Light-work

When Moral High Ground is the Pits!

As I am listening to President Obama's "100 Days Press Conference," I am struck by his response to a water-boarding question. He believes this "enhanced interrogation technique" is torture and wants nothing to do with it. He expressed a commitment to "hold true to our ideals" even when doing so makes it harder to fight terrorism.

Will the President better protect our nation by seizing this moral high ground? Will he inspire those who hate us to admit the error of their ways? I can hear them now: "We've made a horrible mistake! Sure, we have not been above some righteous beheading now and then. But the great Satan has disdained interrogation techniques we consider comparatively tame. How he shames us with his obvious moral superiority! How wrong of us to think he is our enemy when he should be esteemed as our teacher."

My purpose in this moment is not to evaluate interrogation techniques or how shifting the line of demarcation between what we will and won't do will influence our national security. My attention was fixed on the glaring incongruity between what he considers "above his pay grade" and what he deems his moral obligation. The President wants to be able to sleep well at night in the knowledge that no one has been intentionally subjected to the fear of drowning on his watch. Yet, he is apparently capable of sleeping soundly while millions silently scream, their lives snuffed out by those who swear, "Primum non nocere."

The Declaration of Independence that captures our "ideals" names "life" as an unalienable right granted all men by their Creator. I am not closed to a debate about what constitutes torture. But spare me the tortured morality devoid of moral sensitivity to the greatest crime against humanity of our age. How disgusting to hear someone crowing about his scruples over scaring people when he so cavalierly dismisses the slaughter of the innocents. I think I'm going to puke.

Everybody Share!

 

SA has requested that we add a feature to L-W that facilitates sharing. Done! At the bottom of each post you will find a little animated icon and tab titled [share this]. Click on the tab and it will open a pop-up menu (a sample is pictured above) that allows you to forward the relevant post to friends and family (enemies, too, for that matter). Anytime you read something you think could help someone else, feel free to share!

Out, Out, Brief Candle!

If you check the "Where's LightWork" clustrmaps thumbnail in the right hand column, you'll notice that somebody has extinguished all our lovely little red points of light. Alas, clustrmaps housekeeping has decided that we can't have a world awash in red ink. (I say let's elect clustrmap housekeeping to Congress!) You can still find last year's map by clicking on the thumbnail and then clicking on the tab titled  [maps archive]. Otherwise, expect to see our fresh new world which began on April 27.

An Apocalyptic "Smart Idol"

What would church be like if the morning message was delivered by the "Serminator?" Would it be an improvement to consult a cyborg "Bible answer man" who can instantly answer all of your questions? How will "technological progress" affect "the worship service of the future?"

We have smart bombs and smart home technology. Wait till you see the new "smart idol!" Some time in the foreseeable future, a religious leader called the "false prophet" will arise who assists a powerful governmental leader called "the antichrist" or "the beast." One of the great accomplishments of the false prophet will be creation of a "smart idol," an image of the beast that is capable of breathing and speaking. The achievement will be impressive enough to promote worship of the beast.

In a previous post, we noted that the inability of idols to speak diminishes their appeal. By solving this problem, the false prophet will take worship of the antichrist to a whole new level. Here's the Apostle John's warning about what to expect:

And he [the false prophet] deceives those who dwell on the earth because of the signs which it was given him to perform in the presence of the beast [the antichrist], telling those who dwell on the earth to make an image to the beast who had the wound of the sword and has come to life. And it was given to him [the false prophet] to give breath to the image of the beast, so that the image of the beast would even speak and cause as many as do not worship the image of the beast to be killed (Rev. 13:14-15).

This image appears to be a living thing, it speaks, and it kills. The Terminator series has already introduced us to the idea. The false prophet will take the idea and make it real in the world in which we now live. I do not know if this will be achieved through technology or something supernatural. But it will be utterly remarkable. Most men will be enthralled by the beast and captivated by his image. Those who see it for what it is, will discern a connection with the numbers 6-6-6, will be excluded from participation in the marketplace, and will be marked for extermination. The smart idol of the future will not be very tolerant. How politically incorrect!

Could a Terminator Reinvent Idolatry?

The fourth installment of the Terminator movie series is scheduled for release this May. Although the storyline of each movie reflects slightly different time-lines, a computer with artificial intelligence that realizes self awareness is central to each plot. This is not the first time men have spun tales about "when good inventions go bad." Frankenstein fits the profile, as does HAL in Space Odyssey, and a host of lesser lights from sci-fi movies screened during the cold war. But the Terminator series (and a TV spin-off, The Sarah Conner Chronicles) has made the possibility of men creating sentient beings seem believable.

Should the believable become real, a key stumbling block to idolatry would be removed. In yesterday's post, Idols are Dumb, we observed that the attraction of idolatry (which is self-worship) is compromised by the fact that an idol can't speak. So, when a man build's an idol to sing his praises, it bites that said idol has nothing to say!

What if a man could construct an image that speaks? And what if that image could declare the praises of his creator? And what if that image could come up with other witty things to say based upon its superior intelligence? An idol that speaks and is smart - what would men do if they beheld and heard such a thing? I am confident that virtually everyone would be totally smitten by the thing.

Idols are Dumb!

In the book of Revelation, we are introduced to a future form of idolatry. Some of the predictions in John's apocalyptic vision make sense to the modern mind. But idol worship? Surely thoughtful men with an appreciation for science are beyond the appeal of idolatry. Idols are for superstitious souls who imagine misfortune as a sign the gods are angry. How is it that idolatry could make a big comeback in man's future?

Let's be clear about two things. First, the spirit of idolatry is found in self-worship. Isaiah got to the heart of the matter:

    Their land has also been filled with idols;
    They worship the work of their hands,
    That which their fingers have made (Isa. 2:8).

All idolatry is a form of self admiration in which one praises himself by praising his work. A man's accomplishment could be as simple as a stone image or something vastly more sophisticated. But regardless of an idol's form, idol worship is always self-worship.

Second, all idols have a down-side. They can't talk! The OT prophet Habakkuk found the fact that idols are dumb more than a little amusing:

"What profit is the idol when its maker has carved it, or an image, a teacher of falsehood? For its maker trusts in his own handiwork when he fashions speechless idols. Woe to him who says to a piece of wood, ‘Awake!’ To a mute stone, ‘Arise!’ And that is your teacher? Behold, it is overlaid with gold and silver, and there is no breath at all inside it. But the Lord is in His holy temple. Let all the earth be silent before Him” (Hab. 2:18-20).

Men should be quiet and listen when God talks! But idols don't, so men have to do all the talking. This is definitely the downside to idolatry - a man ends up muttering to himself. The appeal of idolatry (self-praise) would surely go up if idols weren't mute. This is precisely what makes the "new idolatry" of Revelation an amazing innovation. Get ready for "idolatry reinvented." More tomorrow!

What Cog is Gog?

The prophesy against Gog and Magog begs the question, "When will these things be?" For a summary of "these things" read yesterday's post and Ezekiel 38-39. A leader named Gog will invade Israel with a coalition army looking for precious metals and commodities. He will fully expect to wipe Israel off the map. But, he will only succeed in rousing God to Israel's defense. Gog will be the one caught by surprise and seriously outgunned. When the dust has all settled, God predicts, "The house of Israel will know that I am the Lord their God" (39:22). God also declares, "I will not hide My face from them any longer, for I will have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel" (39:29).

From the perspective of the present, there are two key periods of future history. "The tribulation" will be an unprecedented time of earthly turmoil marked by famine, natural disasters, economic crises, and religious persecution. When Jesus returns to earth, his "second coming" will end the tribulation and begin "the millennium," a period of unprecedented world peace and prosperity. Within this framework, modern students of the Bible have proposed five possible locations for Gog's invasion and defeat. I have positioned each by number within the time-line represented above.

Why the broad range of opinions? All of these views struggle to deal with two key features of the prophesy against Gog. For one, Israel is said to be dwelling in peace and security at the time of the invasion. For two, God's defeat of Gog's coalition seems to be something of a "last battle," the extinction of Israel's enemies and the full realization of God's fellowship with Israel. So the scenario associated with each view must include Israel at peace before the invasion (the "dwelling in peace" test), God's dramatic intervention (the "decisive victory" test), and full enjoyment of God's blessings for Israel after the invasion (the "new day" test).

View one seems to inform the works of Joel Rosenberg and Tim LaHaye. I am not sure how peacefully Israel currently dwells in the land, but let's assume that view one meets the "dwelling in peace" test. I still have serious doubt that the beginning of the tribulation can be construed as a decisive victory or a new day (tests two and three). The tribulation will be the worst of times for Israel; many will be martyred, many more persecuted. In which case, I do not find view one particularly compelling. This does not annul the possibility that Russia and Iran could form an alliance in our day. It simply means that Ezekiel 38-39 is not the predictor of such an occurrence.

Of the fives views, I favor number 5. It well satisfies all three tests. Interestingly, in the book of Revelation there is a reference to an event that sounds strikingly similar to Ezekiel 38-39:

When the thousand years [millennium] are completed, Satan will be released from his prison, and will come out to deceive the nations which are in the four corners of the earth, Gog and Magog, to gather them together for the war; the number of them is like the sand of the seashore. And they came up on the broad plain of the earth and surrounded the camp of the saints and the beloved city, and fire came down from heaven and devoured them (Rev. 20:7-9).

From the dawn of human history, sin has created bad blood between brothers. Perhaps Gog's invasion will be the last chapter in this sad story that began with Cain and Abel. Noah had three sons, one of whom was Japheth. Japheth had seven sons including three named Magog, Tubal, and Meshech. In Ezekiel's prophecy, Gog is the leader of the three people groups bearing these precise names. Their grudge is against Israel, the people group descended from Jacob a descendant of Japheth's brother, Shem. At its root, Gog's invasion is an outworking of a rivalry between Japheth and Shem.

How much of this future rivalry did Noah see when he blessed these two sons: "Blessed be the Lord, The God of Shem. ...May God enlarge Japheth, And let him dwell in the tents of Shem" (Gen. 9:26-27). When Gog decides to invade Israel and seize what belongs to a people dwelling in peace, the God of Shem and of Israel will say "enough is enough." When this happens, it will mark the end for Magog, Meshech, and Tubal, the people associated with three of Japheth's seven sons, and any who align with them to defy God, the Defender of Israel.

Shock and Awe for Gog and Magog

A prophecy against Gog and Magog is recorded in Ezekiel 38 and 39. It was written by the prophet Ezekiel while in exile in Babylon during the 6^th century BC. He described a bold invasion of Israel that ends in the complete annihilation of the invaders at the hands of God.  What can we learn from Ezekiel's prophecy about this invasion?

First, let's check out the roster. Gog seems to be a king, and Magog his home turf. Gog is also the "rosh prince," or chief prince of Meshech and Tubal. We cannot rule out the possibility that there is a Russian connection to Gog and Magog. Their attack on Israel does come from "the remote parts of the north" (Ezek 38:7). The coalition Gog cobbles together will include nations from all four sides of Israel: Iran (Persia) to the east, Sudan and northern Ethiopia (Cush) to the south, Libya (Put) to the West, and Turkey (Meshech, Tubal, Gomer, and Beth Togarmah) to the North.

What is the sequence of events? Gog has a deep seated antagonism toward God and will be drawn toward a final showdown in Israel. The invasion will be motivated by a desire for "plunder," specifically for the precious metals of gold and silver and basic commodities that include cattle and "goods" (38:13). Gog will perceive that conditions are favorable to his success based on two strategic advantages. (1) Israel has negligible defensive assets. They are at peace with their neighbors and live securely (38:8, 11, 14). Israel dwells "at rest" in unwalled villages and without rudimentary defensive systems like bars and gates. Gog considers Israel easy pickin's. (2) He has also assembled a massive army capable of quick mobilization (38:9, 15). He believes he and his innumerable allies can bring a whole new meaning to the phrase, "shock and awe."

Gog, however, will make one fatal error of judgment. In his planning for war, He will factor God out of his calculations. Big mistake! God will take "shock and awe" to a level beyond Gog's comprehension. Some of the weapons at God's disposal will include a devastating earth-quake, pestilence, torrential rain, hail, fire, and brimstone (38:19, 22). God will lay down a dense blanket of the fog of war and create confusion in which Gog's invaders turn on themselves (38:21).

Gog will discover himself wholly unprepared for God's counter-attack. His invasion will become his Waterloo, Israel's miraculous deliverance, and the complete end of Gog's entire army. Israel will seize spoil from the fallen invaders and destroy their war materiel by fire (39:9-10). A massive valley in Israel (perhaps the one pictured above) will become the location for the burial of Gog's entire invasion force (39:11). The task of burying the dead will take seven months to complete (39:12)!

There are two statements that capture the final outcome of this crowning moment in Israel's future: "And the house of Israel will know that I am the Lord their God from that day onward" (39:22); "I will not hide My face from them any longer, for I will have poured out My Spirit on the house of Israel" (39:29).

No event in history comes close to matching the details of this account, so it hasn't happened yet. The only time marker we are provided in Ezekiel 38-39 is that the invasion will occur "after many days" and "in the latter years" (38:8). Based on what we know from the rest of the Bible about future events, can we pinpoint "Gog's invasion" within this biblical framework?

Agog Over Gog and Magog

Epicenter, the book and companion DVD by Joel C. Rosenberg, allows us a peek behind the curtain. The author explores and explains the connections to prophesy, history, and current events informing the plot lines of his best selling political thrillers. Here's a link to Joel Rosenberg's blog, if you want to learn more about his thinking. He was also a guest on Glenn Beck yesterday marketing his latest, Inside the Revolution.

In 2000, Mr. Rosenberg observed an alliance forming between Russia and Iran. This unprecedented development prompted him to retrieve a book he had read almost ten years earlier, The Coming Peace in the Middle East, by Tim LaHaye. According to Rosenberg, Coming Peace described "a coming period of security and prosperity in Israel, followed by the rise of a military alliance between Russia, Iran, and a group of other Islamic countries that would target Israel and drive the world to the brink of the apocalypse in what Ezekiel described as 'the last days'" (Epicenter, p. 24). Dr. LaHaye found the basis for this understanding in his interpretation of the "prophesy against Gog," found in Ezekiel 38-39. Mr. Rosenberg was intrigued; "If the rebirth and re-population of Israel described in Ezekiel 36 and 37 were coming true in my lifetime, was it not at least remotely possible that the peace and prosperity - and future war and divine rescue - described in chapters 38 and 39 could soon come true as well?" (p. 29).

This view that Ezekiel 38-39 is describing "the next big thing" on a prophetic time-table informs Mr. Rosenberg's writings. Is this the right spot in time to connect this prophesy? It's a great question that we will speak to in tomorrow's post. But first let's make a few preliminary observations.

The pinpoint accuracy of biblical prophecy does not become obvious until after the fact. Here is a great case in point from the Light-Work Resource Collection. From our vantage point in history, Daniel 9:1-21 is breath-taking as you line up each verse with a four century time-line of middle eastern history. But for those living in the 4^th or 5^th century BC, they could only speculate about how each new development might play out according to Daniel's predictions. This is the speculative challenge Mr. Rosenberg faces. He has written novels "about how the Ezekiel scenario could unfold" (p. 29). How Ezekiel 38 and 39 are actually fulfilled  might be much different. But IF they were fulfilled "next," his scenario's are plausible.

Prophesy rarely provides time markers that allow us to discern WHEN a particular event will occur. Prophesy tells us WHAT will happen, but generally leaves us in the dark about WHEN. This is a function of prophesy's purpose: It is not intended to equip us to become "junior prophets" who predict the dates of future events. Prophesy invites us to get ready for what will happen without knowing exactly when. And it encourages us that God is in control when events unfold just as predicted.

Before checking tomorrow's post, read Ezekiel 38-39. Make some summary observations about WHAT will happen and we'll compare notes tomorrow.

PM Netanyahu and "the Joker"

Last night, I watched the DVD, Epicenter, that is based on the book by the same name written by Joel Rosenberg. I especially found the segments from an interview of Benjamin Netanyahu to be informative and compelling. Mr. Netanyahu became the Prime Minister of Israel on March 31 and has a clear and settled understanding of Iran's intentions. The video clip from Glenn Beck is several years old but will allow you to listen first hand to this articulate and engaging leader without a teleprompter.

In his Mr. Netanyahu's view, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad seeks to hasten the arrival of the Islamic Messiah by creating havoc and chaos. The destruction of Israel (little Satan) and America (the Great Satan) are vital to his plans. The acquisition of both nuclear weapons and an effective missile delivery system will dramatically improve his ability to achieve these ends.

Make no mistake - Ahmadinejad is crazy enough to relish the chance to use nukes. He is the living embodiment of "the Joker" as depicted by Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight. We are crazy if we think he is interested in a "sensible" resolution. I am glad that Israel has a leader who understands the threat and sees the need to take action. When Mr. Netanyahu does, he will probably be portrayed in the press as the crazy one. What a joke!

Ferdinand de Lesseps and Infectious Optimism

Everything David McCullough has written is worth reading. One of my favorites is The Path Between the Seas, the fascinating account of the creation of the Panama Canal. His almost 700 page volume is divided into three "books," each devoted to a major phase of the project. The first book chronicles the failed attempt by the French to build the canal, a debacle spanning the years 1870 and 1894.

The dominant figure in book one is Ferdinand de Lesseps. Ferdinand was a diplomat and optimist who seemed the perfect man for the job. He had employed his formidable skills to great effect in the successful completion of the Suez Canal. The Panama Canal seemed the logical next step, albeit this challenge was of far greater scale.

I find this statement from Wikipedia ironic: "He attempted to repeat this success [Suez] with an effort to build a lock-less version of the Panama Canal during the 1880s, but the project was finally completed by the United States in 1914, once developments in medicine had been made which combatted the serious problems of malaria and yellow fever in the area." The statement makes it seem that the US merely picked up where Ferdinand left off, once somebody figured out how to fight malaria and yellow fever. Read the book to get it right - de Lesseps had moved some dirt, but his plan was flawed. The chief impediment to French success was de Lesseps own unassailable optimism. Although neither an engineer nor banker, Ferdinand was CONVINCED that only a sea level canal would do, even though his engineering staff knew this represented an impossible challenge.

Here is an extended quote from McCullough that captures the problem:

"The important point is that de Lesseps, once again, would get exactly what he wanted; he would follow his own lead and they would nod in agreement and go along with him as willingly as his stock-holders had, raising no serious objections about anything, which must be viewed as another testament to his powers of persuasion, rather than any lack of perception on their part. Unmistakably these were men of eminence and ability. ...Yet none was willing, or bold enough perhaps, to challenge de Lesseps' judgment or to take seriously the inevitable cost of a sea- level canal. Later it would be charged that de Lesseps never listened to his engineers. But in fact it was the other way around; it was they who were listening to him" (p. 137)

McCullough quotes the Illustrated London News which observed, "Perhaps no other man ever possessed to such a marvelous extent the power of communicating to other minds the faith and the fervor which animated his own" (p. 137). De Lesseps, in his own words, enjoyed "the privilege of being believed without having to prove what one affirms" (p. 239). McCullough notes, "His was the faith that the mountains could be moved by technology. He had the nonscientific, nontechnical man's faith that science and technology would 'find a way'" (p. 239).

What Ferdinand described as the investment opportunity of a lifetime was eventually demonstrated a fiasco. Those who believed this great optimist and invested in his project incurred staggering loses. They were taken in by a convincing communicator with a positive message and a unbridled confidence in what men can accomplish.

The incessant attempts to raise capital for a flawed project, the astounding amount of time, money, and manpower expended without return, the dogged enthusiasm for what bright minds can achieve, it all sounds eerily familiar to those dwelling in land of the bailout. When the dust settles on the current economic crisis, will we recognize the ghost of de Lesseps?

When men who knew better remained silent before unassailable optimism, when blind faith in the ability of man held sway, when men acted on the strength of another's belief despite their personal misgivings, disaster was waiting in the wings. Do not underestimate the power of men to be convinced of what defies their better judgment. Do not doubt the inevitability of disaster when they do.

Apology Sans Humility: Who's Dismissive Now?

President Obama is winding up his first official foray to Europe. His speech in Strasbourg contained a curious confession: “Instead of celebrating your dynamic union and seeking to partner with you to meet common challenges, there have been times where America has shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive.” Watch the video clip to hear his comment in context.

Obama is making an admission intended to bolster Europe's interest in partnering. Being dismissive involves rejecting serious consideration of another's proposals. Derision adds contempt, ridicule and scorn upon those whose suggestions have been dismissed. The President is trying to win points in Europe by declaring that America has hastily brushed aside some of Europe's proposals. At times, their suggestions have been met with American mockery or disdain.

Some might applaud the President for his attempt to patch up relations with Europe and praise him for his humble confession. Is his gesture worthy of such praise? Let's assume for purposes of argument that America is guilty as charged of being dismissive and derisive. Let's also assume that Europe has been nothing but purely reasonable and gracious toward the US. Assume that America has responded to Europe's consistently noble gestures by being churlish cowboys. Let's also assume that nothing Europe proposed warranted a dismissal. Only sensible proposals begging to be honestly debated by reasonable men have come from their lips.

Yes, those are a lot of assumptions, mostly gratuitous. But assume for a moment that they are true. Even in that moment, the President's apology is not a personal confession. He is NOT saying, "I have been dismissive, even derisive." His "admission" is a form of accusing others. He does not mention President Bush by name but clearly this is a way of criticizing a US President and the previous administration to curry the favor of Europe. If Europe despised Bush, then Obama will partner with Europe in disdain.

I cannot overlook the irony of the situation. President Obama is chiding the Bush administration for being dismissive, yet isn't his criticism fueled by a dismissal? Is he not reversing Bush policies simply because they are Bush policies? Alas, I doubt I will hear him say something like this: "There have been times where I have shown arrogance and been dismissive, even derisive, of President Bush." That apology would get my attention!

Wow, Wampum, Win, or Whack?

Yesterday, a L-W regular spotted an intriguing connection: The Obama Administration's "help" for domestic automakers comes from the same mold as Nebuchadnezzar's image. King Neb was king of the ancient world's leading superpower in the sixth century BC. One night he saw a spectacular statue in his dreams. The four sections of the statue represented a succession of four kingdoms. Each was associated with a specific commodity, gold with Babylon, silver with Medo-Persia, bronze with Greece, and iron and clay with Rome.

In a sermon series on the book of Daniel a few years ago, I observed that these metallic associations well captured the leadership philosophy of each empire. Here's my summary from one of the sermon slides. Please note that I have used the tried and true preacher's tactic of beginning each point with the same letter - I'm sure you're impressed:

• Gold /Wow!  Using spectacle and “dazzle” to inspire people to follow
• Silver / Wampum!  Using money to purchase allegiance
• Bronze / Win!  Using superior strength to overcome opposition
• Iron / Whop!  Using terror / fear to crush men’s will to resist

So, which approach best summarizes the administration's plan to limit consumers to "responsible" automotive choices? For the auto manufacturer, the government is using wampum as leverage. Toward the consumer, the government is bent on winning. Consumers want one thing, the government wants another. By using its wampum-based influence over the manufacturers, the administration limits consumers to choices it deems "responsible." Whatever choice the consumer makes constitutes an administration victory. Won't this be fun!

Begone, Oh Chubbies!

I always thought successful companies employed a simple strategy: "Figure out what people want and sell it to them." Silly me! Here's an article from the LA Times that outlines how the Obama administration is leaning in their latest efforts to "help" the ailing auto industry: Stop giving the people what they want. Only offer them what Uncle Sam has decided they should want. Give them Renault Dauphines instead of evil F-150's and Corvettes.

What a great idea! We could use this approach in all kinds of areas. For example, we have an obesity problem in America, right? And most clothiers are struggling in the economic downturn, right? So why should the government waste a perfectly good crisis? Why can't Uncle Sam fight obesity while "helping" the garment industry just like he is helping Detroit? If he required all garment makers to produce only small and medium sized clothes, it would force the chubs to change their ways! The obese would be shamed (literally) or constrained into eating responsibly.

I wonder if a black market might develop. Imagine catching a voice from the shadows, "Hey, buddy. I've got large and (he pauses for effect) extra-large T shirts. (He lowers his voice to a whisper.) I've also got jeans in waste sizes of 36 and above. You ever worn clothes that fit? You're not gonna believe how good it feels. Wanna try 'em on?" Watch human ingenuity kick in when men are coerced into doing the right thing.

What would our world look like if God "helped" us using the Obama method? Forcing men to do "the right thing" by denying them all choices to do otherwise is not beyond His ability. But God has a better idea! Use grace to accomplish what force cannot. Give men a perfectly good reason to choose the right thing. The cross is that perfectly good reason. Grace respects me enough to allow me to make my own choice, but gives me sufficient reason to make the right choice. That idea suits me better than jeans that fit.