Watchmen Who Are Not Watchmen

April 3, 2025

What Ever Happened To Matthew 24?

On Your Walls O Jerusalem I Have Appointed Watchmen; All Day And All Night they Will Never Keep Silent. You Who Remind the Lord Take No Rest For Yourselves (Isaiah 62:8).

 

The prophetic watchman of Jerusalem and Judah, then and now

It was Isaiah who first prophesied God would raise up watchman concerning the forthcoming events in the history of the Hebrews generally, and their country Judah specifically, with special reference to their capital Jerusalem, where the Temple and Holy Ark were located - God's presence with them. As the events prophetically predicted by Isaiah unfolded we indeed see God calling the Prophet Ezekiel as the definitive watchman in the scriptural usage of the word (Ezekiel 3:17, 33:7), and it is Ezekiel that biblically most demonstrates what a watchman is and what he does.

But first we must note that it is not a term found in the New Testament, it firstly was an office for the ancient Hebrews. Therefore, although there are without doubt those functioning as 'watchmen' in the church, in order to grasp their raison d'etre we must first grasp their Old Testament nature exemplified in Ezekiel (the only individual specifically called a 'watchman'). We need to understand some of the differences between Old and New Testament prophets (which despite the license that cessationists effectively issue themselves to pronounce passages of scripture not to their liking null and void, still do exist in the church - eg. 1 Corinthians 12:29 & 14:32).

One difference is not that Old Testament prophets had to be always right (Deuteronomy 18: 20-22), but since 'we prophesy in part', New Testament prophets could be part right and part wrong. Such perversions of 1 Corinthians 13 out of all reasonable context is the justification people in the Vineyard Movement invented to justify proven false prophets such as Mike Bickel, Paul Cain, Gerald Coates, and Rick Joyner to still be considered prophets after they made God's people trust in a lie (Jeremiah 28:15-17). There is nothing in the grammatical construction of the Greek text warranting such a wild concept and nothing in the context even in an English translation. Like their cessationist opposites, these too pervert the text.

A prime difference between Old and New Testament prophets is that to have a prophetic ministry today even to Israel (or to any nation) one must be a saved believer whether Jew or Gentile, there were no saved believers in the New Testament sense before the Messiah. Additionally, Corinthians tells us prophetic ministry can also be to the church, which did not exist as such in the Old Testament. New Testament prophecy moreover may be purely for exhortation, edification and consolation (1 Corinthians 14:3), and may but need not necessarily contain a 'watchman' element in the Old Testament sense. Israel's prophets warned and called the people back to the Torah in repentance as well as encouraging etc.

The most essential difference however is that Old Testament prophets wrote the canon of Old Covenant scripture as the Apostles wrote the New Testament. Even the Hebrew prophets warned and called the people back to the Law, and predicted on the basis of things written in the Hebrew canon before them (Daniel 9:2); but the entirety of the bible had not yet been written, so there was further doctrinal revelation. Now that the canon is complete there is no new doctrinal revelation (Revelation 22:18-19), only a clearer understanding in the Last Days of what is already in there (Daniel 12:4). As we read in the prologue of the Epistle To the Hebrews 1:1 'God in times long past spoke to the patriarchs in prophets in many ways, but in the Last Days He has spoken to us through His Son'. Thus any predictive prophetic ministry in the form of warning as in a 'watchman's' function will need not only be in character with the prophetic watchman of ancient Israel such as Ezekiel, but be in accord with what is already revealed in both the New Testament and in the Old Testament as the Old Covenant is interpreted and fulfilled in the New Testament revelation in and of Christ.

Looking at the biblical character and nature of watchmen however we see that so much of what is being promoted as 'Watchman Ministries' are actually the mere devices of men out of character with the biblical model. Again, in the bible as we saw with Ezekiel, the watchman ministry often had particular although not exclusive reference to Jerusalem and Judah. It is therefore no coincidence that the first major example of New Testament prophetic ministry was by Agabus specifically concerning the plight of the believers in Jerusalem and Judah (Acts11:27-30). As we note, when God commissioned the watchman, he was also to be an assayer of the people. Ezekiel called the people to repentance and denounced the lunacy and deceivers who misled the nation. Thus understood biblically any watchman in Jerusalem today will be in that character - calling the Jewish nation to repent and accept Yeshua as Messiah and warn against the lunatics and deceivers for which Jerusalem is a virtual magnet. Today however there are unscriptural organizations sucking large sums of mission support from Jewish and Arab evangelism and the local Israeli congregations refusing to preach Jesus in Jerusalem to His own people. These include 'Bridges For Peace' (when biblically there can be no peace without 'the Prince of Peace') and the so-called International Christian Embassy with its notorious history of infighting and heresy and in one case violence perpetrated against an Israeli Messianic Jew while he was preaching the gospel by the embassy's Jim Schutz and threats by embassy personal on another occasion, that included hostility towards believing Jewish children during their 'Feast of Tabernacles'. God's Word of course teaches the only Christian ambassadors in Jerusalem are those who preach Christ (2 Corinthians 5:20) and no other.

A major Christian magazine, itself known for its endorsement of hyper charismatic extremism, exposed Ruth Hefflin's group on the Mount of Olives who displayed footage of women with "miraculous gold dust in their hair". A metallurgical analysis however revealed it was plastic based stationery glitter. Hefflin's miracle gold was exposed as bogus. Yet her followers seem to claim a prophetic calling in Jerusalem! Perhaps the saddest excuse for a watchman in Jerusalem has become Lance Lambert who teamed up with the most extreme example of Toronto style 'charismania' ever captured on video in the person of Mahesh Chavada. The antics of shirtless people yodelling and swinging swords in church yelling 'Prepare For War' in a manifest sons style ritual was the most bizarre demonstration of charismatic chaos imaginable. Chavada has in the past been associated with the Christian Embassy ( who have imported a variety of heretics into Israel including Morris Cerullo), but despite the protestations of many of his friends, Mr. Lambert joined his colleague Chavada in the Cranbourne fiasco. Biblical watchmen in Jerusalem, as assayers of the people, tried to protect God's people from lunacy and deception. While Mr. Lambert is misrepresented as a watchman in Jerusalem, far from protecting God's people from deception and lunacy he in fact joins forces with it. Whatever Lance Lambert may be, he is certainly no watchman.

Israel and Jewish ministry are breeding grounds for every assortment of 'kooks' imaginable, including false watchmen. Genuine messianic bible teachers explaining the original Jewish context of the scriptures like Arnold Fruchtenbaum and Dwight Pryor must contend with the competition from proven heretics like Joseph B. Goode and Peter Michas (who deny the Tri-unity of the God Head as One God in Three Persons). They are heretics who are ignorant of Hebraics and Rabbinics, yet represent themselves as Messianic Bible Teachers teaching Hebrew Roots, and are likewise seen by their followers as watchmen, but aren't. Perhaps the most notorious false watchman of this category has been Michael Brown of the Brownsville Assembly of God clone of the Toronto deception in Pensacola. At a Jerusalem messianic conference several years ago Brown interpreted the national disaster of forest fires destroying nearly a quarter of Israel's reforested land as emblematic of 'God pouring out His Spirit'. Brown then had people up half the night awaiting a second Pentecost in Jerusalem! Nothing of course happened, and not surprisingly Brown wound up a 'watchman' in Pensacola.

Finally, watchman were most of all as Isaiah stipulated, 'to remind the Lord' of His covenant promises to Israel and give themselves no rest in the process. The Covenant promise of course is the New covenant promised to Israel and Judah (Jeremiah 31:31). The emphasis of a real watchman in Jerusalem will always be prayer and intercession reminding the Lord of His promise to save Israel (Romans 11:25). Some of the counterfeit watchmen today are influenced by the 'identity movement' deceptions related to the myth of British Israelism, such as are propagated in Northern Ireland by Elim's Jim McConnell at Whitewell in Belfast. Such nonsense of course is void of any serious biblical or anthropological merit and in certain cases its proponents are clearly anti Semitic. As such, these 'would be' watchmen are given to the doctrinal errors of supercessionism or replacement theology and the hideous notions of such teachers of error as the late Charles Alexander (other more moderate reformed preachers like Charles Spurgeon affirmed the prophetic purposes of God for Israel and the Jews as did the Puritans). Therefore such people must automatically divorce 'watchman ministry' from its biblical context, which is first of all largely Judaic. This is simply not scriptural. Even when we apply the watchman ministry to the church, the same principles seen for example in Ezekiel must still apply or they cannot be legitimate watchmen.

The preachers who cried 'wolf!'

Another contemporary category of watchmen who are not watchmen is more painful to describe. These are not all necessarily wilful deceivers, false prophets, hyper charismatic lunatics, religious con artists, anti Semites, or heretics. On the contrary, most are sincere believers, genuine in their motives, and often people otherwise gifted for a valid ministry - which they should stick to instead of trying to play a role God has plainly not called them to fulfill. In the aftermath of the Y2K foolishness, we speak of course of 'The Preachers Who Cried Wolf'. These are true brethren who are naïve, lacking in discernment, and in certain areas deficient in spiritual wisdom and Christian maturity. Above all they proved themselves as not having the depth of doctrinal and theological grasp of scripture they imagined they did. I am not prepared to judge them or their motives. If their open folly was a matter of pride, ignorance, or just plain gullibility or some combination of these things I am not prepared to say. Yet, as we read in 1 Thessalonians, such crazy things created problems in the apostolic church at the close of the First century. This precise kind of foolishness continued throughout the church age from the Montanists at the close of the Second Century to Pope Sylvester's hollow parousia at the close of the 10th century when the second Julian millennium began, to the Munster Anabaptists at the close of the 16th century, to the Shakers at the close of the 18th Century, to the Millerites at the close of the 19th Century. Is it any surprise it has occurred again at the close of the 20th century? As Dr. Martin Lloyd-Jones said; "If we fail to learn the lessons of church history we are doomed to repeat the errors". Thanks to the watchmen who are not watchmen, we have.

It is no coincidence that many of these 'self proclaimed instead of God ordained' watchmen, such as Morris Cerullo advocate Grant Jeffrey, similarly went with the Bible Codes absurdity, and other such groundless fads. The real problem however is not as much with the watchmen who are not watchmen, but with those who continue following these fads. Sadly, this fad-to-fad pattern exactly mimics the behavior of the people who still follow false prophets with failed prophetic predictions of Revival from Kansas City to Toronto to Pensacola (the latest is Wykoff, New Jersey and some little town in Missouri) even though they know they were wrong the last time (Jeremiah 5:30-31). Concerning things like Y2K, there is in the secular world a certain unstable and insecure personality type identified even by secular psychiatric medicine with an almost paranoid predisposition to conspiracy theories. They piece together odd bits of vaguely related data and conjecture a grand conspiracy theory which they become convinced is fact and it becomes their obsession to alert everyone. I do not hold much belief in secular psychology, but this is indeed a compulsive disorder. This is not to belittle the kind of deception that exists in the world of global politics. Many very knowledgeable people never doubted the American government for instance conspired to cover up essential facts about the Kennedy assassination involving dubious activity by the intelligence community. This however was born out of forensic investigation and investigative journalism, not wild speculation.

The problem for the church comes when these kinds of people become Christians and retain their paranoid concoctions, repackaging them under the eschatological guise of end times biblical prophecy, and call it a 'watchman ministry' of some description. The Internet is literally loaded with such irresponsible rubbish. It is the devotees of such silly rambling that swallowed the Y2K foolishness.

I do not doubt that Freemasonry is demonic, influenced by Felix Weisshaupt's illuminism and is something no saved Christian should ever be a member of. Many of the most pivotal figures in the sphere of international finance, law and politics are Freemasons. But to argue vociferously as some do that a Masonic conspiracy exists to seat the anti Christ in control of the global economy is unwarranted. There are clearly plans of Satan afoot today with de facto conspiracies to reunite Christendom under the anti Christ institution of the Roman Catholic papacy. But this view is not based on conjecture, but rather published and substantiated fact. So too are plans to ramrod Great Britain into a federal Europe at the expense of sovereignty and some would say political liberty without what many people would consider democratic process. Events in Europe and the Middle East today are of tremendous prophetic significance and there is much going on of a conspiratorial nature. But investigating such things requires both a sound biblical position, and sanctified journalistic skills.

There are those such as Christian journalist David Dolan or University journalism lecturer Bill Alnor whom God has called to review current events with a biblical eye. But God has rather called Chuck Missler to biblical exposition and Barry Smith to evangelism. For me it has been a personal tragedy to see, among others, two such outstanding brothers make public fools of themselves, discredit their ministry, and eclipse much of the good they have otherwise achieved with a preposterous level of unfounded, badly researched, and unbiblical alarmism that only a low grade tabloid would publish. Their videos have gone out, and now the world is laughing at us, and Moriel is being deluged with complaints of people who feel misled by ministries we endorsed. In fact, Moriel promoted Dave Hunt's book on Y2K calling it 'mass hysteria'. While I felt no need to do so personally, I do not fault those who picked up a few cases of long shelf life food and extra batteries as a precaution. But Jesus said not to be anxious about what we eat etc., yet in open defiance of His command there were those preachers going around to churches delivering seminars promoting anxiety.

A watchman on Zion's walls would blow a clear series of notes with his trumpet that sounded a proper alarm (Joel 2:1,Jeremiah 4:5, Hosea 8:1, Amos 3:16). A cacophony of mixed notes tells no one anything but only generates further confusion (1 Corinthians 14:8). People look to leaders for clear, unmixed signals. Instead today they are getting mixed signals only compounding the confusion. When David Pawson's followers looked to him for a clear biblical direction on the last days deception of the Toronto Experience he wrote a book entitled: 'Is the Blessing Biblical?'. It gave just such a mixed signal, saying that the light was neither red nor green, but yellow - and concluded telling people to proceed into Toronto with caution. The light in fact was red. The Fruit of the Holy Spirit is self control (ekreitei), not the lack of it, and as true watchmen predicted no revival came from Toronto. The fact it was a mixture of good and bad indicated it was an impurity (akatharsis) proving it was not of God (Greek text of 1 Thessalonians 2:3), and the fact that it mixed true doctrine with error (parasouxousin) proved it was a deception (Greek text of 2 Peter 2:2). David Pawson himself watched the videos of Rodney Howard Browne and Kenneth Copeland yet, as Isaiah predicted leaders one day would, he tottered when rendering judgment while they reeled with wine (Isaiah 28:7). In these Last Days we don't need those who totter and send mixed signals, but watchmen who sound a clear alarm. Neither do we need watchmen who are not watchmen sounding false alarms. Several years ago Barry Smith issued a public statement distancing himself from my stated opposition to the Toronto Experience, as he himself had been preaching in churches that were into this deception, (although he himself was not). My argument was that Jesus never told us to make converts but disciples, and placing converts into Toronto churches such as Richmond Assembly of God in Melbourne, Australia was not biblical discipleship. Indeed, Jesus told the Pharisees that they went to the ends of the earth for one convert and made him twice the son of hell as themselves. Under Brian Houston and his predecessor Andrew Evans the Australia Assemblies of God has become a whirlwind of everything from the hype artistry of Hill Song to the heresy of Benny Hinn. It has gone almost as far away from the bible as Elim in the UK.

I say it not to criticize Brother Barry, yet I myself turned down TV programs offered to me in both America and Britain because I would not associate with heresy. Each day I ask the Lord not to allow the work of the Lord, as important as it is, to become more important to me than the Lord of the work, lest the ministry itself becomes an idol. The day I compromise biblical truth to get a platform is the day there is no further point in me even having a platform as far as God is concerned. Brother Barry stated in his published announcement about me that 'God called him not to criticize but to preach the gospel and to prepare the church for the last days'. When a gospel preacher places people saved under his ministry into zoos instead of bible-based churches, there is a serious deviation from God's bible stated standards. In the Olivet Discourse (Matthew 24&25, Luke 21), Jesus warned of Middle East events surrounding Jerusalem: wars, rumors of wars, pestilence, and increased famines and earthquakes once each. However Jesus warned of deception perpetrated against the elect and false prophets four times. He did not warn of computer failures causing widespread chaos even once. If someone is called to prepare the church for the last days, why do they not concentrate on alerting the church to the rife deception as Jesus said, in the very churches they preach in - instead of compromising what Jesus said for the sake of keeping a platform in order to concentrate on alerting the church about things Jesus never even mentioned as signs of the end such as Y2K, and making themselves look utterly ridiculous in the process?

Predictably, the most extreme proponents of Y2K mania were not Pentecostals, but hyper-calvinists such as Reconstructionist Gary North, D. James Kennedy and R.C. Sproul as well as the more moderately Calvinistic Jerry Falwell. The Post millennialism of Calvinism is one pillar of Dominion ('Kingdom Now') theology, while charismania and extreme Pentecostalism the other pillar. So too, Calvinistic determinism was a pillar of American slavery and South African Apartheid and it is one pillar of prosperity theology, while Charismania and hyper-Pentecostalism, represented by sensationalists like Jeffrey, are the other. It is therefore not surprising that both extreme Pentecostals and extreme charismatics were but one faction caught up in the Y2K frenzy, while hyper-Calvinists were the other. Worst of all was the virtual scare mongering of Michael Hyatt propagated with the assistance of James Dobson's 'Focus On the Family'. I have never had any regard whatsoever for the so called ministries of an anti Israel theonomist like Gary North, much less an out and out son of Judas like Jerry Falwell who among other outrages commended Korean anti Christ Sun Yung Moon (who claims to be 'Lord of the Second Advent'; eg. 'The returned Christ') as "an unsung hero". As was noted by Hank Hanegraaff, Grant Jeffrey has a track record that had already established him as a crackpot. But I personally however have always appreciated the ministries of both Chuck Missler and Barry Smith, as I have to a lesser degree appreciated R.C. Sproul, (at least for his anti ecumenical stance), and for their sakes as well I am very sorry to see the Y2K rubbish leaving them looking like a public spectacle. May the Lord provide the grace to prevent me from going off into the futility of some ludicrous speculation. When a gifted minister of the Word deviates away from the Word into a focus of his own design, he winds up reducing himself to the level of a crackpot. Here lies the unfortunate result, because both Barry and Chuck are not crackpots. Yet that is precisely what their Y2K antics have been left appearing to be.

Some of the Y2K crowd, for all of their outlandish folly and the damage they have done to the church and to themselves, are still our brothers in Christ (such as Barry Smith and Chuck Missler). They are not those impostors of the Last Days who are deceiving and being deceived mentioned in 2 Timothy 3:13 - so why did they behave like them?

The real problem however is not that their predictions of nuclear cataclysm, mass power failures, social and political calamity, huge air crash disasters, and a global economic meltdown did not happen (Italy spent only 1.5 million pounds on Y2K preparation compared to Britain's nearly half billion and nothing happened in Italy). The real problem is that when events that are truly of some crucial prophetic importance take place and the real watchman sound the alarm, the world and indeed much of the church will now think it is just another false alarm. I hate to say anything good about the devil, but he certainly knows his business. If he can use misguided Christians to engineer deception and mislead the church, what better pawns can he have? The Last Days are too serious a time and biblical prophecy too serious a subject for those clearly not called to it to pretend that they are and hurt the church. We must have real watchmen. Let us pray that the watchman who are not watchmen will display the integrity to apologize to the body and ask God to repair the damage done to the church's credibility and to their own.

The false Maccabees, Ruckmanites, Constance Cumby, and the Cyber-cult

In Daniel 11: 33-35 we read what some theologians term a 'double prophecy'. Daniel makes a prediction of what Matthias the Maccabee and his sons John, Eleazar, Jonathan, and Yehudah would do in the face of the deception of Antiochus IV (known as Epiphanus) who slaughtered a swine in the temple, outlawed Jewish observance of the Torah, hellenised and paganised the popular culture, and set up an image of Zeus in the temple with his own features. He was of course a major type of the anti Christ and up to verse 36 of the chapter there was a historic fulfillment by this mad Selucid King. The anti Christ will replay the saga of Antiochus Epiphanus and recapitulate his deeds, then after verse 36 go even further. Like Antiochus he will achieve much of this by intrigue and deceit (we explain this on the Daniel & Maccabees tapes and video series). As at that time there were the Maccabees who gave understanding to the many, so too in the last days 'those who know their God will take action' when the covenant is violated.

I have no doubt that the Ecumenical movement is a prelude to the rebirth of Babylon the Great in Revelation and that deceptions like Pensacola are preludes to the Great apostasy of Thessalonians. With the current drive for a false peace with Islam in Israel and the reconfederation of the Roman Empire via a pseudo-democratic federal Europe, the juxtaposition of these trends and the constellation of events that result indeed are setting the stage for the Man of Sin which Antiochus, among others, typifies and foreshadows (explained in greater depth on 'The Judeo-Christian Understanding of the Antichrist' tape and video series). There will be those who know their God, will take action, and give insight to the many. But as in the days of Antiochus, there will likewise be those who join with them in hypocrisy and betray them (two of the original Maccabees were killed as a result of internal betrayal). However, we already see the embryo of this in existence. There are those pretending to be watchmen, alerting the church, allies in the cause of truth calling themselves 'Discernment Ministries'; but who are largely a collection of charlatans, frauds, and deceivers with their own agenda who already betray the cause.

These people have much in common and tend to imitate each other, akin to the conspiracy theorists operating along the same kind of line. They postulate things on the basis of conjecture, and those not agreeing with them are branded as false or even New Agers in disguise.

Constance Cumby, who herself has published statements supportive of Roman Catholicism, has attacked Dave Hunt. Kevin Burgess (a real 'cyberworld fruit cake' if there ever was one) has attacked Mike Oppenheimer, a Jewish brother who directs the Hawaii based TV and radio discernment ministry 'Come Let Us Reason'. Tex Marrs has attacked a host of good people including Dave Hunt. Two things seem to characterize these false watchman. The first is that they are 'would be' Christian academics who merely have theological veneers with no real background in any scholarly sense in the matters in which they profess expertise. One need not be an intellectual to be a minister or have discernment, but one must have the qualifications to know what one is talking about. Peter, in his epistle, left scholarly matters to Paul, and some scholarly matters Paul appears to have left to Apollos. People of this ilk such as Gail Riplinger, Barbara Aho, Victoria Dillen, Wendy Howard and Richard Engstrom would be laughed out of any academic forum, but sincere believers not trained in academic theology can be sucked in by their endless production of nonsense, often bordering on pure idiocy. The second thing that defines the false watchmen of this category is their ceaseless propensity to defame and slander true watchmen.

The foundational strata of these false Maccabees are undoubtedly the Ruckmanites, named after their patriarch Peter Ruckman, who is on his third marriage after yet another divorce. Ruckman holds the view that the King James Version of the bible is the only one authorized by God to the point of virtual heresy, claiming that even the additions of the 1611 edition not found in ancient manuscripts are further revelation. Not all of Ruckmanites agree with all of Ruckman's extremes, but they are all influenced by him. The worst of these is Gail Riplinger, who was debunked as a charlatan and a fraud when Christian Research Institute revealed that she can not even read Greek and that her academic credentials are not in theology or in Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic manuscript analysis (basic skills as essential in bible translation as anatomy and physiology are in medicine, or mathematics is in engineering) but absurdity of absurdities, rather in home economics! Unfortunately, instead a writing a thesis on cost effective detergents which she may be qualified to do, she published an outlandish book on 'New Age Bible Versions', doing more harm to the cause of protecting textual orthodoxy from paraphrases, Roman Catholic annotated bibles, and the censored and politically correct 'inclusive version' (dealt with on our tape 'Bible Versions').

Let me state that Moriel and I have no problem with the KJV, I read it devotionally myself. And I respect how God in times past has used it. More to the point, who cannot value the noble heritage of Wycliffe, Tyndale, and Coverdale from whose labors it arises? I am additionally perfectly open to considering serious scholarly arguments from academically qualified Christian sources concerning their theories of Textus Receptus etc. (again, we refer our readers to our own audio on the subject). But these people will have no association with Ruckman or Gail Riplinger. The Trinitarian Bible Society as one example made it clear in print that they do not wish to be identified with her or her book. There have been excellent books on the reliability of New Testament manuscripts authored by reliable scholars such as F.F. Bruce and Dr. Craig Blohmberg. Ruckman, Engstrom, Aho, Dillen, Marrs and Riplinger however are not scholars. Neither are they watchmen. They are mere fakers who only wish they were and pretend to be.

Again the pseudo-academic pretense of these people is at times laughable. When Engstrom was confronted with my response to his nonsensical insistence that the New Testament did not use Midrash citing two known scholars (R.N. Longenecker and John Lightfoot), he reacted by saying only two scholars ever agreed with me (after implying at first there were none). Had Engstrom read Longenecker's bibliography before replying to me on Internet, he would have seen that there are at least 58, and not made a public joke of himself! Another case was Paul Fahy who objected to our critique of the Reformers as not having gone far enough and took exception to our views on the Judaic background of the New Testament. Among other things he insisted that Paul used Greco-Roman concepts such as a Roman legionnaire's armor, not knowing that Paul's usage was simply a recontextualisation of the Hebrew armor straight out of Isaiah 59:17 & Isaiah 52:7. He also asserted that he knew of no scholar who ever attributed Gnostic influences to Augustine, while every first year seminary student knows that Augustine had been a member of the Gnostic Manichean sect. While no scholarly source would attribute any credibility to such people, the average well meaning Christian unfortunately just may.

Along a similar line is hyper-Calvinist Peter Glover, who ignorantly equated Midrash with gnosticism, only to have it pointed out in the public arena that it was a renowned Puritan hyper-Calvinist theologian who first documented Midrash in the New Testament and wrote the first Midrashic commentary on the New Testament. Like Cumby who assails other discernment ministries while she herself is party to serious doctrinal error and ecumenical deception, Glover, likewise attacking other valid discernment ministries such as Michael Penfold professes to be an anti charismatic/anti Pentecostal. Yet he himself teamed up with Patrick Dixon in an AIDS charity. Dixon is the most extreme and experiential of charismatics who is a virtual mystic and who teaches New Age experiences such as 'Altered States of Consciousness' as manifestations of the Holy Spirit and grounds for irrational behavior.

We again point out that while generally having the beliefs of Ruckman and Riplinger about the King James Version etc. and being clearly influenced by them, not all follow them to the same degree. Yet, Cyber cultists like Aho, Dillen, Thomas Lamb, and Engstrom with their Ruckmanite and identity movement leanings can be operationally compared to small time gangsters. They do not have the organization, crooked lawyers, money-laundering accountants, or power of a professional criminal. This is like what happens when the cyber cultists get access to the Internet. Most cyber cultists have no church membership, do no evangelism, discipleship or anything else biblically ordained as a normal aspect of Christian discipleship. Theirs is mainly a cyber church where like their paranoid conspiracy theorist counterparts of the secular world they carry on the latest conjecture and attack anyone not getting on board, once more only revealing their ignorance each step of the way.

One recent example of this was their aversions to 'The Star of David'. This aversion is partially shaped by the anti Semitism of the identity movement with which the cyber cult is favored. The identity movement in turn is influenced not only by British Israelism but by the misogenic Manifest Sons/Latter Day Rain heretic William Branham who held to serpent seed beliefs and cursed the Trinity. It is no coincidence for example that Engstrom's partner in the "US1" email network circulates email statements supportive of Branham.

In fact in Judaism, what non-Jews wrongly call the Star of David is actually known as 'The Shield of David' or Magen David and is not seen as a star. Its rabbinic interpretation is the configuration of the 12 tribes around the holy Ark sojourning through the wilderness. It was indeed a pre Christian pagan symbol in Babylon, Phoenicia, and Egypt. But only as the cross was a pre Christian pagan symbol in Celtic Britain and Ireland. The menorah, not the Star of David was the actual ancient symbol of the Jews (and is still the symbol of the State of Israel and the official seal on Israeli government legal documents). So too, the fish, not the cross was the original Christian symbol. The fish also had been a pagan symbol of worship of the fish god dagon (as in the Old Testament). It is a five star pentagram that is a satanic emblem, not a six pointed Star of David. Both these Christian and Jewish symbols had pagan equivalents. The Hebrew Temple had architectural parallels in pagan Egypt and the Flood Narrative in Genesis has a literary parody in the Myth of Gilgemesh and the Masonic Jahbalon is a trinity. Do surface parallelisms dismiss something as evil?

It is rather what the symbol means in a given historical setting and cultural context that determines if it is evil or not. The American manned space program carried project names like Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo, but no one identified these project names with pagan deities or astrology or labeled them inherently demonic. Cyber cultist however, driven by a combination of theological ignorance and paranoia can do no other. Again, we are dealing with charlatanism. There are very good Christian researchers like Dr. John Weldon, Dr. Ron Rhodes, and Dr. Tal Brooks who are bona fide experts on cultic influence. There are superb Christian experts on the occult such as Dr. Curt Koch. We have an anthropological and archaeological masterpiece 'The Two Babylons' by Alexander Hislop documenting the influx of pagan symbolism into Christendom. The Ahos, Dillens, Howards, and Engstroms of the cyber cult however are not anthropologists, archaeologists, psychologists or theologians. They are basically an unbalanced fringe element who are but false Maccabees posing as the watchmen they are not.

You have read about the watchmen who are not, now here are some who are. One thing the Body of Christ needs in these Last Days are true watchmen. We need people who are bible based, and who operate valid discernment ministries to alert the church and give understanding to the many, as Daniel predicted by the Holy Spirit would rise up. These legitimately help prepare the church for the End Times in the correct biblical sense. Among others (as of February 2000), Jacob Prasch & Moriel are pleased to endorse the following Watchmen ministries as true ones. We may not agree with every aspect of their ministry, nor they with every aspect of ours, but we stand by them as comrades in Christ's cause and we sanction them as honest and credible voices for truth and righteousness in an age of deception and compromise who are worthy of the prayers and support of concerned believers.

The Berean Call (Dave Hunt & Tom McMahon)
Belfast Berean (Mark McAlister)
Media Spotlight (Al Dagger)
Apostasy Alert (Jackie Alnor)
CWM (Philip Powell)
Eddy Cheong Ministries (Dr. Eddy Cheong)
St. Matthew Publishing (Philip Foster)
PWM (Clifford Hill & David Noakes)
Spirit of 88 (Michael De Semlyn)
Living Word (Gary Hall)
Bread Upon the Water (Bill Brehm)
Christian Voice (Stephen Green)
Light For the Last Days (Tony Pearce)
Take Heed Ministries (Cecil Andrews)
Come Let Us Reason (Mike Oppenheimer)
Personal Freedom Outreach (Dick Fisher)
Utah Lighthouse Ministry (Sandra Tanner)
Reach Out Trust (Doug Harris)
Discernment in the Church (Sandy Simpson)
Discernment Ministries (Jewel van der Merwe)
Kings Divinity School (Calvin Smith)



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