Judge Not?

April 3, 2025
Introduction

Do not speak against one another, brethren. He who speaks against a brother or judges his brother, speaks against the law and judges the law; but if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law but a judge of it. (James 4;11)

 

Do not speak against one another. Do not speak against your brethren. Do not judge your brother. Is that what it says? Look at verse 4 of the same chapter.

You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. (James 4:4)

“You adulteresses”!

Do not judge your brother!

From the pen of the same apostle, in the distance of a few paragraphs, in almost the same breath that he is saying "do not judge," James calls worldly churches "adulteresses."

James is probably the oldest book of the New Testament. We know from its Hebraic background, from the way it draws on synagogue leadership structure and the Scriptures, that it was obviously written to Jewish Christians. James is using the Hebrew concept of whoredom or harlotry. Whenever Israel went into idolatry, God calls it "adultery." Idolatry equals spiritual adultery.

Israel was to be God's woman, in much the same way as the Church is the Bride of Christ. The Church being unfaithful is like Israel being unfaithful. Such idolatry is called "adultery." It is a very strong term in Hebrew, a very strong concept in the Jewish mind.

By Their Fruit

“So every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit. “A good tree cannot produce bad fruit, nor can a bad tree produce good fruit. “Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. “So then, you will know them by their fruits. (Matthew 7:17:20)

Jesus said that you can judge someone by their fruit. In the same chapter, He says, “Do not judge so that you will not be judged.” (Math 7:1). First it is, "Do not judge so that you will not be judged," yet He goes on to say, "You will know them by their fruits."

People involved with Toronto and Pensacola say, "You know Toronto/Pensacola by its fruit and there is good fruit from it." Jesus never said that you would know a phenomena by its fruit He said that you would know a person by their fruit. More than that, even judging a phenomenon by its fruit, you can see that it is not the fruit of the Spirit? The fruit of the Spirit is self-control, not drunkenness and lunacy. (Gal 5:22-23)

Contradictions?

“Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment.” (John 7:24)

First Jesus says, “Do not judge so that you will not be judged”, but then He says, "Judge with righteous judgment." James appeared to contradict himself, now Jesus seems to contradict himself. Jesus said, "Don't do it," then He tells us how to do it; James said, "Don't do it" straight after he did it.

Therefore you have no excuse, everyone of you who passes judgment, for in that which you judge another, you condemn yourself; for you who judge practice the same things. (Romans 2:1)

Therefore do not go on passing judgment before the time, but wait until the Lord comes who will both bring to light the things hidden in the darkness and disclose the motives of men’s hearts; and then each man’s praise will come to him from God. (1 Cor 4:5)

But you, why do you judge your brother? Or you again, why do you regard your brother with contempt? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God. (Rom 14:10)

For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. (1 Cor 5:3)

Over and over, Paul says, "Don't judge." But then he passes judgment. Jesus says, "Don't judge," but then he says to do it and shows us how. James says, "Don't judge," but then he does it. Why the contradictions?

God is the Judge

If God says in the Bible that something is wrong, and we see someone or some church do that thing, we are not judging them, it is the Word of God that judges. The Hebrew name "Jehoshaphat" means “Jehovah has judged”. That is not me or you judging, we are simply acknowledging, "This is what God says."

James was not calling worldly churches "adulteresses." The Word of God says that, if we are attached to this world, we are an adulteress church.

Paul was not saying that the man involved with his step-mother was immoral. Paul was saying that the Word of God says that person was immoral.

If God says that something is plainly wrong, that is not you or me judging, that is God judging. That is what it means when it says, "Judge with righteous judgment." Judging with righteous judgment means judging with God's judgment, not with our own. There is a big problem here in that there are things that I would not do, but which are not necessarily wrong for someone else.

People's Opinions

I know of a case where some believers, after their wedding, went to a discotheque. (I would not go to a discotheque unless it was to give out tracts.) I did not feel a peace about going, but I am not going to make a big deal out of it, no matter what my own misgivings or feelings.

I know of another case in Ireland where, at a Christian wedding, people danced. Other people became indignant and began yelling, "You're backsliders," and stormed out of the wedding, creating a big scene. It split a church. That is people judging.

The word "Laodicea" has to do in the Greek with "people's opinions, people's judgments." We have no right to make a judgment of another person, but once God says something is right or wrong, that is not us judging.

Anakrino—To Discern

The Greek word for "judge" is krino. If you put the prefix "ana" in front of the word "krino," we get a variation on the idea of someone who judges—anakrino, all things (1 Cor 2:15). God, in His Word, commands us to anakrino. It is not a right, it is not a privilege, it is not something that is advisable. We are commanded to do it. And if we do not discern, we lack wisdom.

There is a reason why false teachers will not stand up publicly and debate someone like Hank Hanegraaff or Dave Hunt. People who will stand up and say, "That is not Scriptural." "That is not right." "I discern that this is not of God," are practicing wisdom.

The reason why Michael Brown backed out of his debate with me over Pensacola, and why Jim McConnell backed out of his debate with me over British Israelism is that they lack wisdom.

Those who practice wisdom cannot themselves be judged by anyone. Because they anakrino, they cannot be anakrinoed. That is why those others are afraid of them.

Diakrino—To Decide

I say this to your shame. Is it so, that there is not among you one wise man who will be able to decide [diakrino] between his brethren, (1 Cor 6:5)

Another prefix which changes the meaning of krino is "dia." Diakrino means to "render a decision." Is something right or wrong? Is someone's behavior right or wrong morally? Is it Scriptural or unscriptural? Is it of God, is it of the flesh, or of the devil? The Holy Spirit speaking through Paul commands that we are to diakrino. We are not “permitted: to diakrino,we are not “advised” to diakrino, we are not “privileged” to diakrino—we are commanded to diakrino. It is not that judging is acceptable; rather, to fail to judge is unacceptable.

Not Allowed to Go to the Secular

About two months ago a woman and her husband contacted us, very distressed. They had a four year-old girl who was the victim of semi-penetrated sex in a church. She was molested by a fourteen year-old boy, who was supposedly a "Christian" going to that same church for years. This little girl was devastated. She drew me a picture, and as soon as I saw the picture, I knew what it was.

I do not have much time for secular psychology. I believe in biblical psychology. Biblical psychology is based in the Book of Proverbs. If you want to know why human beings behave and act the way they do, and think the way they do, read Proverbs. That is the best book of sociology and psychology there is. I can agree with human psychology to the degree that it is based on biblical psychology. Secular psychology is godless and sees man as a two dimensional being. It concerns me that so many Evangelicals have gotten into secular psychology and pop psychology.

The little girl drew a picture of a house. Inside the house there were four windows and a door. Each face inside the house was female—there were no male faces. And she drew a picture of herself, outside. There was no pelvis, there was no pubic area. That, according to pediatric psychiatrists, is a very frequent characteristic of drawings by children who have been sexually abused. Children of that age will say things with pictures and drawings that they cannot express verbally. There were no men and she herself had no mid-section.

Her parents told me, "We don't know what to do. We go to a Baptist church and the pastor can't advise us because this fourteen year-old boy is a Christian, and, based on 1 Corinthians, we are not allowed to go to the secular authorities about another believer. So, according to his parents, “We can't tell the police or the court what has happened. We are at our wit's end—we don't know what to do. Our daughter is traumatized."

Civil Law/Criminal Law

1 Corinthians 6 refers to Roman law. (The systems of jurisprudence in Britain, Australia and America are based on the original model in Rome.) 1 Corinthians 6 is talking about civil law, not criminal law; it is talking about suing someone under civil law, referring to litigation; it is not talking about criminal law. It is 1 Corinthians 5 that talks about an immoral person.

But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler—not even to eat with such a one. For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? (1 Cor 5:11-12)

We judge those who are within the Church, who are guilty of immorality. Do not even associate with the person. Chapter 6 is not talking about criminal law, it is talking about civil law.

That fourteen year-old should have been dealt with under the criminal law. His identity would have been protected by the court because of his age. If something was not done for that kid at the age of fourteen, by the age of eighteen his life would have been destroyed. He would have been in an institution for pedophiles. But this fourteen year-old had a chance. He should have been brought before the authorities for his own good, and also so that the little girl could have seen justice being done. If this kind of stuff is not dealt with by the Church immediately, what is going to happen when these people get older? The victims are traumatized for their whole lives. It affects their sexuality when they grow up. And that church could not even give a Biblical answer!

(It was probably a good thing it was a Baptist minister. He could not give a biblical answer, but if it had been a Pentecostal minister, he probably would have tried to cast demons out of the little girl!)

I talked to my friend's wife, who is a Christian pediatric psychiatrist, and I showed the pictures to a Christian pediatric psychologist. They both agreed with the advice I gave the parents, and the parents referred the matter to the criminal authorities. But what were these other ones saying? "Do not judge." "You cannot go to the authorities about another Christian and you cannot judge another Christian." What were they doing? Giving people a license to sexually abuse little kids?

This is what happens when the church goes away from God's Word. We are not “allowed” to diakrino, we are commanded to diakrino. But it has to do with more than just people.

Judging Prophecy

Let two or three prophets speak, and let the others [diakrino] pass judgment. (1 Cor 14:29)

‘But the prophet who speaks a word presumptuously in My name which I have not commanded him to speak, or which he speaks in the name of other gods, that prophet shall die.’ “You may say in your heart, ‘How will we know the word which the Lord has not spoken?’ When a prophet speaks in the name of the Lord, if the thing does not come about or come true, that is the thing which the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously; you shall not be afraid of him. (Deut 18:20-22)

Jeremiah 14 and Jeremiah 28 says the same thing. Jesus warned that there would be many false prophets in the last days. We do not stone them to death any more, but the sin is no less serious. They shall die if they do not repent. We are not under the law, but under grace, but their "ministries" should be stoned. 1 Cor 14:29 does not say that we are “entitled” to diakrino prophets or prophecies, rather we are commanded to judge prophets and prophecies.

On this basis, Rodney Howard Browne is a false prophet. On this basis, John Wimber was a false prophet. On this basis, Rick Joyner is a false prophet. And on this basis, Paul Cain is a false prophet.

That is not my judgment. I cannot krino anybody. It is the things that God has said that will krino. I have to anakrino—I have to discern, “Is this of God or is this of man?” No, it is not for me to judge. I have to diakrino, render a decision on whether it is morally right or wrong by biblical standards.

The founders of the Mormon cult and the Jehovah Witnesses were false prophets; they predicted things that failed to happen. The Roman Catholic nun, Lucia, from Fatima, in Portugal, is a false prophet; she predicted things that failed to happen. John Wimber and Paul Cain and Rick Joyner (as well as John Kilpatrick, Michael Brown and Gerald Coates) are false prophets; they predicted things that failed to happen. Do I have the “right” to say that? No, not the “right”, but the responsibility to say it, the command from my God in heaven to say it. That is not my judgment, it is what God says about these people.

Jesus said, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments." (John 14;15) If we fail to diakrino, we are failing to keep His commandments. If we fail to diakrino, we will let these same people go on giving people "words" from their own flesh or from Satan. People like that should be brought to account.

Judge Righteously

Then I charged your judges at that time, saying, "Hear the cases between your fellow countrymen, and judge righteously between a man and his fellow countrymen, or the alien who is with him" (“Then I charged your judges at that time, saying, ‘Hear the cases between your fellow countrymen, and judge righteously between a man and his fellow countryman, or the alien who is with him. (Deut 1:16)

That was not advice; that was a command.

Just look at what has happened to our secular society. Everybody is a "victim." It does not matter that he got blind drunk and he was driving at 90 miles an hour through a village and killed a little kid on a bicycle. He came from a broken home, therefore he is a "victim." It does not matter.

I tried to talk to a prostitute the other day. "I do this because my father hung himself." That was her argument. "I came from a bad situation." I said, "You just told me that your sister goes to university and she came from the same background, and she thinks that what you are doing is terrible. Isn't she a victim, too?" Nobody is responsible for their own actions anymore in society. But how can we expect society to live up to God's standards when the Church will not live up to God's standards.

I myself came from a bad situation. My father drank. I was a drug addict by the age of sixteen and I have no doubt whatsoever that if Jesus had not intervened in my life, I would be dead by now or a destroyed person of some kind. It is only because of Him that I went to university and got married and did the things I have been privileged to do. Left to myself, I would not have amounted to anything. Nonetheless, I am responsible for my own life and my own choices.

If the church will not uphold God's standards of responsibility, how can we expect our society to be any different? If we are not upholding His standards, how can we be salt and light to a society that has turned its back on God? No wonder there is crime! The main reason for the moral and social decline of our society is not because of the unsaved people, it is because of the lukewarm Church.

Krisis & Krites

There is a kind of judging that we are not called to do. The Greek word is krisis.

“For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment [krisis] to the Son, (John 5;22)

The ultimate determination of heaven and hell belongs to the Lord alone. We never krisis; we are forbidden to krisis.

But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to myriads of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven, and to God, the Judge [Krites] of all, and to the spirits of the righteous made perfect, (Heb 12:22-23)

God is the judge of all. Yes, there are people who are called to judge, but God is the ultimate Judge of us all.

Hupokrites—Pharisees

If we are going to stand up and confront other people in the Church about something being wrong, we had better make sure we are not guilty of the same thing, because that is another kind of judging we are forbidden to do. Here the prefix hupo is added to krites, giving us the English word "hypocrites."

This is what Jesus meant when he said:

“Do not judge so that you will not be judged. For in the way you judge, you will be judged; and by your standard of measure, it will be measured to you. Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite [hupokrites], first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye. (Matthew 7:1-5)

We do not krites and we especially do not hupokrites.

Kritikos—To Discern

For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge [kritikos] the thoughts and intentions of the heart. (Hebrews 4:12)

Cells called erythrocytes are stored in the red marrow of big bones like the femur and the tibia. On the outside there is the bone and on the inside there is the marrow. But in between there is an area where, even with a microscope, it is very difficult to tell where the bone ends and where the marrow begins. The Bible says that the relationship between soul and spirit is like that. Take prophecy: was that from someone's imagination or was it God's Spirit speaking through their spirit? It is very difficult to tell the difference. Man is a three-dimensional being. We can separate a body from a soul, but we cannot easily tell where the soul ends and the spirit begins.

When people say, "The Lord showed me this" and "God told me that," it is difficult to know if it is someone's imagination or God's Spirit speaking to their spirit. The mind is a good servant but a dangerous master. Many people are not overtly demonic, but they are prophesying from the futility of their own mind.

We are called to kritikos—to discern between the soulish and the spiritual. The Word of God enables us to separate the bone from the marrow, the spiritual from the purely soulish.

Summary

Judge not? What does the Bible say?

 

  • We never judge from our opinions. 
  • We are commanded to anakrino—we always seek to discern: "Is this of God, or is it of the flesh, or of the devil?" 
  • We are commanded to diakrino—to render a decision as to whether something is morally right or wrong.
  • We do not krisis—the Lord alone decides who goes to heaven and who goes to hell. 
  • We are sometimes appointed to krites, but we are to remember that the Lord is the Judge of all and we are to judge righteously. 
  • We never, ever, hupokrites. Before we take a speck out of our brother's eye, we make sure we do not have the same speck in our own eye. 
  • We always kritikos—we draw on the Word of God to discern between the things of the soul and the things of the spirit. 



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