost half—45 percent—say they don’t think lying is necessarily wrong. The better we know someone, the likelier we are to have told them a serious lie” (“Examining the (Un)ethical Behavior of Americans,” Mar. 4-10, 1996).

Yet statistics show that about half of Americans attend church services weekly. Doesn’t this religiosity have a moral impact? The same article reports, “in 1993, the [Josephson Institute of Ethics in California] surveyed more than 8,000 Americans… [and concluded that] the effect of church attendance on morals appears to be limited. The institute found no discernible correlation between ethical behavior and the frequency of attending religious services. Those who attended services 10 or more times in the year prior to the survey cheated, lied and generally engaged in other improper conduct as often as did those who attended less frequently or not at all.”

Shocking? Yes! And there is a price to be paid. Lying is dangerous business. “’One can’t know what’s going to befall you, once you engage in a lie,’ said ethicist Sissela Bok, author of the 1989 book Lying: Moral Choice in Public and Private Life (Random House). ‘In a way, you lose control. Maybe it’ll come back to haunt you, and maybe it won’t’” (San Diego Union Tribune, June 1, 1996).

And it’s difficult to keep up with lying. Often more lies have to be told to protect the first lie. And every lie has to fit the facts available to the person lied to. Then all the lies have to be remembered in every detail or else the liar risks being exposed for what he is. In 1808, Scottish poet Sir Walter Scott penned the now-famous words, “O, what a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive!” (Marmion, cant 6, stanza 17).

The Ninth Commandment

Enshrined in the Ten Commandments is a decree from God against lying. The ninth point states, “You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor” (Ex. 20:16; Deut. 5:20). Certainly, this means we are not to commit perjury by giving false testimony before a judicial body about someone else. But it includes much more. Leviticus 19:11 magnifies the ninth command by forbidding all forms of lying. “You shall not steal, nor deal falsely, nor lie to one another.”

This law protects every upright and decent person’s reputation against slander—despicable lies invented and disseminated to harm others. Exodus 23:1 says, “You shall not circulate a false report. Do not put your hand with the wicked to be an unrighteous witness.” A thief steals only material items. But a slanderer may rob a man of his reputation and esteem in the eyes of others. God says, “A man who bears false witness against his neighbor is like a club, a sword, and a sharp arrow” (Prov. 25:18). Indeed, God views character assassination as a form of murder!

One of the things the Almighty lists in His holy Word as something He really hates is “a false witness who speaks lies” (Prov. 6 :19). Deliberately spreading false rumors about someone or lying about him in formal testimony is a heinous violation of the law of God. False witnesses were employed at the blasphemy “trial” of Jesus Christ! “For many bore false witness against Him, but their testimonies did not agree” (Mark 14:56).

God wants us to always speak the truth. “He who speaks truth declares righteousness, but a false witness, deceit…. The truthful lip shall be established forever, but a lying tongue is but for a moment…. Lying lips are an abomination to the LORD, but those who deal truthfully are His delight” (Prov. 12:17, 19, 22). This doesn’t mean, however, that we must always tell everything we know to those who seek to hurt others. The next verse says, “A prudent man conceals knowledge, but the heart of fools proclaims foolishness.” We can be careful in how we present information. But what we say must be the truth!

It is only in seeking and bearing witness to the truth that a man can be associated with God—for God is Truth! The Bible calls Him the “God of truth” (Deut. 32:4). Jesus Christ, who is also God, proclaimed, “I am the way, the truth and the life” (John 14:6). King David of ancient Israel wrote in praise to God, “Your law is truth…. The entirety of Your word is truth” (Ps. 119:142, 151, 160). Jesus Christ also prayed to the Father, “Your word is truth” (John 17:17).

Yes, everything that proceeds from the mouth of God is absolute Truth. “God is not a man, that He should lie” (Num. 23:19). In the New Testament, we are told that “God… cannot lie” (Titus 1:2) and “it is impossible for God to lie” (Heb. 6:18). This is critically important. If you couldn’t rely on God’s Word, there could be no real assurance of forgiveness from past sins, of divine help in time of need or of future reward and eternal life.

Therefore, it is essential to approach God in truth. David explained, “The LORD is near to all who call upon Him, to all who call upon Him in truth” (Ps. 145:18). And Jesus said, “God is Spirit, and those who worship Him must worship in spirit and truth” (John 4:24). If one’s worship of God is not in Truth, then that person is not really worshipping Him. Anyone who lives by lies and deception will be rejected by the Most High God. One must live by the truth! No matter what other personal weaknesses a human being may have, if he is willing to speak the truth, live openly and honestly, and acknowledge the truth when it is presented to him, he can be respected and helped to overcome his faults.

Even though honest differences of opinion permeate human society, everyone must learn to live and speak truthfully. Church services should make a difference to those who attend—if that church is truly Christian! Why? Because, as the Apostle John clearly says, genuinely Christian churchgoers are to be “walking in truth, as we received commandment from the Father” (2 John 4).

Truth or Consequences

According to the Old Testament, “A false witness will not go unpunished, and he who speaks lies shall perish” (Prov. 19:9). Perish? We’ve already seen that, in some ways, God equates the bearing of false witness with murder. But would He proclaim the same sentence for it? Just how seriously does God view infractions of His ninth commandment?

Under the civil law code God gave ancient Israel, murder was punishable by death. Could such a penalty also have been imposed for lying? “If a false witness rises against any man to testify against him of wrongdoing, then both men in the controversy shall stand before the LORD, before the priests and the judges who serve in those days. And the judges shall make diligent inquiry, and indeed, if the witness is a false witness, who has testified falsely against his brother, then you shall do to him as he thought to have done to his brother: so you shall put away the evil person from among you. And those who remain shall hear and fear, and hereafter they shall not again commit such evil among you. Your eye shall not pity: life shall be for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot” (Deut. 19:16-21). So, in ancient Israel, if it was discovered that you falsely accused someone of a capital crime, you would be EXECUTED!

The final punishment for all sin is death (Rom. 6:23)—and lying is no exception. Truth will ultimately prevail. In the wonderful World Ahead, “Jerusalem shall be called the City of Truth” (Zech. 8:3). Lying will not be tolerated there. “But there shall by no means enter it anything that defiles, or causes an abomination or a lie, but only those who are written in the Lamb’s Book of Life” (Rev. 21:27). Who won’t make it into the New Jerusalem? “But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie” (Rev. 22:15). Where will they go? “But the cowardly, unbelieving, abominable, murderers, sexually immoral, sorcerers, idolaters, and ALL LIARS shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone, which is the second death” (Rev. 21:8). It should be plain to see that lying is serious business with God.

Again, those who seek God must always speak the truth. Yet our society is simply filled with lies! Nationally, we could well say to God, “For our transgressions are multiplied before You, and our sins testify against us…. In transgressing and lying against the LORD… conceiving and uttering from the heart words of falsehood. Justice is turned back, and righteousness stands afar off; for truth is fallen in the street, and equity cannot enter. So truth fails” (Is. 59:12-15). Too often today the world’s judicial systems render precious little justice for the average person. These institutions of justice might be better termed “injustice systems.”

Because of this, the God of Truth wants nothing to do with our nations right now. “Oh, that I had in the wilderness a lodging place for wayfaring men; that I might leave my people, and go from them! For they are all adulterers, an assembly of treacherous men. And like their bow they have bent their tongues for lies. They are not valiant for the truth on the earth. For they proceed from evil to evil, and they do not know Me…. Everyone take heed to his neighbor, and do not trust any brother; for every brother will utterly supplant, and every neighbor will walk with slanderers. Everyone will deceive his neighbor, and will not speak the truth; they have taught their tongue to speak lies…. Your habitation is in the midst of deceit; through deceit they refuse to know Me” (Jer. 9:2-6).

The Value of Truth

What is the result of lying? Blindness! The world is blind to the real nature of God and the plan He is working out here below. And where do these lies originate? With the father of lies—Satan the Devil! Jesus told those religious authorities who could not tolerate His Truth, “you are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it” (John 8:44).

Satan is the world’s most prolific liar. According to Revelation 12:9, he is presently deceiving the whole world. The very first lie he used on mankind is recorded in Genesis 3:4. He told Eve that she and Adam would not die from eating the forbidden fruit—after God had said that they would. What a reversal—the devil calling God a liar! Yet for the most part, the world has gullibly believed satan. As the “prince of the power of the air” (Eph. 2:2), he broadcasts his subtle, lying attitudes to a weak, selfish humanity. This combination of evil attitudes and weak human character has proven so incredibly corrupting that the Prophet Jeremiah observed, “The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked; who can know it?” (Jer. 17:9).

But no one has to remain this way. You can turn to Jesus Christ and change your life to become a new person. The old, deceitful character that all of us once lived with can be destroyed. The New Testament exhorts us, “Do not lie to one another, since you have put off the old man with his deeds” (Col. 3:9). According to the Apostle James, it is a Christian’s duty to root out personal inner corruptness. “But if you have bitter envy and self-seeking in your hearts, do not boast and lie against the truth” (James 3:14). Instead of lying, the Apostle Paul says that God’s spirit will help us to speak “the truth in love” (Eph. 4:15). He taught faithful believers, “Therefore, putting away lying, each one speak truth with his neighbor, for we are members of one another” (v. 25).

But it is not enough to merely speak the truth. We must also live the truth! In David’s psalm of repentance to God, he wrote, “Behold, You desire truth in the inward parts” (Ps. 51:6). In the hidden corners of our lives that others can’t see, we are to deal truthfully. Remember that God can always see. We must live in accordance with all of God’s commands to truthfully say we have a relationship with Him. “He who says, ‘I know Him,’ and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him” (1 John 2:4).

Imagine a world in which everyone told the truth! Every decent person’s reputation would be protected. Millions of wasted hours would be saved from the burden of investigating false reports. Unworthy men would never be placed in high positions of responsibility. Every company would tell the truth about its own products and honestly seek to serve consumer needs. Personal relationships among family members and neighbors would flourish where there is mutual trust. If applied to every phase of society, we would have a utopian civilization!

This is not a farfetched or unrealistic idea. It is simply the blessing that would result if our entire society truly obeyed the ninth commandment of the Creator God! Moreover, it is going to happen in the near future!

Jesus Christ is soon going to intervene in human affairs and set up His glorious Kingdom over all nations. In His kingdom—as we’ve seen—lying will not be tolerated. The entire earth will know God’s Truth—and will live by it. We can rely on this promise from the God of Truth. “And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free” (John 8:32).

Top of Page

WA Home Page

Magazine Home Page     Denver Home Page