By DAVID RUBIN—
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s upcoming speech to the joint houses of Congress has stirred up an unprecedented political storm in both Washington and Jerusalem, but there are several positive developments that are being overlooked by the media.
I have always emphasized that in the muddy world of politics, in which evasion and/or zig-zagging often seem to be the norm, the occasional emergence of clarification is a ray of light for the voting public.
Such a situation enabling clarification has developed as a result of the controversy over Netanyahu’s expected March 3rd speech to Congress. While the Israeli Left has been mercilessly attacking Netanyahu for ignoring the wishes of the White House and for his insistence on going forward with the speech so close to the March 17 elections, their Democratic counterparts in Washington have been scrambling to decide what to do on the day of the speech.
The fact is that the Dems have a serious dilemma. Everyone knows that the controversy isn’t really about the date of the Israeli elections, nor is it about the supposed lack of proper protocol in House Speaker John Boehner’s invitation. The real issue is that there have been consistent reports in recent weeks, confirming that Iran and the Western powers are very close to signing an agreement. It’s been reported that the proposed deal would enable the Islamic state to continue its drive to achieve full nuclear weapons capability. Netanyahu’s speech to Congress couldn’t be timelier in light of this existential threat to Israel’s survival.
Most Democrats in Congress have long stressed their pro-Israel credentials, but they now need to decide whether to attend the speech, thereby literally standing firmly with Israel against Iran and the forces of Islamic extremism, or to be conveniently absent on that day, a prospect that House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi has not so subtly hinted at. Such a conspicuous act by Democrats would be a demonstrative show of support for the Obama administration’s policy of negotiating, or in the words of Iran’s leadership, “begging” the mullahs in Teheran to sign an agreement.
Vice-President Joe Biden has already made it known that he is planning to be absent on the day of the speech, thereby supporting Obama’s policy of weakness, and many of his congressional colleagues are now trying to decide what to do.
A word of warning to the Democrats: It’s not enough to declare before every American election that you are pro-Israel, while spitting in its face in its time of need. The Democrats may not be happy about it, but their attendance at the Netanyahu speech will indeed be seen as a litmus test that pro-Israel American voters should take note of. The real question is: Are you for us or are you against us?
We will find out on March 3rd.
The thoughts below are based upon the speeches of Rivlin, the President of Israel, and the writings of Bruno Bettelheim and affirmed by scriptures, as in Richard Anthony’s ‘Contracts and Covenants’:
1.0 The President of the State of Israel, Rivlin, spoke about the issue of friendships amongst the leaders of Israel and the other western democratic nations, that these were:
*friendships, which come from having a set if shared judeo-christian values
*friendships, which are between people
*friendships, which are above political parties and opinions,
*friendships, which are borne out in trust and shared values
*friendships, which come from a complete belief in cooperation
When the first cited statement ceases to exist, do these friendships, then also cease to exist. Our observation is that there are two world views that are at play in our human relationships today: the ancient traditional judeo-christian value system, which includes the ten commandments, upon which is based our western democracies common law, and the jurisprudence systems built on it.
——————————————————
We Cannot Allow US-Israel Relations to be harmed
by Roi Yanovsky, in Israel News
February 8, 2015
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4624270,00.html
——————————————————-
2.0 Bruno Bettelheim writes that the leaders, of Israel and other western democratic nations, upon espousing the secular humanist value system,which is an antagonistic, relativistic, allegedly individualistic system of values, have begun systemically “… working to do away with the ancient judeo-christian barriers of state, family, church, society, that once prevented our destructive tendencies from running rampant, both in ourselves and in society. These ancient barriers were put to question by fools, who have said in their hearts ‘there is no God’ [Psalms 14:1, 53:1]; thus weakening their power to restrain our destructive tendencies. So it has come to be, that the old means of controlling the ‘death-and-destruction instinct’ lost their hold, and a supposed new, higher morality that would replace these ancient restraints, has NOT yet been realized.”
3.0 Scripturally, as described by Anthony, in his treatise on “Contracts and Covenants”, “a covenant [deal, contract, agreement, alliance, pledge, treaty], between man and man is sacred (Joshua 2:8-21; 9:16-21, Galatians 3:15, Psalms 15:4), binding (Joshua 9:18-20, Jeremiah 34:8-21, Ezekiel 17:14-18, Galatians 3:15), binding, not only on those who make them, but on those who are represented (Deuteronomy 29:14-15). Those who breached their covenant were punished (2 Samuel 21:1-6, Jeremiah 34:8-22, Ezekiel 17:13-19). Covenants were forbidden to be made with certain heathen nations (Exodus 23:32; 34:12; Deuteronomy 7:2-3; 13:6,8, Joshua 23:6-7, Judges 2:2, Ezra 9:12) and with unbelievers (Proverbs 1:10,15, 2 Corinthians 6:14-17, Ephesians 5:11) because it may lead to idolatry (Exodus 34:15-16, Numbers 25:1-8, Deuteronomy 7:4; Judges 3:5-7; Revelation 2:20).
Covenants were designed for establishing friendship (1 Samuel 18:3), procuring assistance in war (1 Kings 15:18-19), mutual protection (Genesis 26:28,29; 31:50-52), establishing peace (Joshua 9:15-16), promoting trade (1 Kings 5:6-11), and selling land (Genesis 23:14-16, Jeremiah 32:7-16,25). Sometimes names were given to places where a covenant was made (Genesis 21:31; 31:47-49).
Covenants were ratified by giving the hand (Ezra 10:19, Lamentations 5:6, Ezekiel 17:18, Proverbs 6:1; 11:21; 17:18; 22:26), by loosing the shoe (Ruth 4:6-11), by giving presents (Genesis 21:27-30, 1 Samuel 18:3,4), by making a feast (Genesis 26:30; 31:54), by a monument (Genesis 31:45,46,49-53), by salting (Leviticus 2:13, Numbers 18:19, 2 Chronicles 13:5), by offering a sacrifice (Genesis 15:9-17, Jeremiah 34:18-19), and by oath (Genesis 21:23,31; 26:31, Joshua 9:15,20, 1 Chronicles 16:16, Hebrews 6:16-17).
Covenants were written and sealed (Joshua 24:25-26, Nehemiah 9:38, Jeremiah 32:10-12), and were made in front of witnesses (Genesis 23:17-18, Ruth 4:1-2,9-11), and God was often called to witness (Genesis 31:50,53). Once a covenant is confirmed, it is unalterable (Galatians 3:15).
God’s people were condemned for making covenants with idolatrous nations (Isaiah 30:2-5, Hosea 12:1) and it provoked the anger of God (Deuteronomy 7:4; 31:16,17, 2 Chronicles 19:2, Ezra 9:13,14, Psalms 106:29,40, Isaiah 2:6, Joshua 23:12-13, Judges 2:1-3). Covenants were often violated by the wicked (Genesis 26:16, Romans 1:31, 2 Timothy 3:3). Covenants were also broken by fellow believers (Genesis 29:15-30).
The Jews were forbidden to enter into an alliance of any kind
(1) with the Canaanites (Ex. 23:32, 33; 34:12-16);
(2) with the Amalekites (Ex. 17:8, 14; Deut. 25:17-19);
(3) with the Moabites and Ammonites (Deut. 2:9, 19).
Treaties were permitted to be entered into with all other nations. Thus King David maintained friendly intercourse with the kings of Tyre and Hamath, and Solomon with the kings of Tyre and Egypt.
3.1 Psalms 83:1-5, “Keep not thou silence, O God: hold not thy peace, and be not still, O God. For, lo, thine enemies make a tumult: and they that hate thee have lifted up the head. They have taken crafty counsel against thy people, and consulted against thy hidden ones. They have said, Come, and let us cut them off from being a nation; that the name of Israel may be no more in remembrance. For they have consulted together with one consent: they are confederate against thee:”
Lesson: Since heathens [Hassan Rouhani & Barak Obama] are in agreement against the Lord, what right do we have to enter into contracts with Caesar on Caesar’s terms? Our covenant is with God, not with Caesar.
3.2 Obadiah 1:7, “All the men of thy confederacy have brought thee even to the border: the men that were at peace with thee have deceived thee, and prevailed against thee;” The Chaldeans are here intended, to whom the Idumeans were attached, and whose agents they became in exercising cruelties upon the Jews. When Idumean ambassadors shall go to confederate states seeking aid, these latter shall conduct them with due ceremony to their border, giving them empty compliments, but not the aid required.
Lesson: Those heathens[Hassan Rouhani & Barak Obama] in whom you trusted to have help and friendship, will be your enemies and destroy you. Contracts by heathens are used for deception. The modern warning, “read the fine print” is evidence of this. By entering into contracts with the heathen, there might be peace, temporarily, but with enough time, the heathen will prevail against us.
3.3 Daniel 11:23, “And after the league made with him he shall work deceitfully: for he shall come up, and shall become strong with a small people.”
Lesson: This is a warning to us, that when we enter into contracts with heathens, their purpose is usually deception. By entering into contracts with them, they become a strong people because we give them authority over us that they previously did not have, and we become the small people because we give up the authority we once had and become the servants of those who we gave it to.
4.0 In summary then, as we have seen, when we enter into an agreement with somebody, God wants us to keep our word, even if it means breaking God’s Word. Why?
Numbers 30:2, “If a man vow a vow unto the LORD, or swear an oath to bind his soul with a bond; he shall not break his word, he shall do according to all that proceedeth out of his mouth.” Therefore, before we enter into an agreement with someone, we must take into consideration who we are entering into an agreement with, the purpose for the agreement, and if the agreement is made before the Lord. Because it is God’s Will that we keep our Word with others, no matter what the consequences.