Midrash: Jesus in the Garden

April 3, 2025
Midrash: Jesus in the Garden

Some of you may not be familiar with Moriel Ministries, so I will take a few minutes to explain one of the things that we do. We try to help Christians to understand the Bible in its original context of the first-century Church,

which was established by the Lord through Jewish Christians. We try to read the Bible the same way the early Jewish church would have read it. There have been others who have tried to do that through the centuries, with varying degrees of success - most notably the Plymouth Brethren. We believe it to be important in the Last Days to understand how to interpret the Bible in the way the first-century Church did.

(For those who already know this, I apologize. However, there may be readers who are new to our teaching or who are new in the faith, and for their sakes all of this bears repeating.)

When a Jewish Christian in the first century read the first four chapters of John's Gospel, he would have said that it parallels the Book of Genesis. He would have said that the story of the New Creation in John's Gospel is a midrash on, or an inquiry into, the Creation. The New Creation in John corresponds to the Creation in Genesis; Genesis tells us that God walked the earth, and Adam heard Him in the Garden of Eden. This speaks of Jesus: it is a Christophany, which is the theological term for an Old Testament manifestation of Jesus. John tells us in his first chapter that His Word became flesh, and once again God walked the earth. 

The Creation account in Genesis speaks of the Small Light and the Great Light, referring to the moon and the sun. In John, we again find the Small Light - John the Baptist, whose Hebrew name is Yochanon Ha Matbil - and the Great Light - Jesus the Messiah, whose Hebrew name is Yeshua Ha Mochiach.

In Genesis, God's Spirit moved on the water and brought forth the Creation. In John chapter four we hear of those who are born of water and of the Spirit; again, the Spirit moved on the water, this time to bring forth the New Creation. On the third day of Creation in Genesis, God does a miracle with water. In John 2:1, we read that the wedding at Cana is on the third day, and once more God does a miracle on the third day with water, this time in the New Creation. God began His first plan for man with the marital union of Adam and Eve; Jesus began His public ministry at a wedding in Cana, and God's second plan for man also commences with a marital union. The New Creation in John is full of parallels with the Creation in Genesis; one is a midrash of the other.

There are many things in Scripture that are like this. The Tree of Life in Judaism, which in Hebrew is called the es hayyim, is represented by a fig tree. We see it in Ezekiel 47 and in the Book of Revelation, but we see it first in the Creation in Genesis. In John chapter one, when Nathaniel asks Jesus how He knows so much about him, Jesus answers, "Because I saw you under the fig tree." What Jesus was saying to Nathaniel with these words was not simply that he saw him under a literal fig tree, although that was a part of it. What He was really saying in midrash, or Jewish metaphor, is this: "I saw you from the garden, from the Creation, from the foundation of the world."

Genesis and John, Creation and New Creation. Compare the Bible to a loaf of bread straight out of the baker's oven: before it has been sliced, it looks the same on both ends. In the same way, Scripture tells us that the Lord declares the end from the beginning. If we cut this loaf open, we arrive at John's Gospel. Most conservative Evangelicals believe that the same John who wrote the Gospel also wrote the Book of Revelation. In light of this, we see that we have first the Creation, next the New Creation, but then also the Re-Creation. If you look at Genesis in comparison with Revelation, you will see this kind of parallel. Once more in Revelation we see the Tree of Life that we first saw in Genesis. In Genesis 49 we find Jacob's prophecy to the twelve tribes of Israel; lo and behold, in Revelation seven and fourteen we find the twelve tribes once more. 

Revelation tells us that "The dragon and the serpent are cast down to you". I don't believe that the dinosaurs are billions of years old, as stated in that interpretation of gap theory. The serpent was once quadrupedal or bipedal; in other words, it walked.
It is interesting to note that every civilization from Mexico to China has stories of dragons. I've been a number of times to the Turanga Zoo in Sydney, Australia, and what a fantastic zoo it is! What would you call a lizard that measures nine or ten feet long by three feet high by two to three feet wide, and that could eat you? We call it a Komodo dragon. The word 'dinosaur' means simply 'great and terrible lizard'; I have seen them alive in our time.

To return to our point, the dragon spoken of in Revelation is Satan the Persecutor; the serpent is Satan the Deceiver. Jesus said in Matthew 23 that Abel was the first martyr: "Your brother's blood cries out", God tells Cain in Genesis. What do we see in Revelation? That the blood of the martyrs under the altar is crying out.

Then in Genesis we are told of Joseph's vision of the woman with the stars. In Revelation, there again: the woman with the stars, in chapter 12. The parallels go on and on and on like that. Again, it is like a loaf of bread; it looks the same from both ends before you cut it. When you do cut it, you see the pattern: Creation, New Creation, and Re-Creation. 

With this background in view, turn with me, please, to the Book of Genesis chapter three. In Hebrew we call Genesis Bereshit, meaning 'In the Beginning'. Verse five: "'For God knows,' said the serpent, 'that in the day you eat from it, your eyes will be opened and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.' When the woman saw that the tree was good for food and it was a delight to the eyes, and the tree was desirable to make one wise, she took from its fruit and ate, and she gave also to her husband with her, and he ate." We see here the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh and the boastful pride of life of which we are warned in John's epistle. John, author of Revelation and of the Gospel of John, is also the author of three epistles. We find midrashes on Genesis throughout his work; the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the boastful pride of life is yet another example.

Generically, in God's economy there are only two men: the first Adam and the last Adam. When you were physically born, you were born of Adam. When you are born again, you are born of the last Adam, who is Jesus. 

The second Adam, Jesus, had to be like Adam in certain aspects. Adam and Jesus were both created directly by God without procreative agency, and they were both created without sin. The first Adam, however, fell into sin. Before Jesus could go to the cross and take our sin upon Himself, He had to reverse what the first Adam had done. That is why in Mark chapter one, when it describes the temptation of Jesus, the text says that He was with the wild animals the same way Adam was. The picture of Jesus in the character of Adam is here being painted. Satan then comes to Jesus holding out the same three temptations into which Adam and Eve fell: the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh, and the boastful pride of life. What the first Adam fell into, the second Adam did not. Before Jesus could go to the cross, He had to overcome what the first Adam was overcome by. Then and only then could He go to the cross. That is why the text states, "And Satan departed from Him until the appropriate time." At their first encounter, Satan had to try to make Jesus fall into the same sin the first Adam did. At their second, He could and did take our sin. Jesus could not go to the cross on our behalf until He had reversed what the first Adam did; until He overcame where the first Adam failed.

At this point we will take a closer look at the phrase 'to know': the Hebrew word 'to know' is la daot, and the Greek term is gnosco. The serpent was already in the garden when Adam and Eve were told to subdue the Earth; they were always meant to know that evil existed, and to know objectively what it was; but they were not to know it within themselves. They were not to know it experientially, although they were to know it existed. We already know that the Tree of Life was present in the Garden of Eden; the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil was also there. Adam and Eve had a choice between those trees: the Tree of Life or the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil. They chose to try to be their own gods, to gain knowledge they were not meant to have. They were to know that evil existed, but they were not to know it within themselves. To understand this, we must grasp the different kinds of knowledge, of which we have two Biblical examples.

The first example is found in the high priest on the Day of Atonement: only the high priest could enter the Holy of Holies, and even he only once a year on Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement. Any Hebrew, however, could read the Book of Leviticus and know what was inside the Holy of Holies. He could read descriptions of the furniture, the showbread, the Ark of the Covenant, etc., and in that sense he could know what was in there. Only the high priest, however, could know what it was like to go in there, because he was designated for it. He was sanctified, or set apart, for that purpose: in Hebrew, me kudesh. The Hebrew terms 'to know' and 'to sanctify', as in 'to set apart' - La daot and Le Heet kodesh - frequently go together in the Bible. Anybody could know what was inside the Holy of Holies, but only the person who was sanctified for the purpose was to know what it was like to go into the holy of holies. 

The other time that these two terms are used in connection with each other is in holy matrimony. Anybody can get a copy of Gray's Anatomy and look at the female body: one can look at diagrams, charts, and pictures of ovarian tissue, Fallopian tubes, uterine tissue, or any other aspect of female anatomy; it is all in the textbooks. Anybody may know what comprises a woman's body. The Hebrew term, however, for "to wed" means 'to make holy, to sanctify'. During a Jewish wedding you say Me kudesh, or "with this ring, I wed thee", literally "sanctify"; set apart according to the laws of Moses and Israel. The word for 'to marry' and the word for 'to sanctify' is the same. The Hebrew word for 'to consummate a marriage' is 'to know'.

Anybody can know what is inside a woman's body; but only the man sanctified for the purpose is to know what it is like to go in. In the same way, anybody could know what was inside the Holy of Holies, but no one except the high priest could know what it was like to go in there. It is the same with gonosko, the Greek term. Adam and Eve were always meant to know that there was evil, and that there was a devil. They were intended to know that things had to be subdued on the earth, though it was not yet fallen. They were meant to know objectively, but they were not meant to know experientially. They were to know, but they were not to know.

"Then the eyes of both of them opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loin coverings." Nakedness in the Bible does not simply mean the nudity on beaches in places such as Maui, Hawaii, or Elat, Israel. The new-agers in such places swim naked and have tattoos of dragons, of flowers, or of any number of other things in places you would not think that people would or should have tattoos; they run around on the beach naked, like the heathens they are. That, however, is not what this is primarily talking about. Adam and Eve were literally naked, yes, but it meant something more than that. Remember the church of Laodicea in Revelation: "You do not know that you are wretched, pitiable, poor, blind and naked". As Isaiah said, nakedness symbolizes not having the garments of salvation.

Adam and Eve knew that now they needed to be saved, for they had sinned.

In their guilt, therefore, they sewed fig leaves together. Remember what we see in Genesis and in Revelation: a fig tree. In Revelation, the text states that the fig leaves are for the healing of the nations; biblically, therefore, fig leaves are figures or symbols of good works. Adam and Eve sewed fig leaves together, and in the same way, fallen man will always try to justify himself before a sinless God with good works.

Every religion on earth is the diametric opposite of the Gospel. When God - that is, Jesus - found Adam and Eve in the Garden wearing their fig leaves, He rejected the fig leaves and said that there must be blood atonement in order to remove sin. Religion is man trying to reach God with good works; the Gospel is God trying to reach man with blood atonement. Religion is man trying to reach God; the Gospel is God trying to reach man. Again, religion is the diametric opposite to the Gospel, no matter what form it takes. It makes no difference whether it is the Jehovah's Witnesses and the Mormons knocking on doors, an Orthodox Jew trying to keep the mitzvot, a Catholic at the Novena, or a Muslim at the haij. Every religion is based on sewing fig leaves together in a futile attempt to be justified before God. There is, however, absolutely no assurance of salvation in that. On the contrary, the Scriptures tell us directly that "all of our righteous deeds are as filthy rags". Am I saying that Mother Theresa's righteous deeds are filthy rags? No, I am not saying that; God is.

Christians do not do good works in order to get saved; real Christians do good works rather because we have been saved. It is not our righteousness, but the righteousness of Christ in and through us. That is totally different from man-made religion. We do good works because we've been saved, not in an attempt to attain salvation for ourselves. This leads to why Jesus cursed the fig tree: it had leaves, but no fruit; in the same way, Israel had a works righteousness based on legalism, but it did not have the fruit of the Holy Spirit.

We should understand that the leaves are certainly important; in the Middle East, the sun is so hot that without leaves the fruit would be destroyed. On a fig tree in particular, the fruit grows underneath the leaves. When Jesus cursed this tree, however, the text states that it was not yet the season for figs. The warning we must glean from this is that the "Son of Man comes at an hour you do not expect"; we must live in readiness at all times. Again, without leaves the fruit would be destroyed; as James tells us, "Faith without works is dead." There's nothing wrong with the leaves, but the fact is that you cannot eat them. Even the best leaves do not make up for a lack of fruit, although you need the leaves. We are not told that we will know people by their works, but that we will know them by their fruit. It should be noted that works can be evidence of fruit, because the leaves normally appear at about the same time as the fruit; but an abundance of leaves is not a guarantee that you will find fruit.

Adam and Eve sewed fig leaves together, just as today every religion still does. There are many non-evangelical 'churches' that think they are Christian. If you ask them, "How do you get to heaven?", they will tell you that it is accomplished by having enough good deeds to outweigh your bad deeds, or something similar. What do they do to hide their nakedness? They sew fig leaves together. What do they do at the Mass? They sew fig leaves together. What do they do down at the Mosque? They sew fig leaves together. Every religion sews fig leaves together, even though it is useless in gaining salvation. For that, there must be a blood atonement. 

So the story continues: "And they heard the sound of the Lord God walking in the Garden in the cool of the day." The Hebrew word for 'cool' is also the Hebrew word for 'breeze' or 'wind', ruach. The Hebrew word for 'breeze', by turn, is also the Hebrew word for 'spirit': Pneuma in Greek, ruach in Hebrew. So you have here the presence of the Holy Spirit implied in the Hebrew text. "And the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the Lord among the trees of the garden. And the Lord called to the man and said to him, 'Where are you?'" We notice here that it speaks of the 'trees of the garden'; concerning the Last Days, Jesus never said we must learn the parable of the fig tree. When you read it in Luke, He actually said, "Learn the parable of the fig tree and the other trees," or, "and all the trees". This is not our subject today, I merely point it out in passing to say that there is much more to the parable of the fig tree than most Christians have a clue about. In fact, the parable of the fig tree and the other trees is found in the Book of Judges chapter nine. But let us continue:

We see now the cast of characters introduced in the Garden; first and foremost, we have God in the person of Jesus, a Christophany. We have Satan in his mode as a deceiver. Then we have naked man. So far, we have three characters: God, Satan, and a naked man. Let us continue with the text: 'And he said, "I heard the sound of the thee in the garden and I was afraid because I was naked, so I hid myself." And He said, 'Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten from the Tree of which I commanded you not to eat?'" This sounds perhaps as if God didn't know; God knew, of course, but He was challenging Adam. "And the man said, 'The woman whom Thou gavest to me, she gave me from the Tree and I ate.'" Notice that although God in His omniscience already knew who ate first, He doesn't go to Eve but to Adam. If something, God forbid, goes wrong in my marriage or my family, or in your marriage or your family, gentlemen, it might not be our fault, but as far as God's concerned, it is our problem; the male is God's authority in that relationship.

In the Bible, every time a man lets a woman take spiritual headship, you have a disaster. Abraham and Sarah or Ahab and Jezebel are two examples of this. This goes right back to the Garden of Eden, and as such is one of Satan's oldest tricks. Why is leadership into this error now? We will see that in a moment, but let's continue.

And the man said in verse 12, "'The woman whom thou gavest to be with me, she gave me from the Tree and I ate." Then the Lord God said to the woman, 'What is this you have done?' And the woman said, 'The serpent deceived me and I ate.' And the Lord God said to the serpent, 'Because you have done this, cursed are you more than all the cattle and more than every beast of the field. On your belly you shall go, and dust you shall eat all the days of your life. And I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed. He shall bruise you on the head, and you shall bruise him on the heel'" - because of the resurrection. "To the woman, He said, 'I will greatly multiply your pain in childbirth. You shall bring forth children, yet your desire shall be for your husband and he shall rule over you.' Then God said to Adam, 'Because you have listened to the voice of your wife and have eaten from the Tree about which I commanded you . . .'" Notice the curse is on Satan first, women second, and men third. Satan first, women second, and men third; the judgment was given in the order of the sin. 

Because of the Fall, men have become insensitive. Also because of the Fall, women have become hypersensitive. When a husband and wife get saved, most of the time it is the wife who gets saved first. This is not always the case, but probably at least 75 percent of the time the wife gets saved first. If the husband does get saved first, 75 percent of the time the wife eventually gets saved also; water takes the shape of its container. If the wife gets saved first, however, it is usually a much harder situation. Christian women often grieve for years over their unbelieving husbands. Why is it easier for women to get saved? It is because they are more sensitive. When a husband and wife pray together for direction, it is usually the wife who hears from the Lord first and clearest; men are reliant on female sensitivity because of the Fall. On the other hand, while it is usually easier for women to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit, it is also easier for women to hear the voice of a counterfeit spirit and thus fall into deception, to be taken in by spiritual seduction. Women are much more vulnerable to spiritual seduction than are men. Therefore, just as men are reliant on female sensitivity, so women are reliant on male protection. The submission in a Christian marriage is to be mutual, but in different ways; it is an equality with different functions, but the buck stops with the man. Women are more vulnerable to spiritual seduction, while men are more vulnerable to not hearing at all. That's just the way it is in our fallen world. There may have been a propensity towards that before man fell, but the Fall brought it to be what it is now.

It happens in a garden. Next, God dispatches an angel and says, "Get out of here. You cannot come in anymore." Here we are introduced to the fourth character, the angel who says 'get out'. In this garden, man falls. In this garden, God pronounces a curse on men and on women. In this garden, the angel says 'do not come in here.' In this garden man is naked before his God.
Yet in this garden, there is also a promise of salvation: "'I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed.'" As most of you know, Eve represents Israel and by extension the church. The church is the bride of Christ, and Israel is God's woman. 

Anti-Semitism and persecution of the believing church are heads and tails; two sides of the same coin. We can distinguish between the two, but we cannot separate them. God's plan for the salvation of the world depends on his prophetic agenda for Israel and the Jews and for the believing church. The two kinds of people whom the Bible calls Abraham's children are the Jews and the believing church. The return of Jesus Christ depends on the prophetic plan of God for Israel and the Jews, and for the believing church.

Hence, the Jews and the believing church have the same enemy. Why do you think the Muslims hate Israel and hate America? Is it purely political? No. There is a spiritual reason. At this time in history America is the seat of evangelical Christianity, as Britain was a hundred, two hundred years ago, and as Germany and Switzerland were during the Reformation.

"I'll put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed." Look at pagan Rome: first, they turned against the church under Nero. A few years later, they turned against the Jews under Titus. A few centuries later, under the communists in the Soviet Union, who did the Soviets persecute the most? Jews and born-again Christians! Throughout the centuries of the inquisitions, the pogroms, the massacres - who did the Roman Catholic Church persecute the most? Jews and born-again Christians. What do Arafat's followers say? What don't they show you on CNN? They don't show you that the Islamic Arabs whom they champion are the same people who say every day of the week, "First the Saturday people, then the Sunday people. Jihad! Jihad!" In other words, first we kill the Jews, and then we kill the Christians. I will put enmity between you and the woman, between your seed and her seed.

It all happens in a garden. With this in view, let us look at the midrash: 

Turn to John chapter 18 verse one: "When Jesus had spoken these words, He went forth with His disciples over the ravine of Kidron where there was a garden into which He Himself entered and His disciples." Of the four Gospels, the one that identifies Gethsemane as a garden is John. John, again, is always interested in doing a midrash on Genesis. The Kidron is a narrow valley between the Temple Mount on the west and the Mount of Olives or Har Zeitim on the east. Gethsemane comes from the Hebrew word Shemen, or 'oil'. The olive oil - which we call Shemen ziot - used ritually in the Temple came from Gethsemane. They would harvest the olives growing on the Mount of Olives, and bring them to Gethsemane to be pressed. (There are still olive orchards on the Mount of Olives to this day - in fact, the experts tell us that there are trees there that are 2,000 years old and still growing; they would have been present in the days of Jesus - olive trees live extremely long, if they are not interrupted by earthquakes or pollution or other environmental catastrophes.) It is to Gethsemane that Jesus goes, and there something begins to happen. To God, one man without sin is worth more than all the men with sin: that is how one could die for all.

In this garden, God takes our sin on Himself. He takes our sin and puts it on His son, Jesus, in order to take His righteousness and put it on us.

Jesus suffered physically; He was tortured. He suffered emotionally; the Bible speaks of this time as the 'travail of his soul'. But something else happened on the cross: His fellowship was broken with His Father. We must note also that He said, "It is finished. Father, into Your hands I give My Spirit." Satan's liars in the church today deny this fundamental doctrine:

Copeland, Hagen, Joyce Meyer, all these people are teaching error. They teach that Satan got the victory on the cross, that Jesus' Spirit was not commended to the Father, that it was not finished, and that He had to go to Hell. They teach further that He was tortured in Hell for three days and three nights, and that then He had to be born again in Hell. That is the teaching of Copeland and Hagen, which they got from E. W. Kenyon. They have another Jesus; they have another Gospel, as most of you know. Because the cross of Jesus is not central to their view of salvation, neither is the cross of Jesus central to their view of the Christian life. Instead of "pick up your cross and follow Me", their doctrine is "you're a King's kid, name it and claim it, God wants you rich, believe God for another Mercedes, etc". These men are from the devil, and are some of the false prophets that Jesus warned would come in the Last Days. Today they are doing exactly what Jesus said they would do.

Jesus takes our sin on Himself, not in Hell, but in a garden. That is where God begins to put our sin on Jesus. 

The full wrath of God was poured out on Jesus while He was on the cross. "Now, Judas also, who was betraying Him, knew the place, for the disciples had often met there" - Jesus often met there with His disciples - "Judas then, having received the Roman cohort and officers from the chief priests and the Pharisees, came there with lanterns and torches and weapons. Jesus, therefore, knowing all the things that were coming upon Him, went forth and said to them, "Whom do you seek?" And they answered Him, "Jesus, the Nazarene."" Jesus' real name was Rabbi Yeshua BarYosef vi Netzeret. They wouldn't have known who Jesus Christ is, but they would have known who Rabbi Yeshua was; He is the One who raises the dead and heals the lepers; He is the one who could walk on water.

"When, therefore, He said to them, "I am He," they drew back and fell to the ground." The Greek text says that they fell back and then they slid forward. Every knee will bow, even those of His enemies.

The phenomenon of being 'slain in the spirit' happens at various times in the Bible, particularly in the New Testament. In Revelation chapter one, John is in the Spirit in the Lord's day, and when the power of Jesus comes on him, he falls as if slain. He fell forward, and was so terrified that God had to send an angel to encourage him. When Jesus cast a demon out of the child whom the demons kept throwing into the fire, they thought he was dead; but when he got up he was completely different. Daniel, too, was terrified.

Notice that in the Bible whenever someone was slain in the Spirit it was a once in a lifetime life-changing event. It doesn't matter what happens when people go down, how different is their life once they get up? But today, who is getting in line? The same ones who were in line to go down last week. They just want to go down for the thrill of it. As with anything else, a wicked and adulterous generation seeks this sign.

Again, in the Bible being slain in the Spirit was a once in a lifetime, life-changing experience. It doesn't matter what happens when somebody goes down, but how changed their life is when they get up. In the Bible, too, whenever it was a blessing from God, the person in question went forward. The only time they ever went backwards was when it was a curse and a judgment: when they came to arrest Christ.

Today you see Rodney Howard Brown and these guys bringing official 'catchers' with them. But they are falling the wrong direction.
People insist that they know this experience is from God; well, it might be indeed, but if it is, He is angry with them. I personally am pretty certain that most of it is hypnotic induction combined with demonic deception. Even if it is of God, however, it is a judgment.

Whom do you seek? Jesus. I am He. In Greek, "I am He," or, ego ami. The Greek equivalent is also found at the end of John chapter 8, where Jesus says, "before Abraham was, I am." Ego ami. The people then tried to stone Him, because He made Himself equal with God. 

Let us go back to our cast of characters: In the Garden of Eden is God in the Person of Jesus. In the garden of Gethsemane is God in the Person of Jesus. But then, in the Garden of Eden, Satan as deceiver is present. In the Gospel of John, what happens to Judas just before the disciples accompany Jesus to Gethsemane? The text plainly tells us: Satan entered him. The only two people demon-possessed by Satan personally will be the anti-Christ or false prophet and Judas, the Son of Perdition. John in his epistle describes anti-Christ in the character of Judas. "They went out from among us, but they were not really of us." Whenever you see something about Judas in the Bible, the Holy Spirit is telling you something about the anti-Christ. Both Judas and the Antichrist will be into money; both can deceive the brethren - the disciples were asking, "Lord is it I, Lord is it I?" - they did not know the identity of the traitor until Jesus revealed him. In the same way, people will not know who the real anti-Christ is until Jesus reveals him. If you cannot see through Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland or Chuck Colson, what will become of you when the Antichrist comes? 

How did Judas con people? He conned people with the Mother Theresa trick: fig leaves. "Could this not have been sold and given to the poor?"- he feigned compassion for the poor in order to ingratiate himself with people, to make them think he was a good guy. In reality, however, he was only using the plight of the poor to seduce, camouflage, and manipulate. Mother Theresa said before she died that she had no assurance of salvation. When she got the Nobel Prize, she made it clear that she did not convert people in India to be Christians, but to be better Hindus and better Muslims. That was her gospel. She cleaned them up, gave them a clean place to die with dignity, and sent them off to Hell in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit in a laundry chute.

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