Posts Tagged ‘the Jews’
Today, it is the 2017 Holocaust Memorial/Remembrance Day, and around the world people will be stopping to remember the atrocities committed against six million Jews and around five million others, murdered because of the madness of one man – Adolph Hitler. For those of you who follow the writings of Lighthouse Trails, you know we hold a special place in our hearts regarding the Holocaust, and indeed have two Holocaust survivors for authors (one a Jewish Christian and one a resistance worker). What we are about to say is prompted because of our commitment to bring the things of darkness to the light.
During the preparation of our two Holocaust books (Trapped in Hitler’s Hell and Things We Couldn’t Say), we turned to the US Holocaust Memorial Museum (USHMM) for photographs of the Holocaust that we could use in our books. The USHMM has thousands of photos, which are proof against any delusion that the Holocaust never happened. They say a picture is worth a thousand words; well think of what thousands of pictures are. So the world should be ever grateful to this Museum that has done well to preserve the past with the hope that such would never happen again.
Eight years ago, during the 2009 Holocaust Remembrance Day observations, when we learned that the USHMM had asked Barack Obama to be the keynote speaker for their ceremony, we realized that the true message of Holocaust remembrance was being lost. We could see that true message is being replaced with ideologies of tolerance, unification, globalism, and so forth. A 2009 press release put out by the USHMM stated:
We are honored that President Obama will participate in our Days of Remembrance ceremony,” said Fred S. Zeidman, Chairman of the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum. “At this critical moment, with hatred and anti-Semitism on the rise in so many parts of the world, and genocide still a reality, we are reminded of the continued relevance of the Holocaust and the urgency of its lessons. What the Holocaust teaches us with such moral clarity is the power of the individual and the responsibility we all have to not stand silent in the face of injustice.”
The Bible says that unless a person is born again, he cannot comprehend the things of the Spirit. So we understand why the world views things the way they do, but unfortunately they have missed the real reason why the Holocaust happened, and why it may possibly happen again. While liberals and homosexuals are cashing in on the new Holocaust message of tolerance in order to propagate their agendas, the real meaning is being buried and ignored by most.
This true message is found within the pages of Scripture. In the Old Testament, God made a covenant with the Jews, and in the New Testament, God offered man a promise of salvation and eternal life for all who accepted this new covenant, which was sealed by the blood of Jesus Christ through His death and resurrection. Within the pages of Scripture are details about God’s enemy, Satan, who hates God’s covenant with man. From the beginning of the Jewish people, they have been hated by Satan, and after the resurrection, when Christianity began, he has hated Christians as well.
The wrath that was poured out by Hitler, particularly to Jews (and anyone who helped them, of which many were Christians) was instigated, not because Hitler wasn’t “tolerant” or because he wasn’t a “globalist.” It was because he was indwelled with an anti-Christ spirit that hates anything to do with the covenant God has made with man. As the Bible explains, Lucifer (Satan) has the aspiration of being “like the Most High” (Isaiah 14). The Bible says he is the father of lies, confusion, and every evil thing. Christians who have studied the Holocaust and read about the horrible rage that was released against the Jews know that no one man could have done this alone. We understand that Hitler was demonically inspired.
The “tolerance” message deceives people into thinking that it cares about people being treated equally and justly, but in reality it is an anti-God, anti-freedom message. Hidden within its core is the idea that no one belief system can be the only way to God or truth; hidden within its core is an anti-Christ zeal that determines to lash out against God’s covenant with man. For instance, to say Christianity is true and Islam isn’t would be seen as intolerance and therefore evil. But in essence, both faiths are diametrically opposite of each other (even though they may share certain moral values) to how one is brought into a right relationship with God. Islam portrays human effort as being the primary catalyst for such a relationship, whereas Christianity’s emphasis is on a Savior who puts a person in a right relationship with God through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, not of man’s own doing. Since Islam rejects this, a devout Christian has to reject Islam. Thomas Merton knew that doctrinally the two beliefs could never come together; he came to believe that it was only through mysticism they could unite. In Ray Yungen’s book, A Time of Departing he discloses Merton’s views on this:
In a dialogue with a Sufi leader, Merton asked about the Muslim concept of salvation. The master wrote back stating:
Islam inculcates individual responsibility for one’s actions and does not subscribe to the doctrine of atonement or the theory of redemption.
To Merton, of course, this meant little because he believed that fana and contemplation were the same thing. He responded:
Personally, in matters where dogmatic beliefs differ, I think that controversy is of little value because it takes us away from the spiritual realities into the realm of words and ideas … in words there are apt to be infinite complexities and subtleties which are beyond resolution. . . . But much more important is the sharing of the experience of divine light [mysticism] . . . It is here that the area of fruitful dialogue exists between Christianity and Islam. (emphasis added)1
Merton was basically saying that the doctrine of redemption and atonement through Christ was “of little value.” This also reflects the view of the emerging church that tolerance is more virtuous than faith, and that faith can actually be unvirtuous. As illustrated in the movie, Doubt, doubt and uncertainty unites. The priest in Doubt does a homily on doubt, and the fundamentalist in the movie (Meryl Streep) sees that as dangerous but in the end, she herself doubts. The point of the film is that uncertainty is good. Father Flynn is a Thomas Merton type priest in the sense that firm conviction is not necessarily a good thing. This is consistent with the emerging church and where emergent leader Tony Jones says in his book, The New Christians that uncertainty (including uncertainty of Scripture) is better than certainty and where Brian McLaren says we still haven’t got the Gospel right (A Generous Orthodoxy, p. 293).
The world thinks that if it teaches “tolerance,” that the Holocaust will never happen again. But the very message behind this kind of “tolerance” could actually cause it to happen again because tolerance, according to the world, is against the God of the Old and New Testament and against the people with whom He has made a covenant. But until Jesus Christ returns, which He has promised to do, Satan will be free to attack and destroy. The Bible says that as the days of Christ’s return draw closer, what takes place in the world will be like the birth pangs of a woman in labor. The pangs intensify the closer the birth becomes. And that is why spiritual deception continues to expand, quite quickly now.
While we have appreciated the efforts of the USHMM to preserve the evidence of the Holocaust, we are disappointed that they have latched onto the “tolerance” message that ultimately will reject the Jews and the Christians.
We must add something here too about homosexual activists, because they are the strongest and most out-spoken group for “tolerance.” But they have used the Holocaust and many of its stories, such as The Diary of Anne Frank, to compare their “plight” with that of the Jews in World War II. While it may be true that Hitler did eventually lash out against homosexuals, a number of the prominent Nazis, such as Ernst Rohm, were homosexuals.
For those who may be skeptical, read the following, which is from William Shirer’s The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich, perhaps one of the best works ever written on understanding Hitler:
He who was so monumentally intolerant by his very nature, was strangely tolerant of one human condition – a man’s morals. No other party in Germany came near to attracting so many shady characters. As we have seen, a conglomeration of pimps, murderers, homosexuals, alcoholics and blackmailers flocked to the party as if to a natural haven” (p. 121-122).
Later, pressure was put on Hitler to rid his organization of these types. But he was not intolerant of the homosexuals – that wasn’t why he turned on them. Hitler was intolerant of anything that stood in his way to bring about a super race of people that excluded, in particularly, the Jews and those who loved them.
We want to make one thing clear. Lighthouse Trails does not advocate persecution of people of any race, religion, or persuasion. We do not believe any person should be treated with hateful or cruel behavior, either physically or verbally. What we are trying to get across is that the tolerance message is too binding in a theological sense and restricts the preaching of the Gospel. It will never work for biblical Christianity because, as Christians, we have to insist that the blood of Jesus Christ is the only way to be reconciled with God, and the tolerance message rejects such an approach.
Some may wonder how this all ties in with Obama speaking for the US Holocaust Memorial Museum ceremony. Obama represents a new kind of “Christianity,” one that looks more like Brian McLaren’s spirituality than biblical Christianity and one that lines up with the “tolerance” message in that Obama believes that other religions are legitimate paths to God:
Obama does clearly believe that the form of Christianity that he committed to at Trinity Church in 1985 is not the only path to God. “I am rooted in the Christian tradition,” he has said. Nevertheless he asserts, “I believe there are many paths to the same place and that is a belief there is a higher power, a belief that we are connected as a people.” He first saw his broad embrace of faith modeled by his mother. “In our household,” he has explained, “The Bible, [t]he Koran, and the Bhagavad Gita sat on the shelf . . . on Easter or Christmas Day my mother might drag me to a church, just as she dragged me to the Buddhist temple, the Chinese New Year celebration, the Shinto shrine, and ancient Hawaiian burial sites.”2
It is the following words that Satan hates and does all he can to destroy, but try as he might, he never will. It is the light that shines in a dark world. And a merciful, patient God calls out.
Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father [God], but by me. John 14:6
In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him. Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and sent his Son to be the propitiation for our sins. I John 4: 9-10
And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood. Revelation 1:5
It is our prayer that many Jews around the world will come to see Jesus Christ as their Messiah and not be deceived by this “tolerance” message that in the end will hate them and persecute them. Historically, the Jewish people have been a trusting people . . . this is one message we hope they won’t buy into.
1. Ray Yungen, A Time of Departing (Eureka, MT: Lighthouse Trails Publishing, 2nd ed. 2006) p. 59, citing Rob Baker and Gray Henry, Editors, Merton and Sufism (Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999), p. 110.
2. Stephen Mansfield, The Faith of Barack Obama (Thomas Nelson) p. 55, quoting from Audacity of Hope, Obama, p. 203. (See our article.)
The article above was originally posted on the Lighthouse Trails Research blog in 2009 but remains relevant today.
Related Articles and Resources on the Holocaust:
Oprah Winfrey’s New Age “Christianity” (Part 2) – Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler
LTRP Note: As we approach this year’s Holocaust Memorial Day (April 24th) and in view of a recent article we posted where we referred to God’s view of Israel, we are reposting Mike Oppenheimer’s article/booklet titled Israel: Replacing What God Has Not, which we originally released four years ago. And if you have never watched Caryl Productions documentary film Christian Palestinianism, we highly recommend it. In view of secular media’s bias against Israel and much of the Protestant and evangelical church turning against Israel as well, this is an issue that Christians need to understand. We hope the DVD as well as Mike Oppenheimer’s report will help with that. Both are from a scriptural perspective.
At a time when a clear and biblically sound understanding of Bible prophecy is most important, we find the church, paradoxically, having less knowledge of it, especially as it relates directly to Israel. Most evangelical Christians throughout history have supported the Jews and the modern state of Israel, but things are changing. The church, from its infancy, believed God had a future plan for Israel based on Scripture (Acts 3:19). This plan included the national restoration of Israel to the same land from which they were eventually dispersed. As time went on and the church drifted further and further away from her Jewish beginnings, many began to erroneously believe the church had replaced Israel. But in this day and age when we see biblical prophecy being fulfilled on such an unprecedented and unparalleled scale—with God’s continual protection and restoration of the Jews to their land, there should not be those who walk in disbelief with regard to God’s promises. But there are!
A growing number within the church are holding to the position that Israel as a people and a nation has no further place with God and that Israel is eternally cast off for their rejection of the Messiah. They believe national Israel no longer has a future in any part of God’s plan. They also believe all the promises given to Israel have not only been revoked but transferred to the church and that the church is now the “true Israel.” Some even go so far as to make disparaging and untruthful remarks, which suggest the Jewish people are now no longer a “chosen people of God” and are cursed because of their unbelief or that they have inherited all the curses of the law found in Deuteronomy 28–33.
They believe all the blessings belonging to Israel have now been transferred to the church, but they neglect to include the curses found in Deuteronomy 28. If one is going to lay claim to the blessings of Deuteronomy 28, then one must lay claim to the curses as well. Nor can we live under the Old Covenant and the New Covenant at the same time. But, these teachers would strip the Jews of the inheritance God pledged to them (and never revoked) and apply all these blessings to themselves. But God sees through the arrogance, and jealousy, that is being rekindled in these last days. Ironically, those who have taken such a stance have proclaimed curses on themselves, for God said He would curse those who curse Israel. Deuteronomy 28 is a conditional covenant of Moses that God extended to the nation of Israel, but we would do well to hold fast to the New Covenant of grace that has now been extended to both Jew and Gentile.
Adherents of this Replacement Theology teaching claim the church was already in place in the Old Testament and was an assembly of believers. Therefore, the church, in their mind, becomes the continuation of Israel. Since Pentecost of Acts 2, the term “Israel” now refers to the church, they say. However, if one takes a closer look at how the words in the Book of Acts are used, one will see this is not so. If this is true, then why are there so many distinctions made between Israel and the church throughout the Book of Acts and why are so many distinguishing statements also made throughout Paul’s epistles? Such inconsistency can only originate from a man-made doctrine built on a false presupposition at best.
The very first occurrence of the Greek word ekklesia in the New Testament is found in Matthew 16:18. The word “church” (ekklesia, or assembly) is often thought to mean Israel by replacement theologians as a generic meaning for an assembly of worshipers. Thus, they assume the word church is a Greek word for Israel. They believe this is what Jesus the Messiah meant in Matthew 16:18 for the word church (it is only used again in the New Testament Gospels in Matthew 18:17). This would mean there always was the church (i.e., “the church” is Israel continued in the New Testament). However, in Matthew 16:13–20, the word “church” literally means “those called out,” referring to those who confess Jesus is the Son of the Living God—something that was not yet revealed in the Old Testament (this will be further explained as we look at Romans 11). These “called-out ones” are not in reference to the Mosaic Law that was given to the nation Israel but to a whole New Covenant.
In the New Testament, the term is used also in the narrower sense of a single church, or a church confined to a particular place. There is the church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla (Romans 16:5), the church at Corinth, the churches in Judea, etc. As I stated earlier, if one were to keep substituting the word Israel for church throughout the New Testament, they would soon begin to see the problems it would create.
In Acts 8:3, Saul persecuted the “church” from house to house. He certainly was not persecuting Israel.
Acts 2:47: “And the Lord added to the church [Israel?] daily such as should be saved.”
Acts 8:1: “And Saul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution against the church [Israel?] which was at Jerusalem.”
Acts 11:26: “And it came to pass, that a whole year they assembled themselves with the church [Israel?], and taught much people. And the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.”
And in Acts 15:4: “And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church [Israel?], and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.”
The fact that Jews were called out of unbelieving Israel to be part of the church does, in every sense, go against the church being Israel.
In the same way, if one uses the word “church” or “the church” interchangeably for Israel, even more problems occur.
Matthew 2:20 says, “Arise, and take the young child and his mother, and go into the land of Israel [church].”
Matthew 8:10: “[T]o them that followed, Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel [the church].”
Matthew 10:6: “But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel [the church].”
Matthew 15:24: “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel [the church].”
Matthew 19:28: “[Y]e which have followed me . . . ye also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel [the church].”
Luke 24:21: “But we trusted that it had been he which should have redeemed Israel [the church].”
Would it not be prudent then to let the word “Israel” mean what God would have it mean in its consistent, designated, biblical
context, and the term “the church” be what God would have it mean in its longstanding, God-given context as well?
[T]hey asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?” (Acts 1:6. See also Acts 3:12; 4:10; 13:24.)
Was he restoring the church? Of course not.
As Israel rejected the chief Cornerstone, Peter remarks that the believers are, “coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious . . . as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:4–5).
You “are built up a spiritual house”—oikodomeisthe. These have become a congregation of faith among those who disbelieve.
The Nation Israel
Israel was always referred to as the nation made up of Jews who are physical descendants of not just Abraham (as are the Gentiles) but Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Seventy-three times in the New Testament the term “Israel” is used. In the majority of the instances given, Israel is referred to in the national, ethnic sense. There are three main passages used to try to prove the church is Israel. They are as follows: Romans 9:6, 11:26; and Galatians 6:16. I Corinthians 10:18, however, cites “Israel after the flesh” as the true, believing Israel among the unbelieving—just as in Romans 9:6 the Apostle Paul makes a distinction between two Israel’s—one who believes, and the other who doesn’t. And yet, both are ethnic Israelites, but only one has the measure of faith necessary to enable them to faithfully uphold their end of their covenant with God. For without faith, it’s impossible to please God.
Galatians 6:16 is often used to prove that the church is Israel. This view maintains that the “Israel of God” is comprised of Gentile believers. The “Israel of God,” however, clearly is comprised of those Jewish believers who, in sharp contrast with the Judaizers, followed the rule of salvation by faith alone. Here Paul is speaking only of a division within ethnic Israel.
Some of them are believers and thus truly Israel, whereas others, though ethnically Israelites, are not truly Israel, since they are not believers. No Gentiles, therefore, are found in this statement at all.
This Replacement Theology view is often held within groups such as Reconstructionists, Dominionists, and Kingdom Now adherents who hold to a view that we will build God’s kingdom on earth before Christ returns. This non-biblical view presupposes that the Gentile will be able to establish what the Jew could not, but this will never happen.
God, however, has entered into a binding covenant with and is committed to the people of Israel. He has made an everlasting covenant with Israel and cannot break His Word. There are those in the “church” who take the position that His first covenant promises to the Jews are now null and void. Paul makes it clear to the church in Rome saying, “Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin” (Romans 11:1). On this basis alone, we are provided with scriptural proof that Replacement Theology teaching is wrong. In Ezekiel 36, God makes it very clear that He will never abandon Israel—not for their sakes alone, but because His name and His reputation are on the line. Jeremiah writes immediately after the promise of a New Covenant:
Thus saith the Lord, which giveth the sun for a light by day, and the ordinances of the moon and of the stars for a light by night, which divideth the sea when the waves thereof roar; The Lord of hosts is his name: If those ordinances depart from before me, saith the Lord, then the seed of Israel also shall cease from being a nation before me for ever. (Jeremiah 31:35–36)
God is so adamant about His covenant with Israel here that He would sooner revoke the existence of the stars and planets that He would withdraw His covenant with Israel.
In other words, God cut an everlasting blood covenant with Abraham:
And I will make of thee a great nation, and I will bless thee, and make thy name great; and thou shalt be a blessing: And I will bless them that bless thee, and curse him that curseth thee: and in thee shall all families of the earth be blessed. (Genesis 12:1-3)
This has not been revoked. To this nation, God will give a land—the land of Canaan (Genesis12:1, 7; 13:14–15, 17; 15:17–21; 17:8). God will bless those who bless this nation and curse those who curse it (12:3). God laid down a divine principle that has been seen and proven time and time again throughout history.
When you go against Israel (cursing the people like Balak tried to get Balaam to do), you are going against the Messiah who created Israel to be a blessing to all nations.
Another Scripture to consider is found in the Book of Joel:
I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land. (Joel 3:2—emphasis added.)
Also, in Genesis we read:
And the Lord appeared unto Abram, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land: and there builded he an altar unto the Lord, who appeared unto him.” (Genesis 12:7)
He promised a land—specifically, the land of Canaan. The emphasis of Genesis 17:9–14 is that circumcision is a token of God’s covenant with Israel—being performed on the eighth day of a boy’s life. Circumcision was to be a sign of one’s Jewishness, or the seal of the covenant.
God chose to confirm His covenant with Jacob, as evidenced in Genesis 28:13–15. Then it was confirmed through all of Jacob’s twelve sons, who fathered the twelve tribes that came to comprise the nation of Israel (Genesis 49).
Israel was given laws and instructed in all the ways by which to be distinguished, set apart and separate from the Gentiles. Yet, now we have teachers saying the Gentile church is Israel. Such Gentile Christians who claim they are the true Jews and are of the notion they have replaced Israel, should take heed of and fear the words of Jesus when He states that those who “say they are Jews” but are not, are liars and are of “the synagogue of Satan” (Revelation 2:9; 3:9).
The promises made to both Abraham and his seed are unsearchably rich in blessings which have not yet come to complete fulfillment but await the Messianic Kingdom. The Abrahamic Covenant contains both physical and spiritual promises. The physical blessings were limited to the Jews (such as the land), whereas the spiritual blessings were to extend to the Gentiles through the Messiah only (upon their being grafted into the Olive Tree). In the Old Covenant, the Gentiles had to convert to the religion of Judaism (but this still did not make them Jewish).
God revealed that it was to be through Sarah’s son Isaac that the Abrahamic Covenant would be confirmed (Genesis 26:2–5, and 24). Case in point examples of this include: Exodus 2:23–25; 4:24–26; 6:2–8; 32:11–14; Leviticus 26:46; Deuteronomy 34:4; II Kings 13:22-23; I Chronicles 16:15–19; II Chronicles 20:7–8; Nehemiah 9:7-8; Psalm 105:7–12; Luke 1:54–55, 68–73; and Hebrews 6:13–20. These verses explain how the Abrahamic Covenant is the basis for Israel’s Exodus from Egypt, for giving them the land, for Jewish survival throughout the centuries despite their disobedience, for the coming of the Messiah, the resurrection of the dead, and for Israel’s final redemption and restoration.
Israel has become the focus for a watching world, always making front page news, and yet ironically and unfortunately, much of the church, to their own shame, no longer believes in the nation’s relevance today. It is Satan, of course, who has instigated hatred and anti-Semitism towards the Jewish people throughout the centuries. The closer we come to the end of all things and in the final analysis especially, he will be seething, and his rage will be unchecked, for he knows his time is short, and he will do everything in his power to annihilate them in a more horrific manner than even what Hitler was able to inflict upon the Jewish people.
In the meantime, we would all do well to remember that any teaching, doctrine, or interpretation must be based upon all of what Scripture has to say on a given subject (both Old and New Testament passages), and not just upon a single verse. We must take the whole counsel of God’s Word. When we study Israel, there is a wealth of information in the Bible awaiting our discovery concerning the people, the nation, and its future. Replacement Theology and its antagonistic view of Israel is perpetuating an anti-Semitic stance within the church.
What one believes about Israel is of utmost importance and pivotal to understanding the Bible and the end times. This should be all too apparent, if not self-evident when we study the Word. Old Testament promises made to national Israel will literally be fulfilled in the future just as they were literally fulfilled in the past. The details to support this can be found in abundance in the Old Testament, and we find that both John (in the book of Revelation) and Paul in his epistles often draw on a number of passages to prove their points.
As I’ve stated more than once already, but cannot stress enough, if Israel is truly no longer God’s “chosen people,” we find numerous problems inherent with this position that cannot be reconciled with God’s character, His promises, or Scripture.
Romans 11 contains scriptural precepts which are critical to understand. To get the complete picture, read chapters 1–10 of Romans through thoroughly. Also, chapters 1–2 of Romans points out how all men are without excuse because of the evidence of the truth of God, which has been with us from the beginning, revealed in creation, and found in nature.
Romans 2 discusses the Jew and the law. It points out the futility of trying to obtain salvation through the law—that Jews, God’s chosen ones do not have any advantage over the Gentiles for salvation. For we all have sinned, we all have missed the mark and fallen short of God’s glory. There is none truly righteous—no, not one. The law shows us just how short we fall of God’s holiness. In fact, the Jews who have more knowledge of God, will have even more to answer for. The chapter closes with the statement that it is not enough to be circumcised externally to be a Jew, but rather God’s concern is for the heart to be circumcised or transformed—not an outward change in the flesh but in the inner man.
In Romans 3–8, we are told that the Jews had an advantage over the Gentiles in that they were given the truth of God’s Word (the oracles of God) and were entrusted to keep it. However, both the Jew and the Gentile have sinned, and the law did not, does not, and will not justify any of us. None of us are justified apart from a genuine faith in Jesus Christ.
Paul raises the question in Romans 9–11 regarding the rightful place of Israel. On this matter then, Paul has this to say:
For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh. (Romans 9:3)
If the church was in any kind of position to replace Israel, Paul could not have made such a strong statement. However, we need to pay close attention to how Paul defines Israel throughout the book of Romans and his other epistles.
It’s obvious that God’s everlasting Covenant is still in effect with Israel because of what Paul states earlier in his very same letter to the Romans. He goes on to identify his people—distinguishing them from the Gentiles and the church:
. . . who are Israelites, to whom pertain the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the giving of the law, the service of God, and the promises; of whom are the fathers and from whom, according to the flesh, Christ came, who is over all, the eternally blessed God. Amen. (Romans 9:4–5)
Certainly, these are not Gentiles or “the church” of which he is speaking.
In summary, what can be said for Israel? God says that we are to bless them and not curse or turn against them. Of the Jew, Paul stated “unto them were committed the oracles of God” (Romans 3:2). Jesus Himself said that “salvation is of the Jews” (John 4:22). And though they have been dispersed throughout the world, God has blessed and prospered them wherever they went. We, therefore, owe a great debt to the Jewish people; and Israel is still Israel and will continue to have a special place in God’s heart and significance in the future of our planet. Remember, God has said of the Jew:
For thus saith the Lord of hosts; After the glory hath he sent me unto the nations which spoiled you: for he that toucheth you toucheth the apple of his eye. (Zechariah 2:8).
To order copies of Israel: Replacing What God Has Not?, click here
By Bill Randles
President Obama’s term is almost over (God willing), but in one of his last attempts to express his disdain for the only Democracy in the Middle East, and our Ally, Israel, he has denounced Jewish settlement building in the West Bank (Judea and Samaria). Normally, the U.S. would veto such a brazen vote (a vote that puts incredible pressure on the state of Israel to “cease immediately all development of settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem”).
Within two days of the uniquely conjoined holidays of Christmas and Hannukah, the U.N.security council voted for a resolution which would criminalize Israeli settlements, subject Jewish soldiers defending their homeland to international tribunals, and cede the entire West Bank, (Judea) to the “Palestinians,” cede East Jerusalem to the Palestinians, and criminalize any construction of Jewish dwellings there, as “obstacles to the two state solution.”
Such insane regulations are proposed regularly in the United Nations, the largest voting block being the Organization of Islamic conference, consisting of 57 Muslim states, not to mention Israel’s other enemies. But usually these malicious motions are dismissed by the veto of the United States of America. This resolution is the first successful condemnation of the Israeli “settlers” in 37 years.
Indeed, Obama has assured Israel repeatedly that, “we have your back,” and there is no greater friend to Israel than the United States. This is what made this act of perfidy so treacherous. It is obscene that Obama would do it in the closing hours of his failed presidency, seeking to pre-empt President Trump’s pro-Israel policy.
The implications of this resolution are ominous; Israel must return to the borders she had before the six day war in 1967, the Temple Mount, Tomb of the Patriarchs, and several other sacred sites are now considered to be illegitimately occupied by Israel; Israel can now be subjected to international sanctions for violating these redrawn lines.
In Matthew 24, in the most complete compilation of Jesus’ teachings on the events leading to the “end of the age and the sign of his coming” Jesus cited many universal signs such as floods, famines, earthquakes, wars, and rumors of wars. Suddenly, he shifts from the universal to the local . . . “Then let them which be in Judea. . . .” Judea will be the pressure point, the catalyst which provokes “Great Tribulation, such as has never been seen before, nor shall ever be seen again. . . .”
In view of this outrage, I am reposting a teaching from the prophet Joel to demonstrate the stunning relevance of this passage to the current Geo-political situation. This teaching is an excerpt from my 2010 book, A Sword On The land-The Muslim World in Bible Prophecy.
God Sues the Nations . . . Joel 3
For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem, I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat, and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations, and parted my land. And they have cast lots for my people; and have given a boy for an harlot, and sold a girl for wine, that they might drink. (Joel 3:1-3)
Joel, the biblical prophet, who ministered between 835-800 BC, prophesied with amazing clarity Geo-political events that are occurring right before our very eyes.
To demonstrate this, allow me to unpack Joel, chapter three.
*The Time of fulfillment: “For, behold, in those days, and in that time, when I shall bring again the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem . . . .” This prophecy is slated for the time when God would bring back the captivity of Judah and Jerusalem; that is, it is going to be fulfilled post 1948.
* I will also gather all nations: The literal possibility for this aspect of the prophecy is only recent, for at no other time in human history has there been even a possibility for the “gathering of all nations” since the Tower of Babel judgment.
All nations have indeed been assembled into a congress, the United Nations, which arose, like Israel, out of the aftermath of World War II in the late 1940s. As Psalm 2 predicts, “the kings of the earth and their rulers take counsel together against the LORD and His Christ.”
* Valley of Jehoshaphat: “ . . . and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat . . .” The point is not that there is or isn’t an actual geographical valley of Jehoshaphat, the point is that the name Jehoshaphat is part of the prophesy. It means “Jahweh shall Judge,” i.e. God shall judge the nations of the earth.
It could also be a reminder of the story of the siege of Judah in the days of King Jehoshaphat, in which after repentance and a national day of prayer and fasting, the instruction was given not to fear the combined gentile armies of Ammonites, Moabites, and Edomites.
This is the battle where Judah, at God’s command, marched the Priests out front of the army, with instruments instead of weapons, and praised the goodness of the Lord! The enemy turned upon itself and was routed.
* “ . . . and will plead with them there for my people and for my heritage Israel . . . ” This is not a prediction that God will ask the nations to go easy on Israel. This is legal language. God is going to slap a lawsuit upon the nations; he is serving an indictment, for this is the court of Divine justice!
The indictment has four counts, 1) they scattered God’s people, 2) they parted God’s land, 3) they cast lots for God’s people, and 4) they sold out the children of Israel, for the hire of a harlot, and for wine.
My people, whom they have scattered among the nations— The nations of the world indeed scattered the children of Israel, thoroughly across the world; it is not unusual even to this day to find a tribe in remote China, India, or even black Africa, who keep kosher and observe other practices of the Jews, though cut off for centuries from the rest of the world.
But one could argue that this was exactly what God told Israel would happen should they prove faithless.
And I will scatter you among the heathen, and will draw out a sword after you: and your land shall be desolate, and your cities waste.(Leviticus 26:33)
So why is there an indictment on the nations of the world for doing exactly what God said they would do? We have to turn to Zechariah for the answer:
And I am very sore displeased with the heathen that are at ease: for I was but a little displeased, and they helped forward the affliction.(Zechariah 1:15)
God is bringing suit against the nations because though He used them to scatter the children of Israel, and to afflict them, they have taken it further than He wanted.
The nations were “at ease” when holocausts and pogroms were occurring—it didn’t bother them. Hitler was offering shiploads of German Jews to any nation that would shelter them, but there were no takers. He then knew that his “final solution” was possible to undertake without international interference.
All through the 1940s into the 1990s, the word of the nations to Israel, in the midst of intifada and terror campaigns was “don’t rock the boat” and inflame the Arabs, give them “land for peace” so that oil prices would be stable.
The nations could overlook the Palestinian bombings and murder campaigns, the slaughter of children, women, Olympic athletes, etc., for they themselves were “at ease.” This is what is bringing upon the world the final judgment.
The second indictment against the nations of the world is that they have participated in the partition of God’s land. This will bring judgment to the world.
* Israel isn’t the property of the UN, the Vatican, the European Union, or the Arabs; neither is it the property of Israel, for it belongs to God himself.
The land shall not be sold for ever [permanently]: for the land is mine; for ye are strangers and sojourners with me. (Leviticus 25:23)
Therefore, for the nations of the world to deliberate at the UN, or in Rome or Washington or Cairo as to the disposal of the Holy Land and its borders, as if it were theirs to dispose of is arrogant presumption.
Not even the Jews have the right to trade land for peace, although the leadership of Israel being for the most part secular in their outlook, would desperately love to do so if it would bring peace.
Currently, this prophecy is being fulfilled by the insistence of the UN that Israel return to its pre-1967 borders (rendering it indefensible), as well as the pressure everted to cede the Gaza, and the so-called “West Bank” territory, which is biblically named “Judea and Samaria.”
The United States, under the Obama administration, has been insisting upon a “No Natural growth” policy for Judea, which means that the number of Jewish settlers there is to be “capped,” allowing for no further growth in population. This would effectively strangle the existing population, forcing the remaining Jews to leave.
While Arab leaders, International statesmen, “human Rights” champions of every stripe, the Pope, the presidents of the free world, UN delegates, and a host of other parliamentarians the world over heatedly debate the “status” of Jerusalem and the “legitimate” borders of Israel, the Holy God of the Bible observes.
It would be well to remember the Words of the prophet Ezekiel in his prophecy to the “West Bank,” that is the mountains of Judea:
Also, thou son of man, prophesy unto the mountains of Israel, and say, Ye mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord: 2 thus saith the Lord God; Because the enemy hath said against you, Aha, even the ancient high places are ours in possession: 3 therefore prophesy and say, Thus saith the Lord God; Because they have made you desolate, and swallowed you up on every side, that ye might be a possession unto the residue of the heathen, and ye are taken up in the lips of talkers, and are an infamy of the people:
Therefore, ye mountains of Israel, hear the word of the Lord GOD; Thus saith the Lord GOD to the mountains, and to the hills, to the rivers, and to the valleys, to the desolate wastes, and to the cities that are forsaken, which became a prey and derision to the residue of the heathen that are round about;
Therefore thus saith the Lord God; Surely in the fire of my jealousy have I spoken against the residue of the heathen, and against all Idumea, which have appointed my land into their possession with the joy of all their heart, with despiteful minds, to cast it out for a prey.
Prophesy therefore concerning the land of Israel, and say unto the mountains, and to the hills, to the rivers, and to the valleys, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, I have spoken in my jealousy and in my fury, because ye have borne the shame of the heathen: therefore thus saith the Lord God; I have lifted up mine hand, Surely the heathen that are about you, they shall bear their shame. . . .
But ye, O mountains of Israel, ye shall shoot forth your branches, and yield your fruit to my people of Israel; for they are at hand to come. For, behold, I am for you, and I will turn unto you, and ye shall be tilled and sown: 10 and I will multiply men upon you, all the house of Israel, even all of it: and the cities shall be inhabited, and the wastes shall be builded. (Ezekiel 36:1-10)
A powerful message from Pastor Bill Randles:
Israel: Archaeologists Uncover Inscriptions in Jesus’ Language – Proves Existence of Jewish Community
“This discovery is important because it proves the existence of a Jewish community in the region from ancient times–something which the Palestinian Authority continually denies.”
From The Berean Call
Archaeologists in Israel have uncovered ancient epitaphs in both Greek and Aramaic that date back to the first century.
[It was reported] that the inscriptions were found in a cemetery that is located in the ancient Galilean capital city of Zippori.
“Zippori was the first capital of Galilee from the time of the Hasmonean dynasty until the establishment of Tiberias in the first century CE. The city continued to be central and important later on,” researchers explained in a press release announcing the discovery.
Four words which are part of the inscriptions were thus far able to be decoded. One word, in Greek, means “Jose,” a common Jewish name during the period, the three other words are Aramaic for “the Tiberian,” “forever,” and “rabbi.” Click here to continue reading.
By Amy Spreeman
March 19 – Today we’re bringing up some oldies but not-so-goodies. You may hear the names Oprah Winfrey, Rodney Howard Browne or Neil Donald Walsch and think, “Oh sure, SUFTT, we know they’re New Age. Nothing new to see here.”
But wait. What’s old news is new news again, especially when the fringes become mainstream. And when God “speaks” to these change agents, “he” tells them to forget the old; that a new Christ is coming. And our guest today says it’s coming into the mainstream visible Church.
Joining us is Warren Smith, a former New Ager, now born-again Christian, author and researcher who has just released his brand new booklet which you can read in it’s entirety on our site, titled, OPRAH WINFREY’S NEW AGE “CHRISTIANITY” (PART 2) Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler. Click here to continue reading. Click here to listen to the interview. (might load slowly)
NEW BOOKLET: Oprah Winfrey’s New Age “Christianity” (Part 2) – Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler
Oprah Winfrey’s New Age “Christianity” (Part 2) – Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler by Warren B. Smith is our newest Lighthouse Trails Booklet. The Booklet is 14 pages long and sells for $1.95 for single copies. Quantity discounts are as much as 50% off retail. Our Booklets are designed to give away to others or for your own personal use. Below is the content of the booklet. To order copies of Oprah Winfrey’s New Age “Christianity” (Part 2) – Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler, click here.
By Warren B. Smith
Several months after the tragic events of 9/11/2001, Oprah Winfrey did a special program on the ten most “memorable thinkers” she had ever met.1 One of these memorable thinkers was a controversial New Age channeler by the name of Neale Donald Walsch who teaches—among other things—that we are all “God”2 and that “Hitler went to heaven.”3 Oprah’s high praise of Walsch provides important insight into the strong New Age beliefs she attempts to pass off as being “Christian.”
Who is Neale Donald Walsch?
In 1992, Neale Donald Walsch, a disillusioned and distraught former radio talk-show host, public relations professional, and longtime metaphysical seeker, sat down one night and wrote God an angry letter.4 He was amazed when “God” immediately answered his letter by speaking to him through an inner voice. That night, and in subsequent conversations, Walsch wrote down all the dictated answers to his questions. Walsch’s Conversations with God, Book 1 was published in 1995 and became the first in a series of best-selling Conversations with God books. It seemed that in Walsch, “God” had found yet another willing channel for his New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality teachings.
In a style reminiscent of John Denver and George Burns in the movie Oh, God!, Walsch and “God” present a more “down home” version of the same New Age/New Gospel teachings that were conveyed through previous “inner voice” dictations to Helen Schucman (A Course in Miracles), Barbara Marx Hubbard (The Revelation), Benjamin Creme (Messages from Maitreya), and many others. With Walsch playing the role of devil’s advocate, “God” cleverly plays off of Walsch’s leading questions and comments. Walsch and “God” come across in these conversations as a couple of “everyday Joe’s” who systematically dismantle biblical Christianity with their straight-from-the-source, “thus saith the Lord,” “spiritually correct” teachings. With the assurance of two foxes now in control of the henhouse, they emphatically assert that their New Gospel is from God and the “Old Gospel” is not.
Delighted by the fact they are being taken seriously by millions of people around the world, “God” and Walsch appear to thoroughly enjoy their process of bringing the public up to spiritual speed. Continuing to build upon the foundation of New Age doctrine already introduced through other channelers, “God” and Walsch add some special twists of their own to the New Gospel story. Using Walsch as the straight man, “God” introduces many of his more extreme teachings with smug, authoritative declarations such as: “There are no such things as the Ten Commandments,”5 “So who said Jesus was perfect?,”6 and “Hitler went to heaven.”7
Hitler and Death
Regarding Adolph Hitler, Walsch’s “God” makes a number of provocative statements about him. The net effect is a minimization of Hitler’s actions and a glorification of death. The following are several examples of “God’s” comments about Hitler and death:
The real issue is whether Hitler’s actions were “wrong.” Yet I have said over and over again that there is no “right” or “wrong” in the universe. A thing is not intrinsically right or wrong. A thing simply is.8
Now your thought that Hitler was a monster is based on the fact that he ordered the killing of millions of people, correct? . . . Yet what if I told you that what you call “death” is the greatest thing that could happen to anyone—what then?9
So the first thing you have to understand—as I’ve already explained to you—is that Hitler didn’t hurt anyone. In a sense, he didn’t inflict suffering, he ended it.10
The mistakes Hitler made did no harm or damage to those whose deaths he caused. Those souls were released from their earthly bondage, like butterflies emerging from a cocoon.11
Walsch, always the public relations man, anticipates reader incredulity at statements like these by expressing apparent surprise and then asking “God” questions that the skeptical reader would probably ask. But in the process of seeming to challenge “God”—which he does with considerable skill—Walsch actually enables “God” to further expand upon and reinforce the thoughts and ideas contained in his teachings. Not surprisingly, Walsch always seems to come around to “God’s” point of view—even to some of his more extreme views about the nature of “God,” the glorification of death, and his strange proclamations regarding Adolph Hitler. In his book titled Questions and Answers on Conversations with God, Walsch tries to address reader concerns about some of the comments “God” makes about Hitler and death. In response to one person’s confusion, he states:
Yet while the books do state that life is eternal, that death is nothing to fear, and that returning to God is joyful, I do not believe that any reasonable interpretation of the material could fairly portray God as condoning the killing of human beings—or brushing it off as if it were of no importance or consequence.12
But his attempted explanation that his “God” does not condone killing human beings or taking death lightly is woefully inadequate and totally unconvincing. Neale Donald Walsch is caught in the vortex of his own twisted channelings. His “God” contradicts the one true God of the Bible at every turn. Contrary to what his New Age “God” teaches, we are not God; Satan is real; there is spiritual deception; there is a hell; and Jesus is Lord. In his convoluted rationalizations about Hitler and what he did, Walsch does not address the fact that he and other New Age leaders highly recommend Barbara Marx Hubbard’s The Revelation. This is a book in which the New Age “Christ” describes a future “selection process” that would result in the mandated deaths of all those who refuse to comply with the bottom-line doctrine of his New Spirituality—that we are all “God.”13 Thus, it would certainly appear that the New Age “God” and “Christ”—through their channeled New Age books and teachings—are trying to make it easier for people to rationalize the future elimination of Christians and all who oppose the New Spirituality.
Humanity as “God”
At one point in their conversation, Walsch’s “God” expounds upon the fact that man is not subject to God because man is “God.” His “God” explains there are no rules, and there is no right or wrong because man, as “God,” is his own “rule-maker.” Walsch’s “God” contends that because “God” and humanity are one, it is therefore up to humanity to determine what “God” wants to do. If humanity wants to make up a new set of rules this late in the game, humanity can do that because it was humanity—as “God”—that devised the original rules in the first place. Everything is relative. Everything is up to the prevailing majority. Therefore, because humanity is believed to be “God,” humanity can create whatever rules and whatever future it wants. “God” tells Walsch:
You are the Creator and the Created.14
All your life you have been told that God created you. I come now to tell you this: You are creating God.15
You are your own rule-maker.16
In truth, there is no such thing as a “sinner,” for no one can be sinned against—least of all Me.17
Think, speak, and act as the God you are.18
Your future is creatable. Create it as you want it.19
There is only one of Us. You and I are One.20
And do not stay so “stuck” in your present beliefs and customs that you halt the process of evolution itself.21
Walsch’s “God” makes it clear that his postmodern progressive “revelation” is for people who have never really understood his teachings about man being “God.” Walsch’s “God” contends that the only real “sin” is for man to see himself as sinful and separate from God. He states that the only “devil”—or “Satan”—is the separatist thinking that causes people to make a distinction between man and God.
When at last you see that there is no separation in God’s World—that is, nothing which is not God—then, at last, will you let go of this invention of man which you have called Satan.22 (emphasis added)
The mind can make the belief in separation very real and very fearful, and this belief is the “devil.”23(emphasis added)
Echoing A Course in Miracles and other channeled New Age teachings Oprah Winfrey has also endorsed, her New Age “God” states that only as humanity sees through the illusion of “separation” and “sin” and affirms its own godhood and “Oneness” with all creation, will the planet be saved from ultimate ruin.
New Age/New Gospel Politics
Walsch’s New Age “God” warns that in the future people will have to make a choice between the “old” and “new” gospels. The choice they make will have great bearing on the future of mankind. His “God” declares that humanity, by collectively imagining and envisioning its highest hopes and dreams, can override Bible prophecy by consciously creating a positive future. “God” expresses great optimism that the New Age/New Gospel spirituality will prevail and tells Walsch that humanity is standing on the threshold of a “golden” “New Age.”
The twenty-first century will be the time of awakening, of meeting The Creator Within. Many beings will experience Oneness with God and with all of life. This will be the beginning of the golden age of the New Human, of which it has been written; the time of the universal human, which has been eloquently described by those with deep insight among you.
There are many such people in the world now—teachers and messengers, Masters and visionaries—who are placing this vision before humankind and offering tools with which to create it. These messengers and visionaries are the heralds of a New Age.24 (emphasis added)
Regarding how the New Age will be achieved and ultimately overseen, “God” impresses Walsch with the importance of bringing spirituality into politics and government. Walsch’s “God” is very specific about how this spiritualization of politics should ultimately manifest itself:
“God”: Something will have to be new if you wish your world to change. You must begin to see someone else’s interests as your own. This will happen only when you reconstruct your global reality and govern yourselves accordingly.
Walsch: Are you talking about a one-world government?
“God”: I am.25
“God” then exhorts Walsch to carry out his mission to change the world and bring in a spiritually based new-world order by issuing this charge:
Go, therefore, and teach ye all nations, spreading far and wide The New Gospel: WE ARE ALL ONE.26
And certainly, Walsch seems to be doing his part. Responding to his “God’s” charge to spread the New Gospel and to help establish sympathy for a “one-world government,” he co-founded “The Global Renaissance Alliance” to help further the New Age agenda for world peace. GRA members include Deepak Chopra, Barbara Marx Hubbard, Wayne Dyer, James Redfield, and Gary Zukav among others.
Walsch, “God,” and Hitler
And while Walsch’s New Age “God” describes his unbiblical plans to save humanity, he also puts forth his bizarre views regarding Adolph Hitler. The channeled teachings about Hitler alone prompt one to seriously question how Oprah Winfrey could even begin to describe Neale Donald Walsch as one of the ten most “memorable thinkers” she had ever met. Did she read all the statements Walsch claims to have channeled from “God?” Did Oprah and her staff somehow miss what “God” said about Hitler—such as “Hitler went to heaven, “Hitler didn’t hurt anyone,” Hitler “did no harm or damage to those whose deaths he caused,” etc. If those statements weren’t enough, Walsch’s “God” seems to wonder why anyone—like Hitler—should be punished for bringing the “greatest peace” and the “greatest joy” to those who were killed:
I tell you this, at the moment of your death you will realize the greatest freedom, the greatest peace, the greatest joy, and the greatest love you have ever known. Shall we therefore punish Bre’r Fox for throwing Bre’r Rabbit into the briar patch?27
A generation or so ago, Neale Donald Walsch would never have been taken seriously. Yet in today’s metaphysically minded mainstream society, he is regarded as one of America’s top spiritual leaders—someone to whom Oprah Winfrey gave her highest praise. What was Oprah thinking to single out Walsch as one of the most “memorable thinkers” she has ever met?
Humanity’s Team and the Oprah Interview
To encourage people to accept and defend the teachings of the New Age/New Spirituality and to help Walsch reinvent himself, he founded a new organization in 2003 called Humanity’s Team. At the first “Humanity’s Team Leadership Gathering” held June 27-29, 2003 in Portland, Oregon, Walsch described Humanity’s Team to its leaders:
A grassroots, citizen’s movement with chapters and people active in cities, towns and communities and villages all over the world. . . . We seek to create the possibility for a New Spirituality to emerge on the planet. . . . We seek to encourage humanity to expand and explore its ideas about God and about Life. To change our fundamental beliefs in such a way that we alter our collective reality. . . . We are trying, we are seeking to create a cultural story for the whole of humanity.28
One of the things Neale Donald Walsch wanted to impress upon those attending his Humanity’s Team Leadership Gathering was how to effectively deal with the media. In a session titled “The Care and Feeding of the Press,” Walsch taught his team leaders some subtle tricks of the trade. Because he and his Conversations with God books were so controversial, he warned attendees they would have some problems with the press. To make it easier for people to accept his ideas, Walsch described how he was in the process of “reinventing” and “repackaging” himself. He explained that the establishment of Humanity’s Team was an important part of the “repackaging” process. He told them:
You’re fighting an uphill battle here because I’m the guy who says he has conversations with God and nobody in the media wants to touch that with a ten foot pole. . . . The reason we formed Humanity’s Team was to get it away from me. And to get it away—at least one step away—from the Conversations with God stuff. . . . We formed Humanity’s Team as a way frankly . . . of repackaging, repackaging the product, if you please, which is the New Spirituality. And suddenly we are getting media, suddenly we are getting interviews. . . . We’ve stepped into a place that generically is difficult to disagree with. Humanity’s Team is difficult to disagree with. Conversations with God brings up disagreement almost at once.29
In this presentation, Walsch disclosed some interesting things about himself. In a very revealing talk, he used a personal situation with Oprah Winfrey to illustrate the problems he has had with the media and why he felt the need to “repackage” and “reinvent” himself. To illustrate his point to attendees, Walsch described how Oprah had flown him to Chicago where they taped a special two-hour interview. He goes on to recount how she held up his book Conversations and called it her “favorite book.” In his presentation, Walsch inadvertently revealed how New Age leaders like Oprah Winfrey and himself are subtly—and not so subtly—maneuvering and manipulating people into accepting the teachings of the New Age/New Spirituality. Because the context is so important, I have quoted Walsch at length:
Oprah brought me to Chicago. She loves Conversations. In fact she says it is her favorite book. She says that on the air—“This is my favorite book”—and she holds up Conversations with God. So she brought me to Chicago and she said, “Let’s do two hours.” I’m gonna do a two-hour special. And she interviewed me on videotape for two hours and we had a fascinating conversation, the way only Oprah can, ’cause she gets right into the interior of it. And I went back home, flying back home, and I thought, My God, they’re going to do a two-hour special. This is incredible . . . talk about zooming sales. And I went home and . . . it stayed in the can for a year and a half. I did not call her, ’cause I didn’t want to bother Oprah with, you know, “Where is my program? When are you going to put it on?” . . . But finally the producer called us and said, “You know, Neale, we just can’t use it. You are so incredibly provocative in what you’re saying about your relationship with God, humanity’s relationship with God, where religion currently stands in the world etc. etc. . . . that we’ve looked at this thing, we’ve watched this program eight times and all of us agree it’s just too soon. You’re way ahead of the curve, we can’t put this on now.”30
Thus, the unaired interview was perceived as a potential public relations problem for Oprah and her staff. They thought the public wasn’t quite ready for a controversial interview with a man who claimed to be taking spiritual dictation from “God.” And they were definitely not happy that Walsch had mentioned the unaired interview in one of his newsletters and took him to task for bringing the whole situation into the open. Walsch explained:
I made a comment about this—just a short one or two sentence comment in a newsletter about a year and a half ago—about this. And she didn’t get a thousand e-mails, she got about six thousand e-mails and phone calls and letters. And they actually had one of her personal assistants call me and say, “Neale, would you just, could you just not do that, because you’re hurting yourself more than you’re helping yourself. You’re irritating the producers here. I know you didn’t do it personally, but you’re upsetting. You’ll never get on the show that way. Don’t do that . . . Don’t send letters of protest to Oprah because you’ll just ruin it—any chance.”31
Walsch proceeded to use the whole interview incident to teach his Humanity’s Team leaders how to avoid antagonizing the media. Walsch suggested that it was his own low-key reassuring attitude that helped Oprah and her staff find an alternative way to introduce him to their millions of viewers. It also set up the possibility for airing the entire interview sometime in the future.
We’ve got to make Oprah and her people totally okay with the decision they made. You know what I said to Oprah, I called Oprah personally. I know Oprah. I called her personally. I said, “You know, Ope”—see now, you know you know Oprah personally when you call her ‘Ope.’ I said, “You know Ope, I totally get it. I totally understand. I’m totally okay. I’m right there with you. Don’t you put me on your program one minute before you think your audience is ready to receive it. I would not have you jeopardize all the wonderful good you’re doing in the world by stepping into that before your audience is ready to go there with you. You will know when the right time is and I will be there, unless I’m not.” And she got to feel like, whew . . . totally understood, totally embraced and totally made okay with the decision that she had made. That’s how I’ll get on Oprah if I’m ever on it.
So what happened? Last January Oprah did this really neat program. Last January—you may have seen it. She said the ten most influential people in my life. She had Nelson Mandela. She had Vaclav Havel. She had people at that level, and she had a clip from our interview. And she said, “Neale Donald Walsch.” It was a minute and fifty-seven second clip—less than two minutes of an interview of that two hours. She took about two minutes. But you know what—traveling in some pretty fast company . . . and even with those two minutes, our book sales just went through the roof. . . . So we learned don’t—that’s my last word to you here today—don’t antagonize the media.32
Walsch’s revealing account illustrates how New Age leaders like Walsch and media personalities like Oprah Winfrey are spiritually molding an unsuspecting public. They understand that the media is the message and that timing is everything. They are pushing their New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality beliefs, but they have to make sure the public is ready for what they have to say. They must always anticipate what their audience can handle. And this is why Oprah and her staff decided to introduce Walsch in a short, safe, carefully edited clip describing him as a “memorable thinker” rather than in the longer interview and describing him as the “man who has conversations with God.”
Walsch Anticipates Criticism
In a special tutorial session that immediately followed the Humanity’s Team Leadership Conference, Walsch warned team leaders about media questions that would inevitably arise regarding “God’s” controversial statements about Hitler. He explained that the Hitler material—if not carefully explained—had the potential to damage their New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality message.
To prepare his team leaders for what they might encounter, Walsch introduced a question and answer role-playing exercise. He used a seemingly logical, formulaic presentation they could employ to convince people that Hitler had really gone to heaven. The simple routine was cleverly designed to take skeptics through a process that would lead them to ultimately agree that if God’s capacity for love and forgiveness was all-encompassing, then God could forgive anyone of anything at anytime—if they were really sorry—even if the person had already passed on—even if that person was Adolf Hitler.33
But for all his talk of love and forgiveness, Walsch never really explained why his “God” seemed to be excusing Hitler for what he did—even going so far as to glorify death in the process. Unbelievably, Walsch’s “God” makes it look like Hitler actually did the Jewish people a favor by killing them. A knowledgeable observer, with prior understanding of the New Age’s proposed “selection process,”34 might suggest that Walsch and his New Age “God” were conditioning the public for the spiritual euthanasia of future resisters to their New Age/New Spirituality. In fact, it sounds a lot like Antichrist and his future plans for those who oppose him. It brings to mind the following Scripture where the true Jesus Christ warns about this kind of situation:
These things have I spoken unto you, that ye should not be offended. They shall put you out of the synagogues: yea, the time cometh, that whosoever killeth you will think that he doeth God service. And these things will they do unto you, because they have not known the Father, nor me. (John 16:1-3)
In Conversations with God, Book 1, “God” told Walsch:
You know you have found God when you observe that you will not murder (that is, willfully kill, without cause). For while you will understand that you cannot end another’s life in any event (all life is eternal), you will not choose to terminate any particular incarnation, nor change any life energy from one form to another, without the most sacred justification.35 (emphasis added)
One has to wonder just what Walsch and his New Age “God” would say about what constitutes the “sacred justification” of killing someone. In Walsch’s 2006 book Home With God, his New Age “God” continues to glorify death as he teaches that no one can die against his own will. In other words, Walsch’s “God” would have us believe that those who were killed by Hitler gave their consent to the Holocaust and thus bear equal responsibility for it. This kind of thinking even trumps the absurdity of those who insist there never was a Holocaust. The following are some quotes from Walsch’s ”God” that could one day be used to justify killing those who do not “choose” to conform to the dictates of the New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality:
Dying is something you do for you.36
You are the cause of your own death. This is always true, no matter where, or how, you die.37
You cannot die against your will.38
Death is never a tragedy. It is always a gift.39
Death does not exist.40
If Oprah was embarrassed by her endorsement of A Million Little Pieces—author James Frey’s partially fabricated book—it will seem like a very small matter compared to the fallout she could receive if she chooses to air the long-delayed interview with Neale Donald Walsch. Unless, of course, her viewers have been sufficiently conditioned to accept what Walsch says without question. Her praise of this New Age teacher is a tragic statement about her spiritual beliefs and her New Age “Christianity” that is no Christianity at all.
In 2002, the same year that Oprah declared Walsch to be one of the ten most “memorable thinkers” she had ever met, Walsch released a new book titled The New Revelations: A Conversation with God. In this book, Walsch’s “God” states:
There have always been ideological differences on your planet, but the present widening of the split in ideology with a simultaneous advance in technology has created the conditions for rapid self-destruction. . . .
It will take an unprecedented act of courage, on a grand scale. You may have to do something virtually unknown in the annals of human history. . . . You may have to give up some of your most sacred beliefs.41
Later in the book, Walsch’s “God” lays out the heretical bottom line of his New Age/New Gospel Spirituality when he categorically states:
Yet let me make something clear. The era of the Single Savior is over.42
Oprah or Orpah?
At birth, Oprah Winfrey was given the biblical name of Orpah. She was named after the biblical Ruth’s daughter-in-law Orpah, and that name was recorded on her birth certificate. But her name was mispronounced by her family as the r and the p were inverted and her name morphed into Oprah. A little letter or two can leaven a biblical name away from its biblical foundation. And a little New Age leaven—God “in” everyone—can leaven away the true foundation of biblical Christianity (Galatians 5:9).
Oprah is not God and neither are any of the rest of us. Hopefully she will one day recognize the falsity of the deceptive teachings that have converted her to the New Age/New Gospel/New Spirituality that she is sharing with her millions of followers. We should all pray that Oprah will one day renounce the false New Age “God” and “Christ” she has learned from Neale Donald Walsch and all the other New Age figures she has read, studied, and featured on her programs throughout the years. Until then, Oprah Winfrey remains one of the most influential and charismatic false teachers in the world today.
To order copies of Oprah Winfrey’s New Age “Christianity” (Part 2) – Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler, click here.
- “Memorable Thinkers” (The Oprah Winfrey Show, January 2002).
- Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God: an uncommon dialogue, Book 1 (New York, NY: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1995), p. 202.
- Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God: an uncommon dialogue, Book 2 (Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing Company, Inc., 1997), p. 35.
- Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 1, op. cit., p. 1.
- Ibid., p. 95.
- Ibid., p. 192.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 2, op. cit., p. 35.
- Ibid., p. 36.
- Ibid., p. 56.
- Ibid., p. 42.
- Neale Donald Walsch, Questions and Answers on “Conversations with God” (Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing Company, Inc., 1999), p. 334.
- Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Revelation: A Message of Hope for the New Millennium (Novato, CA: Nataraj Publishing, 1995), pp. 240, 267.
- Neale Donald Walsch, Conversations with God: an uncommon dialogue, Book 3 (Charlottesville, VA: Hampton Roads Publishing Company, 1998), p. 350.
- Ibid., p. 256.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 1, op. cit., p. 41.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 3, op. cit., p. 87.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 1, op. cit., p. 76.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 2, op. cit., p. 235.
- Neale Donald Walsch, Friendship with God: an uncommon dialogue (New York, NY: G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1999), p. 23.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 3, op. cit., p. 89.
- Ibid., p. 56.
- A Course in Miracles: Combined Volume (Glen Ellen, CA: Foundation for Inner Peace, 1975, 1992, Text), p. 50.
- Walsch, Friendship with God, op. cit., pp. 295-296.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 2, op. cit., p. 141.
- Walsch, Friendship with God, op. cit., p. 375.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 2, op. cit., p. 36.
- Humanity’s Team Leadership Gathering, Portland, Oregon, June 27-July 1, 2003: Session: “The Care and Feeding of the Press.” Transcribed by author from audiotape of conference. Note: January program Walsch is referring to is The Oprah Winfrey Show that aired in January 2002 and titled “Memorable Thinkers”).
- Humanity’s Team Teacher’s Tutorial: Session 12, Portland, Oregon, June 30-July 1, 2003. Transcribed by author from compact disc of the tutorial.
- Barbara Marx Hubbard, The Revelation, op. cit., pp. 240, 267.
- Walsch, Conversations with God, Book 1, op. cit., pp. 96-97.
- Neale Donald Walsch, Home with God: In a Life That Never Ends: A wondrous message of love in a final Conversation with God (New York, NY: Atria Books, 2006), p. 7.
- Ibid., p. 8.
- Ibid., p. 10.
- Ibid., p. 42.
- Ibid., p. 89.
- Neale Donald Walsch, The New Revelations: A Conversation with God (New York, NY: Atria Books, 2002), p. 175.
- Ibid., p. 157.
To order copies of Oprah Winfrey’s New Age “Christianity” (Part 2) – Neale Donald Walsch, “God,” and Hitler, click here.