Hanukkah, Part 1

April 3, 2025
Introduction

“Hanukkah” comes from the Hebrew term “hanukkat” meaning “dedication” or “rededication”.


There are four aspects of Hanukkah: The first is the “traditional” one, what most people are familiar with. However, the most important are the “historical”, the “messianic”, and the “eschatological” meanings.

  • The “historical” aspect of Hanukkah concerns what happened in the time of the Maccabees, about 160 years before Jesus. 
  • The “messianic” implication of Hanukkah is revealed in the tenth chapter of the Gospel of John when Jesus celebrated the Feast. 
  • The “eschatological” view observes how these things will be recapitulated or replayed in the Last Days, heralding the return of Christ.


So our main focus is on the historical – “what happened”; the messianic – “how it was fulfilled in Jesus”; and the eschatological – “what it will mean for His return”.

The Traditional Aspect

The Apostle Paul says to let no one be your judge in regard to a festival or new moon or a Sabbath (Col 2:16-17). A parallel passage is in Romans 14:4, “Who are you to judge the servant of another? One man esteems one day, one another, let each be convinced in his own mind.” The important thing is that these things be done unto the Lord or else not be done at all.

My main problem with the Christmas celebration is that it is not done unto the Lord. I would rather see it not done at all than done the way it is. We have no idea when Jesus was born. An educated guess might be during the Feast of Tabernacles, but nobody really knows. God didn’t tell us, didn’t see fit to tell us, and obviously it wasn’t that important. He just was.

However, Hanukkah is something different. There is both an historical and a biblical – that is, a New Testament – precedent, for the Feast of Hanukkah. However, most of what we associate with Hanukkah now in Jewish culture – in “Yiddish kiten” – and most of what many Christians who know about it (if they do know about it) comes from something that’s traditional.

Most of the traditions associated with Hanukkah originated not in the ancient world, but in the Middle Ages; even the words of the songs associated with the Feast. The most famous song, “Ma’oz tzur y’shuati” derives from the Hebrew of the Middle Ages, not biblical Hebrew or modern Hebrew. 

Hanukkah tradition says that the oil burned for eight days. There was enough oil in the lamp in the menorah in the temple for only one day, but it burned for eight. Again, there is no historical record of that in the book of 1 Macabees or 2 Macabees, and certainly nothing in Scripture; it was developed later. That is not to say it is not true. It may have happened, but it is never recorded in history. It was not mentioned by Josephus in Antiquities in a big way. People wonder how Josephus knew about it, but in his Antiquities much of what is focused on today was not his emphasis.

Hanukkah is the Jewish Feast of Light and the Jewish Feast of Miracles. The miracle was seen not in that the lamp burned eight days, but in that God gave them this incredible victory over this all-powerful enemy. And the light, of course, was when they rededicated the temple and they were able to light the menorah in the temple.

Normally, windows were built wide on the outside and then going narrow into the inside in order to focus light inside the building. But the shape of the temple where the menorah stood would be wide on the outside and then, to capture as much light as possible from the menorah, focused narrowly so it would shine out over what we call the “Millo” and go from the temple mount onto the City of David below. Hence the idea built into the architecture of the temple was that the light of Yahweh – the light of His Word – would come from the temple. The architecture of the temple illustrated that the Law would go forth from Zion and it would shine out. And so when the temple was rededicated this was the idea, that now we could re-illuminate the menorah.

Today you have things like traditional Hanukkah food. People eat jelly donuts called “sufganiot“. I don’t think they did that in ancient times. They ate “latkas”, potato pancakes, special kinds of knishes, if you like Jewish food.

And then, of course, there’s the “dreidel”: a Yiddish word based on the Hebrew word ” tsvivon”, “to spin” and there’s an acronym on it, “Nes, Gadol, Hya, Po” {A Great Miracle happened here.) They would spin the dreidel and children play the game with the dreidel, the top. What is popularly associated with Hanukkah has little to do with what actually transpired historically, and has little theological significance outside that which the rabbis attributed to it later on.

The Historical Aspect

Daniel is the only book of the Bible containing all three original languages: Aramaic (or Chaldee), Hebrew, and Greek. It has Greek words for certain things like musical instruments and so forth that would have been brought there by Macedonian mercenaries most likely.

The Rise and Fall of Assyria

When you read the book of Daniel, remember that the Last Days are like Daniel’s days. The Jews were terrified of Assyria. They were the bad guys, the ones that took the ten northern tribes into captivity. These were the cruelest and most powerful Pagans. Nobody imagined that Assyria would one day implode. Once it did, there was a false sense of peace that lasted a very short time. They were confronting Babylon and its meteoric rise, which was far worse than Assyria. And it had ancient roots (certainly spiritually) going back to the Tower of Babel.

The Rise and Fall of Media-Persia

Babylon went down the tubes overnight. And as Daniel prophesied, Media-Persia rose in its place. The Persians aligned with the Medes all the way until the late 20th Century during the rule of the Shah of Iran. Going back to Isaiah’s prophecies, the Persians (the Iranians) always favored the Jews even though it was an Islamic country, all the way until the fall of the Shah in the 1970’s. He claimed to be a descendant of the Peacock Throne of Cyrus the Great (“Kowresh”), who was prophesied about twice by Isaiah. (Isa 44:28; 45:1) And all the way until that time the Iranians favored the Jews. Their culture and languages were not Arabic, nor was the culture. They were “Zoroastrian,” monotheists who traced their monotheism in part back to Zoroastor, but were influenced by the Jews.

The Magi were Media chaplains to the kings of Media-Persia. That was the origin of the Magi. And because of the monotheistic influences they had from Zoroastor and from the Jews in the captivity (who influenced Nebuchadnezzar), they journeyed to see Jesus. You always had this link with the Persians and the Jews that lasts until the Last Days.

The Socratic Greeks in the West had the most light about monotheism, but in the East it was the Zoroastrians who had the most light about monotheism The Socratic Greeks were in the West much later, but the Persians – Zoroastrian Persians – had the most light.

The Rise and Fall of Greece

But the Persian Empire did not last long due to the conqueror Alexander the Great. But then Alexander the Great did not last long. He reached the desert of Belushistan, conquered most of the known world, and then at the age of 36 he got sick and died. His empire fragmented and was divided between four of his generals. The two most important of these were Seleucus, who got Syria, Lebanon, Galilee, and central Israel – and Ptolemais, who got Egypt and southern Israel. They are the two most important of the four, historically, but also in the Bible.

The Seleucids were Syro-Phoenician Greeks, Greeks who lived in that area of Phoenicia – of Lebanon and around Alippo in Syria – down to the area of Tyre and Sidon. Luke the apostle was a Syro-Phoenician who converted to Judaism.

Antiochus Epiphanes is one of the most important types – or foreshadows – of the Antichrist in the Bible. He came from the line of Seleucids called the dynasty of Antiochus. There were Antiochus I, II, III, and IV. Antiochus IV is Antiochus Epiphanes. The Greek speaking Jews would ridicule him by changing it to “Epimanus”, meaning “the mad one.”

You had this historical situation with the kings of the north and the kings of the south. Assyria goes, then it’s Babylon. Babylon goes, then it’s Media-Persia. Persia goes, then it’s the Greeks. Then there’s a worldwide chaos among the known world, and out of the chaos Rome comes to power. And in the middle of all this, Jews are going back to their land. In the Last Days, the same thing happens.

Similarities to Today

Growing up in the Baby Boomer generation, the big threat was “the Soviets”. They were the ones persecuting Christians; they did not believe in God; they were dogmatically atheistic. Nobody of our generation who remembers the Cuban Missile Crisis and Vietnam would have thought the Soviet Union would have imploded and the Berlin Wall would have come down. It imploded – just like Assyria, bringing a false sense of peace to the world, until you turn around and you’re looking at a much more dangerous enemy, Islam.

When I was a little boy in New York during the Cuban Missile Crisis, I remember Nikita Kruschev came to New York and literally took off his shoe and pounded it on the podium in the U.N. saying, “We will bury you! We will bury you!” He actually did that. In a matter of months, Brezhnev, Suzlov, and the Politburo deposed him. You can’t have a mad man that likes to drink vodka with his finger on the button.

During the Watergate crisis, Nixon was stoned on tranquilizers and alcohol according to his associates Colson, Haig, and Kissinger. And he called a stage three nuclear alert on the Soviets during the Yom Kippur War, trying to capitalize on the war, to save his own neck politically. He was deposed within a matter of weeks. The American establishment turned against him. You can’t have a nut stoned on tranquilizers and alcohol with his finger on the button.

The Islamic world does not think that way. The Hindu world does not think that way. The Hindu believes he’s going to be reincarnated, and the Muslim thinks he’s going to be “Shahadi”. The only assurance of salvation in Islam is to die in a Jihad. Hence, just like the world was in a much more precarious state after Assyria collapsed, the same is true now. It is in a much more dangerous and precarious state now when Islamic countries are getting enough fissionable materials to make even a 50-megaton bomb.

So it is a very rapid series of world empires rising and falling very quickly and, in the middle of all this, the Jews come back to their land – just like what happened in the book of Daniel. To understand the Last Days, we have to understand what happened here.

Now notice something else when you see the kings of the North and the kings of the South. The final conflict could not be East-West; it had to be North-South. It had to be a North-South conflict just like in the days of Daniel. And that’s what you’re going to see. You’re going to see a North-South conflict, creating the same kind of chaos that existed in the days that saw the rise of the Roman Empire. That will happen again out of the chaos.

Pompeii as a Type of Antichrist

Notice that the figure earlier in the 11th chapter of Daniel also enters the “ Beautiful Land” in verse 16, and he also makes a false covenant. One of the problems you’re going to have in the Last Days is that there are many Antichrists. So every time somebody tries to sign a peace treaty in the Middle East, people are going to say, “That’s it!”

This ultimate Antichrist is going to be different. He will be in the character – insofar as this text is telling us – of two people. One is Antiochus IV – Epiphanes, and the other is General Pompeii. Whenever somebody other than the High Priest on the Day of Atonement (or than Lord Jesus Himself in the book of Hebrews) enters the Holy of Holies, it’s a type of the Antichrist. And the Roman General Pompeii did that. He represented the triumvirate of Rome, made a treaty with the Jews, and then the Jews were double-crossed and he entered the Holy of Holies. He is a major, major type of the Antichrist which people overlook.

Antiochus IV as a Type of Antichrist

The Hasmonean Period was between the time of Macabees and Pompey. The Hasmoneans were the descendants of the Macabees. It was a prosperous period where they thought the throne of David was going to be resurrected, and it was where the messianic expectation was really amplified. Much of the stage was set for the coming of Jesus in the Hasmonean Period. The Hasmoneans began right, but ended bad.

Antiochus IV had an agenda to use culture and religion to gain political control. The Antichrist will do the same thing. He will try to make something multi-cultural and multi-faith, and he will come in the character of Antiochus. Now remember, other people were doing similar stuff before Antiochus came. The important thing to remember is that up to verse 36 of Daniel 11, there was a partial historical fulfillment. Antiochus did everything up to verse 36. But, from verse 36 onward into chapter 12, nobody has ever done that yet. In other words, the Antichrist – the Beast – will replay what Antiochus did and then do the rest of it. He will do the kinds of things Antiochus did – up to verse 36, but then he’ll go beyond and do the rest of it.

Antiochus Hellenized the Jewish culture. He took the popular culture of the world – and put it on God’s people who compromised with it. They went along with it until it got to the point that they could no longer stop it.

The Use of Culture and Religion

Everything in the Greek world was the diametric opposite of the Hebrew world. There was the Greek way of thinking and the Hebrew way of thinking. The Hebrew way of thinking was one based on a concept of theopomorphic men and women, that we are made in the image and likeness of God. The Greek way of thinking was based on an anthropomorphic view of god: “We’re gods.” The Hebrews were monotheistic, the Greeks polytheistic. The Hebrews were made in God’s image, the Greeks, “We make god in our image. Their gods had human qualities: You could cheat them, you could con them, you could placate them. This was the underlying philosophy of the Greeks, completely diametrically opposed to what the Hebrews believed. There are no two things philosophically more mutually exclusive than Aristotelianism (Aristotle’s philosophy) and Judeo-Christianity.

In the Middle Ages Thomas Aquinas wrote something called the “Summa Theologica” and he Aristotelianized Christianity. Maimonides (Rambam) came along and Aristotelianized Judaism. There are no two things more incompatible than Aristotelian philosophy and a Judeo-Christian worldview.

There are three kinds of people in God’s economy: the Jews, the Gentiles, and the church made up of both Jew and Gentile. As far as the nations are concerned, they are deceived. That leaves the two kinds of people the Bible calls “God’s chosen”: the Jews and the church. The Jews, except for a faithful remnant who accept the Messiah, are deceived. That leaves us, the church, made up of Jew and Gentile.

The End Result of Compromise

In Greek entertainment there was this mixture of Pagan religious philosophy and entertainment. The problem was not the sports, the problem was in the Greek view of the Olympics: It was lewd. I do not mean “naked” in the biological sense that the athletes competed in the nude, but “naked” in the sense of sexual exhibitionism. Originating in the Greek world, something the Romans later adopted – the Romans called them “gladiators” – violence was used as popular entertainment.

These were the cultural elements of the Greek world that Antiochus wanted everybody to accept. He wanted to Hellenize all culture. When the Hebrews went along with it, they brought trouble upon themselves. “Well, we’ll go along with this, we’ll go along with that, we’ll go along with the other thing”, until surreptitiously laws were passed that outlawed their beliefs and they could no longer practice them. Ultimately, circumcision was outlawed and “Kasrut” (dietary law) was outlawed, then the reading of Torah was outlawed.

The Haftorah developed at this period because the reading of Torah was outlawed. So they began reading the Prophets (Haftorah), and they tried to find something from the Prophets which in theme corresponded to what the Lection would have been in the Torah for that week. That’s how you got the Haftorah.

Things were progressively banned. And the problem was God’s people went along with it step by step until it couldn’t be stopped, including the banning of the Levitical theocracy. The priests of the Levitical theocracy had been the Zadokites, the good priests according to Ezekiel; sons of Zadok. But then the Zadokim became the Sadducees; they became bad guys. But they began right. The Hasmonean Period began with the Maccabees and then it got corrupted after that. The Jews were compromising, then things got outlawed and could not be stopped.

The main problem was not the Pagans. The main problems were the Jews who collaborated and the Jews who stood by and kept their mouths shut.

The Maccabees

The Maccabees were a priestly family that lived in a village called “Modein” outside of Jerusalem. One of them was named Menelaus, a Hebrew who collaborated with the enemy. The Maccabees assassinated Menelaus and one of Antiochus’ officers. They took off to the hills of Judah, an area near Jerusalem known as the Shillah, between Jerusalem and modern Tel Aviv, or between the Sea and Jerusalem. It is interesting that the Antichrist is prophesied to pitch his tents there in the same area, the Shillah. Another parallel is that both the Antichrist and the Maccabees begin with a small group and get more powerful.

Take note that you had a father and he had five sons. You have Eleazar, Jonathan, Jehuda the Maccabee, and Mathias and two of the five sons were betrayed from within. Again, the Last Days are the same thing – brother will turn against brother, many will fall away and betray each other. (Mark 13:12)

The Defiling of the Temple

In the first chapter of 1 Maccabees it is reported that the temple gets defiled. The stones of the altar underwent something horrific: A swine was sacrificed on them by Antiochus. And he built a statue of Zeus, giving Zeus his own features. Now Zeus was a corruption of “Theos” in Greek. Almost the same spelling, Zeus was the corruption of “Theos” in Greek meaning “god.” But he gave it his features – a man trying to identify himself as the great god. It was Mt. Olympus as opposed to Mt. Zion.

The Maccabees liberated Jerusalem but they had a quandary: “What can we do with the stones of the temple? Well, we can’t throw them away because they’re ‘mei qodesh’, they’re sanctified, but we can no longer sacrifice on them because a pig was sacrificed on them.” So they disassembled the altar (and that’s called a “mizbeach”) into stones, and we’re told in the Mishnah that they were stockpiled outside in Solomon’s Portico. And they believed that at Hanukkah, at the time of dedication, that either the Messiah or possibly Elijah the prophet (Eliyahu ha-Navi) was going to come and tell them what to do with the stones. “When the Messiah comes, He will know what to do with them. We can’t throw them away.” So they built another altar.

Antiochus was empowered by spiritual seduction and by Hellenizing God’s people – that is, using the popular culture. Riding on the back of the popular culture was a compromised morality. So it got to the point that things would have been abhorrent to any observant Jew in God’s own house, and the reading of His Word was outlawed.

The New Testament calls the church “the temple” no fewer than seven times. There are different Greek words for temple: “naos”, “heikal ioudaios”, and “heiron.”

Keeping the World Out of the Gospel

What happened with Greek culture? Homosexuality and bisexuality were culturally endemic and, in fact, they even had a religious trapping to it. In the temple of prostitutes the female prostitutes were called the “hieros gamos”. The “hieros delphos” was a religious clergy.

Already, in Sweden and in Canada, there are moves afoot to call the public reading of portions of the Bible that denounce sexual sin and homosexuality, such as Romans 1 or Leviticus, “hate literature”. You can read the Quran, of course, but the Bible becomes outlawed.

This is exactly what happened in the days of the Maccabees; violence was used for entertainment. Now the Bible talks a lot about violence, but it never glorifies it. It just portrays it for what it is. It says at best that it is a necessary evil, but it never glorifies it. The whole society is getting like that. How can the church be salt and light in a society when the church is going along with the culture?

“For wicked men to triumph, good men must merely remain silent.” Last April, during Lent, I was reading a copy of a Christian magazine, and they were asking various Christian leaders about their devotional reading for Lent. Nicky Gumble, the man who runs Alpha Courses, said that for Lent he was reading the works of Rowan Williams, the Druid who ordains homosexuals. This is the guy who everybody is looking at to re-evangelize Britain. Somebody who recommends books by a Druid that ordains homosexuals at Holy Trinity “Bedlam” at Brompton, and everybody thinks he is a good guy. You understand how sick this is, how eroded the standard has become? There is no stopping it. This is exactly what happened when the Maccabees came along.

The Maccabees said, “Enough is enough!” The first one they knocked off was Menelaus the collaborator. The foremost dangerous enemies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in this country are Evangelicals who collaborate with the enemies of the cross of Christ.

This is exactly what happened in the days of the Maccabees. Those who resisted, who stood up and said this is not right, were in small groups conducting a guerrilla action. But, lo and behold, others began coming out of the woodwork and joining with them. And I’m seeing this happen all over the place. I’m seeing people who are meeting in homes because they can’t find a decent church where they live, meeting in the British legion hall or something like that.

Joined by Hypocrites

Because somebody is against what you are against does not automatically mean that they are for what you are for. People who point out what is wrong – ministries like Vanguard magazine, the Berean Call, Understand the Times, or even Moriel – any who will stand up and say this stuff is not biblical will have a problem. 90% of the people we attract are sincere; 10% are malcontents that will find fault in any church. They will just join with somebody like me as a sounding board so they can attack other things.

There are those who the only way to know what they’re for is based on what they’re against. You cannot build a church, a fellowship, or a ministry based on what you’re against. We know that stuff is off the wall, but what are we for? We know Alpha is not biblical, but what do we stand for? That’s the question.

Watch out for people that say they have discernment ministries and all they do is attack what’s wrong but they never point to what’s right. They are not into evangelism, they’re not into missions, they are not into Bible studies. Be careful of people like that. There are good discernment ministries and bad discernment ministries; there are good organizations and there are bad ones. Those who are trying to rebuild the body of Christ like Intercessors for Britain are alright. You could never base or build something on what you are against, only on what you are for.

Those Who Have Insight

Small Groups

Now, that was the background. That’s what happened then, and that’s what’s happening now. So we have the traditional and we have the historical, then we have the eschatological.

In the Last Days it’ll be the same thing, a small group of people will arise like the Maccabees. Those that have insight will give understanding to the others and God begins to build an army that will withstand this landslide. Many will join in hypocrisy, there will be treason within the ranks, but in the end they win. In the end, the Maccabees won. It was prophesied by Daniel.

Well, I can tell you this: A lot of bad things are going to happen. These two beasts are going to come, but I read the end of the book – in the end we win. What is going to happen is what did happen.

The Maccabees, Jesus, King David – all had the same strategy. Things got really bad under King Saul, things got really bad under the Seleucids, things got really bad under the Sanhedrin and the Romans (Herodians). Whenever things get really bad, God begins raising up something new based on small groups.

This becomes Hanukkah -- the Hebrew feast of light and miracles, what we call in Hebrew, “Nesim v’ niflaot”. 

How AI is transforming defensive capabilities against drones

October 12, 2026
Written by - Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM Examples abound in history of how the responses to innovations in technology that disrupted and transformed the nature of warfare have taken a delayed time to be adapted. Chain mail and armour had to be altered and bolstered to repel arrows from the English Longbow in Medieval Europe, but this didn't occur in time to the dismay of the French at Agincourt. It took the Spanish decades to redesign their cumbersome Galleons that lay prey to the swifter English ships. Napoleonic era field tactics were still being employed during the American Civil War, with mass charges mowed down by the Gatling barrel machine gun. Trench warfare was only later embraced during WWI. With the cheap manufacture of drones and the advances in AI a new chapter has opened in how war is waged in our own time. The conflicts in Ukraine and Iran have demonstrated how asymmetric warfare has become as much an economic calculation as a game of cat and mouse. Drones (and relatively cheaply manufactured ballistic missiles by Iran) are being shot down at great expense. AI which has been extensively deployed for target identification in Gaza is also proving to be a vital tool in hunting incoming drones. But as in the delayed development of military countermeasures historically, drones are ahead of AI in the battlefield. This is reflected in the enormity of Russian military casualties that have fallen victim to Ukrainian drones. AI is able to cut through the 'background noise' of distracting projectiles, birds and other debris to home in efforts to eliminate the actual drone target. The magic formula is speed and precision. Humans can detect and assess a threat, but AI can process radar, cameras and other sensors almost instantly, and with increasing accuracy predict where a drone intends to strike. When swamped with a wave drone attack, AI acts to identify and track the multiple threats. AI can also help decide how to respond. Depending on the system, the response could involve electronic warfare, an interceptor drone, a missile or a gun-based system. Ukraine has installed automated machine gun turrets instructed by AI to protect Kiev. In some cases, humans still make the final decision to engage, while AI handles the calculations and tracking required to make that decision quickly. More broadly, drone warfare is becoming a contest between autonomous systems. The challenge is no longer simply building a better missile or a better drone. It is building a system that can see the threat first, understand it quickly and respond before the drone reaches its target. In that sense, AI is becoming a critical part of air defence. The advantage may increasingly belong to whoever can make the fastest and most accurate decisions—not necessarily whoever manufactures the most expensive weapons. AI's pace of progress is exponential. It is beyond comprehension what capacity could be realized in even the next 2-3 years. The combination of drones, robotics and AI may render the traditional military hardware of tanks, frigates and fighter jets almost functionally obsolete. The development of AI's course of military application will be largely directed by the conflicts where it is deployed. In the pre-AI world of 1987, the black Friday market crash during the Reagan Administration saw a dangerous drop in the Dow, where computer analysis issued sell orders against a background of Reagan's massive budget deficits. Amidst Reagan's budget deficits this created an environment where social security was looted to fund defence spending. A supposed conservative President ran a fiscal policy with simultaneous increases in the Pentagon budget, coupled with tax cuts. The computer generated sell off was beyond the functional control of brokers and market makers, while the Soviets attempted to engineer market irregularities affecting the American economy which had further global ramifications due to massive American trade deficits with Japan under Reagan. The current Securities exchange environment is at best no less complex now. Given the spectre of what transpired in 1987 with computerised over control of stock exchange trading, and a shadow hanging over the bond market we are left to ponder could another such scenario be triggered in the age of AI? And even more illuminous prospect over shadows us now with the question can AI gain a decision-making operational capacity over command-and-control decisions. Certainly, for tactical weapons systems or even a doomsday scenario with Russia, China, India or Pakistan placing nuclear launch control in the hands of AI that could result in an exchange that either the US, Britain, France or Israel would be forced to react to. Without scaremongering it is necessary for strategic planners to prevent the nuclear powers that be from arriving at the precipice of such an abyss.

Interconnected Conflicts: The Risk of a New Thirty Years' War. By Rubin Rothler - LLB, MLB

September 21, 2026
The interlinked nature of third-party involvement in the ongoing conflicts in Iran and Ukraine has increasingly come to the fore in recent weeks. It emerged that China has not only been providing Iran with radar systems, navigation tools, and electronic warfare technology, but also high-resolution satellite imagery and geospatial data to direct its rockets. The same great-power relationships that are shaping the Middle East are affecting the conduct and constraints of the war in Ukraine. It is apparent that a reciprocation in kind is dictating Russia's conduct towards the US in Iran. Intelligence and targeting support mirror similar U.S. assistance to Ukraine. But this picture becomes murkier when considering the backroom accommodations Trump is willing to give Putin. Recently, Trump pressured Zelensky to stop targeting Russian diesel infrastructure, saying the attacks were causing a shortage of the fuel that is "hurting the world." The U.S. national average price for diesel, which is used by trucks, trains, ships, and farm equipment, rose above six dollars a gallon for the first time last Thursday. Such interventions demonstrate how developments on the battlefield in Ukraine can no longer be considered independently of wider economic and geopolitical calculations. China has been using tankers that are already at sea, when that runs out the American blockade will create shortage problems for the Chinese economy, as China no longer gets Venezuelan oil and is reliant on Iran and international spot market prices. The war with Iran is now spreading to Yemen, with the Houthis attempting to replicate the Iranian chokehold model perfected in the Strait of Hormuz. The strategic importance of controlling or threatening critical maritime chokepoints is central to the wider contest. What happens in the Gulf can therefore have consequences for shipping, energy markets, and military calculations far beyond the immediate theatre. So far, the US has declined Saudi requests to slow the Houthi advance. Neither Turkey nor Egypt seems inclined to come to Saudi Arabia's aid. This is despite the signing of a very recent mutual defence pact between Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and Pakistan. More developments can happen in these conflicts on an average day than can be afforded mention, but they should be increasingly understood as interconnected parts of a wider geopolitical confrontation. Assistance in one theatre triggers reciprocal action in another. Consequently, these cease to be discrete, containable conflicts and are extending into prolonged multinational conflicts. There is a distinct possibility that these may become frozen conflicts over time. A more terrifying eventuality is something more akin to the Thirty Years' War, which was fought in the first half of the 17th century in Europe. It is important to remember that this calamity, which ravaged Europe, began as a localized rebellion that gradually drew in more and more powers. The initial religious nature of the fighting gave way to political struggles. The mechanism by which a localized conflict becomes a multinational struggle offers a historical warning worth considering. The danger today is that a collection of individually distinct conflicts could become sufficiently interconnected that containing any one of them becomes increasingly difficult. Iran, Ukraine, Russia, China, the United States, and the conflict involving the Houthis are already linked by military assistance, intelligence, energy, trade, and strategic competition. The question, therefore, is no longer simply how any one of these conflicts ends. It is whether they can remain separate conflicts at all.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

Prayer Request

By David Passmore • September 12, 2026
Moriel & Jacob Prasch request prayer for our sister in Jesus - Wendy Blomkamp, widow of Brother Fred Blomkamp (now with The Lord), the founder of Moriel South Africa Branch (not to be confused with Moriel's Ebyown Aids Children's Mission in South Africa founded by David Royle). Wendy, (an equestrian rider of all things) is originally from West Yorkshire, England but has lived most of her life in South Africa and is currently in retirement in the USA. Unfortunately, Wendy is diagnosed with inoperable pre terminal cancer with cardio pullmonary complications. The Lord will either intervene supernaturally or call her home. We request prayer for Wendy and her beloved family and wisdom for her physicians. In Christ, All at Moriel

What would happen to Israel if the House is controlled by Democrats, and if the Republicans lose control of the Senate?

By David Passmore • September 7, 2026
The US midterm elections are around the corner and the results could have profound effects on US foreign policy concerning Israel. Much has been said about this vote being a referendum on Trump's unpopular war with Iran. But it can equally be said to be about Trump's other foreign policy engagements that are viewed rather more favourably like the overthrow of Maduro in Venezuela and his replacement with a pro-American regime. With Israel the picture is less clear. It used to be a given that Israel enjoyed bipartisan support on the Hill. You could count on the fingers of one hand the number of politicians opposed to supporting Israel - the occasional fringe Democrat representing a singular Michigan constituency with a high Arab origin demographic, or a rare odd ball Republican preaching strict isolationism. This dynamic has shifted quickly in the last decade. The Democrats have all but abandoned any inclination of a pro-Israel position. Even establishment figures like Chuck Schumer have been pressured to side with the Party's radical left wing. With 60-80% of Democrats now anti-Israel, Israel can no longer rely on Jewish Democrats to oppose anti-Zionism or antisemitism. The most outspoken Democratic member of the Senate advocating a pro-Israel position, Senator John Fetterman of Pennsylvania is being pressured to resign and leave the party even by Pennsylvania's Jewish Governor Shapiro and Soros sponsored Philadelphia Prosecutor Krasner. This is happening concurrently with mass endorsement from 170 leading Hollywood Jewish actors writing a letter of support for Mark Ruffallo - despite his antisemitic comments naming Jewish investors supporting a Hollywood studio mega merger as being associated with apartheid genocide. However most shocking, were the comments by Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel who stood before an audience of Jewish Democrats last weekend telling them they may need to sacrifice the safety, and even the future, of their own people in exchange for saving the rest of humanity. Such rhetoric is contrary to basic human instincts of survival and self-preservation. If any other nation were suggested this course of action, I wonder what their response would be? On the Republican side the foreboding sense of an altering course towards Israel no longer seems so distant. The anti-Israel faction in the Republican party led by Tucker Carlson, Candace Owens and Nick Fuentes are now being supported by Vice President Vance. Jewish kingpins in the Trump Administration such as Witkoff and Kushner have been tied to business dealings in N.Y. with the Muslim Brotherhood controlled Qatari government through its business holdings. Should Republicans lose control of the Senate while Democrats take the House, Israel could find itself having to drastically re-access its relationship with Washington. We wouldn't see an immediate break in ties. American military, intelligence, technological and strategic cooperation with Israel is too integrated into the core of US institutions and corporations that would take a protracted period to dismantle. However, the power of Congress is in no way feeble. Congress controls funding, foreign-assistance legislation, sanctions, arms-related legislation and, perhaps most importantly, the political milieu in which an administration operates. A Democratic House combined with a Senate no longer controlled by Republicans could place enormous pressure on Trump to alter his attitude towards Israel. Practically this could entail demanding further accountability from Israel over military operations in Gaza, and the West Bank Settlers causing civilian casualties and property damage. Military aid could face more conditions or restrictions, but an immediate cutoff is unlikely. Israel has historically depended upon the presumption that regardless of who was President, there would be a robust enough bipartisan coalition in Congress to prevent a major deterioration in the relationship. Now the opposite appears true. Israel is taking the gamble of solely relying on a friendly President like Trump getting elected to maintain cordial relations. With the erosion of even much of Jewish American support for Israel and the hijacking of the Democratic party by a pro Islamist socialist left seen in Mamdani and others, Israel is forced to confront the inescapable reality that the last strong bastion of support for it is the Republican Party's evangelical base. But even younger voters in this key demographic are beginning to question support for Israel. The hostility displayed by the Haredim in Jerusalem and elsewhere against Christians including evangelicals, is to say the least counter-productive to the national interest. To attack the one friend Israel has left with a proven track record of loyalty and is vital to pro-Zionism internationally, is particularly detrimental to the national interest. It is Iran with its Mahdiist interpretations of jihad and sharia as a religious ideology that drives its hatred of Israel and the USA, and The West, to the detriment of the interests of the majority of the Iranian populace who want non hostile co-existence.  Such religious fanaticism and ideologically fuelled hatred ought not be given place in Israeli Judaism. It too, will generate adverse consequences for the majority of Israelis, including religious moderates, who desire an ongoing friendship with Evangelical Christians whose theology is not one of anti Semitism, but of proven Philo-Semitism and pro Zionism.

Don't bit ethe hand that feeds you - Irish hypocrisy towards Israel

By David Passmore • August 21, 2026
Don't bite the hand that feeds you - Irish hypocrisy towards Israel Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM Amongst European nations, Ireland in recent years has gained the reputation as being the leading anti-Zionist country. The Irish Republic has never been favourably inclined to Israel. It only established an Embassy in Tel Aviv in 1996. In poll after poll the vast majority of the Irish public have indicated hostility towards Zionism and strong support for Palestinian Statehood. The curious aberration to this is that in British Ruled Northern Ireland support is demarcated along sectarian lines. Catholic Republican areas predictably tend to ardently support the Palestinian cause, while Protestant Unionist communities are overwhelmingly pro-Israel. Perhaps some credence can be given to sentiments of traditional Catholic antisemitism hardwired into the Irish psyche as contributing towards this disposition. It was certainly odd that the Irish government promptly sent a delegation to the Nazi German Ambassador in Dublin to convey condolences after news of Hitler's suicide broke at the end of WW2. But more concretely if you were to ask the average Irish protester on a pro-Palestine march the basis of their empathy for the Palestinian cause, they would point to the ostensible parallels between the Irish experience of fighting for independence from British colonial oppression to the plight of Palestinians living under Israeli occupation. Further remonstrations on a diplomatic level concern the actions of the IDF interreacting with Irish Peace Keepers in Southern Lebanon that have caused the deaths of several Irish Peace Keepers over the decades in friendly fire incidents. Ireland has contributed the most peace keepers to this mission per capita and the government has condemned Israel for these deaths that they view as avoidable. This animosity towards Israel is unbalanced. There are reasons to consider that Ireland and Israel have a shared experience of national liberation. Both countries fought the British in the pursuit of independence. Both countries made great efforts to resurrect their ancient languages for modern wide scale use. Both the Irish and Jews form major diaspora communities in New York. Despite all this Ireland ranks as Israel's second largest export market after the US. The preponderance of Israeli exports to Ireland comprises electronic integrated circuits, micro-assemblies, and tech manufacturing components. American multinational colossal tech corporations like Intel are substantially engrossed in this trade through the chain of supply. Ireland and Israel are hubs for design and manufacture of high-tech hardware components for US corporations. So, due to the nature of the most prosperous and competitive sectors of their respective economies, Israel and Ireland are inextricably bound in bilateral trade ties. Resolutions from the Irish government to impose sanctions on West Bank originating produce is merely perfunctory rhetoric. Such actions amount to a drop in the bucket in terms of impact to overall trade. The stark reliance of Ireland on advanced Israeli aviation equipment recently caused a spectacle when Ireland's new government jet struggled to land in heavy fog due to it being ordered without an advanced Israeli made navigation system. This was directly due to a short-sighted government decision not to buy Israeli military technology. There is a marked disparity between the official position of the Irish government designed for domestic public consumption and the economic policies that it actually pursues towards Israel. The government is acutely aware that the US is massively invested in the Irish economy and they don't want to do anything to jeopardise this. Washington demands that their enterprises in Dublin are intertwined with operations in Israel. The Irish government dare not even prevent US military supply flights refuelling at Shannon Airport on their way to Tel Aviv. The Irish government knows that times change and now the gripping social issue is the anti-immigrant/anti-Islam popular street protests. Soon the anti-Israel protests could become a mere side show only really promoted by Sinn Fein given the pressing ramifications of mass migration. So, in the meantime certain politicians will rile against the occupation, purported genocide and pass paltry sanctions against insignificant produce from the West Bank. All the while making hand over fist in money with the Israelis where it really matters in tech.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

The tide has Changed

By David Passmore • July 31, 2026
The Tide Has Changed Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The America that Netanyahu touched down on is a changed America. The death of Lindsey Graham represents a changing of the guard. Graham was a staunch Israeli ally who will most probably become an increasingly rare breed in Washington. Sixty percent of Americans now hold a unfavourable view of Israel which politicians are finding difficult to ignore. It was once unthinkable to believe that New York City with such a strong Jewish electoral base and influence on all sectors of economic and cultural life would have a mayor that is so hostile to Israel to such an extent that he is calling for the arrest of its Prime Minister. From all accounts Netanyahu was cordially welcomed at the White House. The official press release stated that the talks were constructive. What is more telling is what was left unsaid particularly concerning the proposed sale of F35's to Israel's new regional adversary -Turkey. Trump is keen to find a swift resolution to the Iran War, while Netanyahu is opposed to a premature departure. When the US and Israel initiated their attacks on Iran over five months ago, Trump and Netanyahu appeared united in the War's goals and purpose. But as the protracted conflict has staggered to topple the Iranian regime fractures have emerged. Much has been said about the imminent political realities both leaders face. The Republicans could take a big hit in the November midterm elections should the war continue and global energy markets be negatively impacted. Netanyahu is anxious to demonstrate a big win to the Israeli public with the upcoming October election. In Israel, the Iran War is not viewed in isolation, but rather as an extension of the response to the colossal disaster of the October 7th massacre. Netanyahu must rehabilitate his reputation as a competent steward of national security having had the greatest loss of civilian life in an attack happening under his watch. Aside from the Iran issue, Trump is being pressured by Erdogan to insist upon Israeli withdrawal from Syrian territory pre-emptively seized by Israel following the toppling of Assad. Trump has also indicated disapproval of the extent of continuing Israeli measures against Hezbollah in southern Lebanon, questioning the proportionality employed. Netanyahu is not in an envious position. Throughout his tenure and political career, he lauded his ability to engage successfully with the American public by zealously advocating Israel's position. Yet under his government Israel's reputation has plummeted in the US. Trump may be the last US President to extend such overwhelming bilateral support to Israel. The days of politicians like Lindsey Graham are fast ending. While John Fetteman and Marco Rubio appear to be remaining more solid, even some of the most warmly inclined leading Republican and Democrat voices like Donald Trump and Rahm Emanuel have nuanced their support for Israel. The tide has shifted and will at best level off if not continuing to shift further.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

The Saudi Nuclear Deal: An attempt to alter the Regional Balance of Power

By David Passmore • July 24, 2026
The Saudi Nuclear Deal: An attempt to alter the Regional Balance of Power Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The initiative to develop a civilian nuclear program in Saudi Arabia with US assistance isn't new. There were concrete plans discussed towards these ends during the first Trump Administration. The recent announcement to actualize this deal follows the geo-political regional tumult in the wake of the Iran War. Several dimensions of motivation underlie the US decision. An overarching US strategic agenda is to keep the Saudis firmly in the American sphere of influence. Washington knows all too well that the Chinese and Russians are eager to offer their nuclear technical assistance to the Saudis in order to draw them closer to their camp. On a personal note, the nuclear agreement is a significant achievement for Bin Salaman. The Saudis have long had designs to diversify their energy supplies. Having a civilian nuclear program also adds prestige to Saudi Arabia as an emerging market economy. For the US, a monopoly on contracting companies for the requisite construction offers lucrative economic opportunities. Although the Civilian Nuclear deal does not allow the enrichment of Uranium, the Saudis will be in a position to do so if Washington gives the green light. This will act as a counterbalanced threat hanging over the Iranians. After the recent flare up of renewed fighting with Iran due to their lack of adherence to the moratorium of understanding, something had to budge in Trump's estimation. A reconfiguration of the power balance in the Gulf by introducing the potential of Saudi Arabia to be able to acquire nuclear weapons shifts the dynamic and places further pressure on Iran to strictly abstain from nuclear proliferation. Despite Israeli concerns about the agreement, Trump sought to assuage their alarm by making it contingent upon Saudi Arabia normalizing relations with them. Given the inherently unstable nature of an autocratic Saudi regime Israel views a diplomatic relationship with the Saudis as being on precarious footing in the long term. Israel is already forced to contend with the implications of one nuclear armed Muslim state - Pakistan and it will further weaken its own deterrent capability if another similarly capable hostile neighbour were to emerge in the future. The roles of Turkey and Qatar in all this foray are a wild card. Officially Turkey is served under the NATO nuclear umbrella for defence that is subject to US control. However, its civilian nuclear program remains in its infancy. Now with the Saudi deal, Erdogan may be inclined to exert pressure on the US to help accelerate his own nuclear program. Just as Erdogan's efforts to acquire F35 fighter jets from the US greatly disturbed Israeli military planners, a heightened Turkish nuclear ability will intensify this fear. Qatar views itself as pursuing its own independent foreign policy that has managed to remain rather neutral during the current war, thereby escaping the ire of Iran's strikes on US regional assets. Overall, the Qatari government has grown closer to the Turkish vision for the region and so likely isn't particularly amiable to the Saudi agreement. Ultimately the Saudi deal is a gamble. Many will see it as throwing more fuel on the fire which will further imperil the tinder box region and heighten tensions. But Trump finds himself at a continuing impasse with a stubborn regime in Tehran that is leveraging their geographic hold on the straits of Hormuz to inflict damage on the global energy markets. Iranian strikes upon US Arab regional allies have underscored the de facto alliance between Israel and the Arabs against Iran and its Shia proxies. The US hopes to use the Saudi nuclear deal as a means of making this alliance official by having Saudi Arabia joining the Abraham Accords as a pre-condition.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

Circling the Wagons

By David Passmore • July 14, 2026
Circling the wagons Ruben Rothler LLB, LLM Israel is a society riddled with tension and division. It is sociologically, if not politically miraculous that a country drawing Jews from all over the world is able to exist at all. The army affords a degree of integration as a melting pot. But this is only a marginal source of national unity in the overall scheme of things. More so are the myriads of external threats that face this small country. In the former generation the Ashkenazi (Jews of European descent) - Sephardic (Jews of Oriental descent) divide was far more pronounced. The dominant Ashkenazi establishment held the reins of political and economic power which was resented by the Sephardim. However, due to a combination of inter-marriage and political accommodation much of the chasm that separated these distinct groups was forged. Menachem Begin (an Ashkenazi politician) in 1970 successfully ran on the Likud Party ticket with a campaign that brought Sephardic Jews under his conservative political umbrella. Later the immigration of Russian Jews following the end of Communism would add a whole new dimension to the Israeli demographic milieu. The younger generation of these immigrants tended to adapt well to Israeli society and contributed much to the economy. The wider division in Israeli society that crosses ethnic lines concerns that between religious and secular Jews. This can be further bifurcated to the clash between the secular and specifically ultra-orthodox Jews (Haredim) as distinguished from the national religious Jews (Dati Leumi). The Secular and the Religious generally part on what they envisage a Jewish State to entail. Religious Jews desire the State to strictly adhere to the stipulations of Jewish Law (Halacha), while at present Halakhic influence is largely limited to certain areas of Family Law concerning Jewish citizens. Wider considerations of promoting a socially conservative political agenda would also be forefront amongst the religious mindset broadly. Secular Jews view the imposition of such proposed measures as a serious infringement of their civil rights. With regard to the Haredim, the bone of contention looms larger, in that this group is fundamentally opposed to participating in society at large. This is acutely manifested in diminished contribution to the work force and a refusal to be conscripted into the army. The 2023 judicial reform protests posed a significant threat to social civil order. The nation appeared to be bitterly divided into two opposing camps. This split reflected broader divisions concerning visions of how the country should be governed. The judicial reforms would have weakened the Supreme Court's ability to render the Executive branch accountable. However, the Supreme Court was also accused of using its considerable powers to promote a socially liberal agenda. Left wing secular Israelis tended to oppose the proposed reforms while those on the right (which included the majority of Religious Jews) supported the reforms. Every weekend droves of protesters were brought onto the streets causing major disturbances to traffic. The polarising nature of this impasse threatened the future of Israeli democracy. It was the October 7th attack that brought a swift end to this public debate and civil strife. The nation instinctually united in response to this common existential threat. The judicial reforms were shelved for a future point when the urgent security threats subsided. However, as the war dragged on the enduring issue of Haredi refusal to conscript into the army became more pronounced. Mounting casualties combined with ever increasing manpower demands to field troops on the multiple theatres of action on which the IDF is engaged has depleted the ranks, and the army is now in much need of fresh conscripts. Haredi belligerent refusal to participate in the pressing national defence has escalated from being a political debate to a matter of very practical vital importance. Overall we can observe that the challenges to national unity in successive generations since the establishment of Israel has recurrently been ameliorated by the common necessity of defence towards outside threats. Most recently we can see this happening with regard to the global anti Semitism and anti-Zionism that has been raging since the October 7th atrocities. These hostile attitudes have paradoxically acted as a force which promotes nationalism and a sense of national cohesion in Israel that otherwise might not functionally exist.  (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

A Divided Nation

By David Passmore • July 8, 2026
A Divided Nation Rubin Rothler LLB, LLM The Haredi community has had a complicated, paradoxical relationship with the State since its founding. Rooted in a Talmudic precept that the Jews are forbidden to resettle the land of Israel en masse by force before the coming of the Messiah, the secular democratic State of Israel presents itself as blasphemous by its mere existence. Yet due to practical considerations such as the need to obtain funding for its religious academies the Haredi leadership reached a settlement with the State's founders that exempted Haredi men from being conscripted for military service. This was at a time when the Haredi population in Israel was relatively small. Over the past decades this demographic ballooned until the point that soon the majority of Jewish children in Israel will be born into Haredi families. Such a situation is clearly unsustainable. Recently the Knesset's (Parliament's) Haredi parties have pressured their coalition partners in government to codify Torah Study as part of the Country's Basic Laws. This was purposefully done to elevate the status of their institutions to be on parity with service in the IDF. Israel is yet to promulgate a written Constitution, so legislation classed as a Basic Law holds Constitutional status for all intents and purposes. These moves by the religious parties represent a back door power grab to enshrine in law very significant hurdles to prevent the enlistment of Haredi men. The burden of Israel's defence is comparatively massive for a country its size and it is vastly disproportionately shouldered by the secular population. Until now there have been political initiatives to conscript the Haredim. But given the huge manpower shortages emerging in the wake of near continual conflict on multiple fronts since the events of October 7th this matter has become urgent and not merely a theoretical discussion of what is fair and equitable. It is important to draw a distinction between the Haredim and national religious Jews (Dati Leumi). The Haredim adhere to a lifestyle entirely committed to observance of Jewish Law and Talmudic study. This is embraced to the exclusion of gainful employment and participation in wider society. They are either outrightly opposed to Zionism or consider themselves non-Zionist. Conversely, followers of the national religious movement in Israel although being observant of Jewish law and learning would alongside this pursue secular professions. Furthermore, they are ardently Zionist and disproportionately serve in IDF combat units. This is often done within the framework of a program called Hesder Yeshiva that combines religious learning with military service. Efforts to cater a similar model for accommodating Haredi participation in the IDF have so far failed to make substantial gains. Such measures designed to override Haredi objections to service based upon modesty concerns by strict segregation of the sexes in these specially formed units have failed to appease the Haredi leadership. For them, any form of military service is considered a dereliction of their duty to fully devote themselves to a Torah lifestyle. They argue that their Talmudic learning and prayers are in itself a form of national service and act to protect the Jewish people spiritually from enemy attack. It is as if two parallel societies exist within Israel. And the trajectory of separation between the two is only growing. The Haredim are cloistered away in their Yeshivas, immersed in lives devoted to adhering to the stipulations of Jewish law. While the particulars of actually running the State is left to the Secular. The Haredim desire all the benefits of subsidizing their lifestyle without contributing to society. What we really have going on here at source is two profoundly different and opposing ideological visions of what is important in life and what is the purpose of a Jewish State. At the State's founding these divergent perspectives were more manageable. Ben Gurion only had to contend with one religious party –the National Religious Party. Later in 1970 Begin aligned with the NRP to form a coalition government that also brought Sephardic Jews under the Likud umbrella which had the effect of bringing unity to the country by bridging the Ashkenazi-Sephardi divide. However, over time Israeli politics has seen a proliferation of religious parties, gaining further leverage as king brokers in forming governments due to the proportionate representation voting system which secular Israelis not uncommonly view as political blackmail. (Author is an Israeli American lawyer academically qualified in British and in U.S.A. law, and a graduate of the School of Oriental & African Studies, London. He is a Jewish believer in Jesus and is currently based in Israel).

Why Is It Always Israel? | Zechariah 12 Is Happening Before Our Eyes

By David Passmore • June 29, 2026