Gibraltar back on the scene! What it means to us today

Confusion over Gibraltar border controls in UK-Spain deal

Gibraltar is moving towards a new era after the UK and Spain on New Year’s Eve reached a preliminary post-Brexit deal to avoid a hard border on the south of the Iberian peninsula.

This agreement, currently being examined by the European Commission, would allow Gibraltar – officially a “British Overseas Territory” – to join the Schengen zone that guarantees passport-free travel and freedom of movement to more than 400 million EU citizens.

As a result, Gibraltar’s port and airport would become the external borders of the Schengen area – with Spain as the member state responsible for the oversight and implementation of Schengen.

Europe’s border agency Frontex will have a presence at entry and exit points in Gibraltar, in an operation expected to last four years.

Gibraltar, an area with a population of around 34,000 people, has been a matter of often antagonistic discussion and debate since the disputed territory was ceded to Great Britain under the Treaty of Utrecht in 1713.

But a new row was sparked after Spanish foreign minister Arancha González Laya said her country would have the last word on who can enter Gibraltar, under the preliminary agreement.

In an interview published on Saturday by Spanish newspaper El País, González Laya said that “to be able to enter a Gibraltar which is integrated into the Schengen area, the responsibility for [border] controls will be in Spanish hands – [both] at the port and the airport”.

“Schengen is a set of rules, procedures and tools, including its database, to which only Spain has access. Gibraltar and the United Kingdom do not,” she also said, without giving further details.

Responding to the interview comments, Gibraltar’s chief minister Fabian Picardo tweeted: “Under the New Year’s Eve agreement only Gibraltar will decide who enters Gibraltar and Spanish officers will not exercise any controls in Gibraltar at the airport or port now or in four years’ time. This is our land. Couldn’t be clearer.”

The Spanish ministry of foreign affairs, when contacted by EUobserver, declined to clarify whether Spanish authorities will be physically controlling Gibraltar’s airport and port.

The cabinet of Gibraltar’s chief minister also did not respond to EUobserver’s questions.

The details of the agreement are expected to become public in the coming days.

Sovereignty sensibilities

Meanwhile, experts argued that it is clear that a European border cannot be controlled exclusively by non-European officials.

“This is the usual debate that tends to confuse sovereignty issues with practical questions,” said Enrique Feás, senior policy analyst associated with the think tank Real Instituto El Cano.

“In the end, there will be a practical solution. The Gibraltar deal aims to find solutions to practical issues and not to harm the Spanish economy near Gibraltar, or the economy of Gibraltar, unnecessarily. This is only possible by allowing free movement,” he added.

For Feás, allowing the British Overseas Territory to join the Schengen area raises “practical problems that can hurt sensibilities related to the question of Gibraltar’s sovereignty”.

“Yet, the lack of an agreement with Gibraltar would have harmed both parties and it would have been the same or worse [for Spain] in terms of sovereignty,” he said.

For his part, the former Spanish foreign minister and current MEP Juan Manuel García-Margallo, who has been advocating for the co-sovereignty of Gibraltar for years, said that Spain has failed to seize the opportunity that Brexit had offered.

“The Spanish government said from the very beginning that in no case the issue of Gibraltar’s sovereignty would be discussed [with the UK], which means renouncing to all the bases of the negotiation, including Spain’s veto right in the UE-UK deal,” García-Margallo told EUobserver.

The Gibraltar deal, which still needs the approval of the European Commission, will be part of the UK-EU treaty that should be ready within six months.

While the treaty is being prepared, London and Madrid have also agreed to extend for six months three memorandums of understanding for cooperation regarding tobacco, the environment, customs and policing cooperation – which were signed in 2018 and due to expire on 31 December.

Meanwhile, the two countries are also in talks over a post-Brexit security and defence deal, which will contain “measures of trust” regarding the base in Gibraltar, El País reported.

This base has been a matter of diplomatic tensions in the past.a matter of diplomatic tensions in the past.

By ELENA SÁNCHEZ NICOLÁS – EuObserver – source

From the April 1982 Plain Truth Magazine


John R Schroeder

The Spanish government has finally agreed to reopen its borders to Gibraltar. Will the quarrels over the famous Rock at last pass into history?   FOR NEARLY 300 years Gibraltar has been a rock of contention between the British and the Spanish.
   It seems, understandably, that nothing upsets Spanish pride more than a British royal visit to the Rock of Gibraltar.
   Prince Philip’s visit in 1950, for example, served to spotlight the controversy. And to highlight the British Parliament’s long-range goal to grant self-government to the Rock’s 30,000 inhabitants. Madrid immediately perceived that the vast majority (mostly foreign in origin) would not vote for a return to Spanish sovereignty.
   Again, when Queen Elizabeth II stopped off at Gibraltar to complete her world tour in 1954, the Spanish blamed the British government for this “deliberate,” provocative act. The Spanish press hauled out British “sins” from the so-called rape of Gibraltar in 1704 to Henry VIII’s treatment of Catherine of Aragon.
   All the furor finally ended with Premier Francisco Franco forbidding Spaniards to visit the Rock. (In 1969 Spanish authorities completely sealed off the border linking Spain with Gibraltar)
   The last time the “royal yacht touched the Rock” was in 1981. Spain’s King Juan Carlos declined to attend Prince Charles’ wedding because Gibraltar was chosen as a convenient place to begin the royal honeymoon cruise in the Mediterranean. Over a week before, The Daily Express ran a headline captioned: “Spain Ready to Open Gibraltar.” The upshot of that British decision to begin the royal honeymoon at Gibraltar was perhaps to delay the opening of the Spanish frontier.
   But despite another wounding blow to Spain’s sensitive national pride, why has Madrid finally agreed to open up Gibraltar to the mainland?

Spain Ready to Reenter Europe   

In simple terms the reason for Spain’s about-turn is her desire to effectively reenter modern Europe. Spain wants to join, finally, both NATO and the European Economic Community (EEC).
   NATO’s 15 members all appear to favor the Spanish application. And Spain hopes to formally enter the Common Market on New Year’s Day, 1984.
   Spain’s basic decision to discard its traditional isolationism by becoming an integral part of the Western family of nations is a fundamental turning point in her modern history. It would be incongruous for Gibraltar to continue to be a bone of contention between two treaty partners in both a major economic and an important military alliance. Besides that, Spain desperately needs British support if her application to the EEC is to succeed at a time when wealthier community members are beleaguered with all sorts of internal economic problems.
   In return for agreeing to open her borders to Gibraltar April 20, Spain received a British promise to hold more talks on “all differences over Gibraltar.” There are some surprising elements in The Economist’s comment on these proceedings. England’s leading news magazine stated: “Britain has no objection in principle to handing Gibraltar over to Spain — providing this is acceptable to the majority of the Rock’s inhabitants” (January 16, 1982).
   It may surprise one to learn that even conservative thinkers have no objection to giving Gibraltar away.
   The fact that the majority of all Gibraltarians want the Union Jack to fly over the Rock may not always guarantee British control, however. One provision hammered out during the recent talks between Spanish Prime Minister Calvo Sotelo and Mrs. Thatcher was to allow Spanish workers to take jobs in Gibraltar after April 20. That particular proviso may prove to be the thin end of the wedge. For instance, if and when Spain is allowed to enter the EEC, these Spanish workers will automatically receive more favored status. This in turn opens up the possibility of a new scenario.
   The Christian Science Monitor expressed it very succinctly: “What Gibraltarians fear is that Spain will encourage enough [workers] to establish themselves in Gibraltar to swing the vote in Spain’s favor in any future referendum to decide the colony’s eventual status” (January 18, 1982).

Gibraltar in Prophecy?   

It looks as if Gibraltar is going the way of the Panama Canal. Britons seem determined to negotiate the Rock away in the same basic manner that Americans turned the Canal over to ultimate Panamanian sovereignty.
   In some ways the Spanish attitude puts Britain to shame. In the words of a contemporary book, “Gibraltar is not a necessity to Spain — strategic, economic or political…. It goads Spain’s pride” (Benjamin Wells, Spain: The Gentle Anarchy, page 234). Without a doubt that is an overstatement, but it serves to help make this basic point: Spaniards are divided on many important political and economic issues, but they all agree on one point.

Pride in a Spanish Gibraltar   

Lackadaisical Britons with little pride in their power or in their inheritance are ready to negotiate the Rock away. In the ringing prophetic words of a long previous issue of The Plain Truth: “Gibraltar is destined to fall — not in glorious and heroic defense after a famous siege — but in utter ignominy. In useless and helpless sacrifice — in disgrace and shame” (June, 1965).
   Few understand why we could say this in The Plain Truth 17 years ago. Fewer still understand what Gibraltar really represents to Britain. Little do the British realize who gave them the Rock, why it was given and why it will be taken away. If you have not before heard of the answers to these questions, then you should request our free book entitled The United States and Britain in Prophecy. It will give you a new under-standing of the Gibraltar controversy that you never had before. And a new look into the surprising future of Europe in the 1980s.

Gibraltar in History   

Recorded possession of the Rock extends far back into history. The ancient Phoenicians once held it. The early Greeks occupied it next, followed by the Phoenicians of Carthage and then the Romans.
   Threatened by barbarian invasions at home, the Romans left the Rock in the early fifth century A.D. Three centuries later, in 711, Tarik-ibn-Zaid’s invasion from North Africa began a long Moorish domination of much of Spain.
   Then in 1309 the Rock was taken by the Spaniards only to be retaken by the Moors in 1333. It became Spanish once more in 1462. Gibraltar was formally incorporated within the domains of the Spanish Crown by Queen Isabella in 1502.
   Two centuries later in July, 1704, Spain in turn lost control of the Rock during the War of Spanish Succession. A combined British-Dutch naval force under Admiral Sir George Rooke seized Gibraltar after three days’ siege. Finally in 1713 Spain ceded the Rock to Britain in Article X of the Treaty of Utrecht.
   Various Spanish expeditions were undertaken in subsequent years to recapture the Rock — all ending in failure. The last great attempt by Spain to regain Gibraltar by force came in June, 1779. This “Great Siege” — one of the most memorable in history — lasted more than 3½ years as a combined Spanish-French army of 60,000 blockaded, but never quite conquered, the small British garrison of 6,000 under General George Elliot, the governor of Gibraltar.
   In 1783, Britain’s possession of the Rock was once more confirmed by the Treaty of Versailles. This ended Spanish hopes in a military sense.

Visiting a Nation Fraught With Impending Total Disaster

Personal from the Editor (Herbert W. Armstrong)

[Original Publication]


November, 1971


Visiting a Nation Fraught With Impending Total Disaster

  ISTANBUL, TURKEY: AS I WRITE, I gaze out the window in my hotel room on the mouth of the Bosporus. It is a scenic and tranquil panoramic view, today. Tomorrow it may be the site of a world-shaking event. The Bosporus is a strait about 18 miles long, between Turkey in Europe and Turkey in Asia. It connects the Sea of Marmara and the Black Sea to the north. Russia borders on the Black Sea. The Bosporus is Russia’s gateway to ocean commerce with the world. Istanbul, Turkey sits astride this gateway. It reeks with history. And it is fraught with ominous portent of total disaster to this country of Turkey. It has been interesting, today, September 11, 1971, to spend a quiet and restful day refreshing my mind on the very beginning of this Turkish nation, its earliest history, a mental review of the general course of its history up to now, and, finally, the Biblical PROPHECIES for its almost immediate future. I will give you, here, the thrilling story. We are en route to Indonesia, where the very first of the planned scientific expeditions jointly conducted between a Belgian Foundation headed by King Leopold III, and Ambassador College, is to get under way. Accompanying us are King Leopold and Professor Heinrich Harrer of Munich, who, later, will lecture at Ambassador College. He is a scientist with a rich experience in scientific expeditions. Another famous scientist is en route by commercial airline, to meet us at Djakarta. While the King and others of our party were out sightseeing today, I refreshed my mind with the intriguing story I give you now. The very first beginning of this nation, significantly, was a struggle between unborn twins. It was emblematic of the final struggle that will involve Britain and the United States, and a prophesied total disaster to Turkey. Indeed, truth is often stranger than fiction! But since the Turkish people are descended from Abraham, let us first get our bearings beginning from Abraham. So notice first, Genesis 25:5-6: “And Abraham gave all that he had unto Isaac. But unto the sons of the concubines, which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts, and sent them away from Isaac his son.” Abraham also was the father of Ishmael by Hagar, handmaid of his wife Sarah. But Ishmael, too, was rejected from the birthright. Now pick up the story, beginning verse 20, same chapter: “And Isaac was forty years old when he took Rebekah to wife, the daughter of Bethuel the Syrian … the sister to Laban the Syrian. And Isaac intreated the ETERNAL for his wife, because she was barren: and the Eternal was intreated of him, and Rebekah his wife conceived. And the children struggled together within her; and she said, If it be so, why am I thus? And she went to inquire of the ETERNAL. And the ETERNAL said unto her, Two nations are in thy womb, and two manner of people shall be separated from thy bowels; and the one people shall be stronger than the other people; and the elder shall serve the younger. “And when her days to be delivered were fulfilled, behold, there were twins within her womb. And the first came out red, all over like an hairy garment; and they called his name Esau” (verses 20-25). Esau was the father of the Turkish nation. God said two nations were in Rebekah’s womb. The other, Jacob, was the father of the twelve tribes of Israel. Continue, verse 26: “And after that came his brother out, and his hand took hold on Esau’s heel; and his name was called Jacob (meaning, Hebrew, supplanter, or one that takes by the heel): and Isaac was threescore years old when she bare them. And the boys grew: and Esau was a cunning hunter, a man of the field; and Jacob was a plain man, dwelling in tents. And Isaac loved Esau, because he did eat of his venison: but Rebekah loved Jacob. “And Jacob sod pottage (red lentils): and Esau came from the field, and he was faint: And Esau said to Jacob, Feed me, I pray thee, with that same red pottage (soup); for I am faint: therefore was his name called Edom (meaning red). And Jacob said, Sell me this day (first of all) thy birthright” (verses 2 & 31). The “Birthright” was a promise God had made to Abraham because of Abraham’s spirit of willing obedience, to be handed down to his descendants. Normally the Birthright was given to the eldest son, though on this occasion God allowed it to be sold to the younger. The Birthright was a promise of national greatness, power, and wealth — all material. It was a different promise than the Scepter Promise, which was spiritual, and involved the GIFT of eternal life by grace through Christ. The Birthright was a RIGHT by birth; the Scepter Promise one of grace, not a right. The Birthright was a promise of RACE, the Scepter of GRACE. The Birthright ultimately was fulfilled in the greatness, power, and wealth of the British and American people. It was of just that TREMENDOUS IMPORTANCE! This is explained in our free book “The U.S. and British Commonwealth in Prophecy”. Continue the story: “And Esau said, Behold, I am at the point to die: and what profit shall this birthright do to me? And Jacob said, Swear to me this day; and he swear unto him: and he sold his birthright unto Jacob. Then Jacob gave Esau bread and pottage of lentiles; and he did eat and drink, and rose up, and went his way: thus Esau despised his birthright” (verses 32-34). Next, Jacob, through the scheming of his mother, managed to deprive Esau of Isaac’s blessing. You will find this recorded in the 27th chapter of Genesis. It is too long to print the entire chapter here but I will give you a quick’ synopsis. It occurred when Isaac was old, his eyes so dim with age he could not see. He called for Esau, and asked him to go out to the field and hunt a deer, and make him “savory meat” the way Isaac liked it prepared. Then Isaac would give him his blessing on the Birthright. While Esau was gone hunting, Rebekah told Jacob to quickly bring in two good kids of the goats, and she would prepare them into the kind of “savory meat” of which Isaac was so fond. Rebekah brought to Jacob Esau’s clothes which he donned. She put the skins of the kids of the goats on Jacob’s hands and arms, and “the smooth of his neck,” so that when Isaac smelled of him and took hold of him, he would smell and feel like Esau. However, Isaac was suspicious, because of Jacob’s voice, and because the “venison” came so soon. He said, “The voice is Jacob’s voice, but the hands are the hands of Esau. And he discerned him not, because his hands were hairy … so he blessed him. And he said, Art thou my very son Esau?” Jacob lied, “I am.” Isaac said, “God give thee of the dew of heaven, and the fatness (fat places) of the earth, and plenty of corn and wine. Let people serve thee, and nations bow down to thee: be lord over thy brethren, and let thy mother’s sons bow down to thee: cursed be every one that curseth thee, and blessed be he that blesseth thee.” That was the blessing of the materially rich Birthright to be handed down through many generations. Jacob had scarcely gone from the presence of Isaac when Esau came in. He had returned and made “savory meat.” “Who art thou?” asked Isaac. “I am thy son, thy firstborn Esau,” he replied. “And Isaac trembled very exceedingly, and said, ‘Who? Where is he that hath taken venison, and brought it to me, and I have eaten of all before thou camest, and have blessed him? yea, and he shall be blessed!’ “And when Esau heard the words of his father, he cried with a great and exceeding bitter cry, and said to his father, ‘Bless me, even me also, O my father.'” Isaac said, “Thy brother came with subtlety, and hath taken away thy blessing.” Esau said, bitterly, “Is not he rightly named Jacob? For he hath supplanted me these two times: he took away my birthright; and, behold, now he hath taken away my blessing …. And Esau lifted up his voice, and wept.” “And Esau hated Jacob,” and threatened to slay him after their father’s death. But Rebekah warned Jacob to flee to her brother, Laban, at Haran. Christians are admonished, in the New Testament “Follow peace with all men, and holiness, without which no man shall see the Lord: looking diligently lest any man fail of the grace of God; lest any root of bitterness springing up trouble you, and thereby many be defiled; lest there be any fornicator, or profane person, as Esau, who for one morsel of food sold his birthright. For ye know how that afterward, when he would have inherited the blessing, he was rejected: for he found no place of repentance, though he sought it carefully with tears”(Heb. 12:14-17). God intended the Birthright to go to Jacob. But He did not intend Rebekah and Jacob to take it by deceit and lying. Had they been more honest, God would have brought about the transfer in an honorable way. As it was, Jacob had to struggle for years to overcome such ways contrary to the ways of God. But he finally did overcome, and his name was changed from the reproachful Jacob (Supplanter), to Israel, meaning “Overcomer,” or one who prevails with God. Jacob heeded his mother’s warning, fled to the house of Laban. He fell in love with Laban’s younger daughter, Rachel. He worked for Laban seven years for her. At the wedding, foxy old Laban pulled a switch on Jacob. Apparently women wore veils at weddings which completely hid their faces in those days, and Jacob found old Laban had gotten rid of his elder and not-so-beautiful or marriageable daughter, Leah. Jacob was forced to work another seven years for his beloved Rachel. By these two sisters, and the handmaids of each, Jacob had twelve sons. They became the fathers of the twelve tribes of Israel. Jacob and his family later departed secretly from Laban. Jacob finally repented, overcame, prevailed in wrestling with an angel, and his name was changed to Israel. Meanwhile, Esau had grown rich. Finally, Israel and Esau met, and were reconciled (Genesis 33:1-4). Esau’s riches and descendants are recorded in Genesis 36:1-2, 8-9: “Now these are the generations of Esau, who is Edom” (Gen. 36:1). And, “Thus dwelt Esau in Mount Seir: Esau is Edom” (verse 8). Mount Seir is in the area of Petra. One of Esau’s sons was named “Teman.” His descendants developed into the Turkish Empire, called the “Ottoman” Empire. Through the centuries there developed more or less continuous rivalry between the descendants of Esau and of Israel. Also a rivalry developed between the descendants of Judah — one of the Twelve Tribes — and the Arabs, who are the descendants of Ishmael. That rivalry stemmed from the jealousy of two women — Sarah, Abraham’s wife, mother of Isaac, and Hagar, Sarah’s maid, mother of Ishmael, also son of Abraham. All these ancient rivalries are playing crucial parts in the tense world conditions of TODAY! The Turks grew to become a considerable Empire. Prior to World War I, the Ottoman Empire included European Turkey, Anatolia, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Jordan, Palestine, Arabia, Yemen, and islands in the Aegean Sea. But they joined Germany in World War I, and their defeat resulted in loss of empire. Turkey was reduced to a small and unimportant nation. Now look to the future from this point. See what is prophesied. The book of Obadiah is devoted to Turkey. It is a short book, of only one chapter. It begins: “The vision of Obadiah. Thus saith the Lord Eternal concerning Edom … Behold, I have made thee small among the heathen: thou art greatly despised. The pride of thine heart hath deceived thee, thou that dwellest in the clefts of the rock, whose habitation is high … “Shall I not in that day, saith the Eternal, even destroy the wise men out of Edom, and understanding out of the mount of Esau? And thy mighty men, O Teman (Ottoman Empire??), shall be dismayed, to the end that every one of the mount of Esau may be cut off by slaughter. “For thy violence against thy brother Jacob shame shall cover thee, and thou shalt be cut off for ever.” Now WHEN? Of what TIME is the prophecy speaking? Continue: “In the day that thou stoodest on the other side, in the day that the strangers carried away captive his forces, and foreigners entered into his gates, and cast lots upon Jerusalem, even thou wast as one of them” (verses 10-11). Compare this casting lots upon Jerusalem to Joel 3:3. The entire context of Joel from 2:28 through chapter 3 is speaking of a time very shortly future from now — just prior to the “Day of the Lord” — a time which will cut short the imminent “Great Tribulation” and immediately follow it — a time leading quickly into the coming of the Messiah to rule all nations. But continue in Obadiah: “But thou shouldest not have looked on the day of thy brother in the day that he became a stranger; neither shouldest thou have rejoiced over the children of Judah in the day of their destruction ….” This, in past tense, may refer, typically, looking back, to the captivities and exiles of Israel, 721-718 B.C., and of Judah, 604-585 B.C., respectively — but merely as a type of captivities now imminent. The time of the prophecy is NOW — and the immediate future. Continue: “Thou shouldest not have entered into the gate of my people in the day of their calamity …” (verse 13) — speaking of the coming Great Tribulation (Matt. 24:21-22, Dan. 12:1-2; Jer. 30:5-7) — greatest time of trouble of all history, the time of “Jacob’s trouble,” meaning U. S. and British nations — see free book, “United States and British Commonwealth in Prophecy” — “… nor have laid hands on their substance in the day of their calamity; neither shouldest thou have stood in the crossway (the Bosporus — Turkey stands astride it), to cut off those of his that did escape; neither shouldest thou have delivered up those of his that did remain in the day of distress” (verses 13-14). Now the TIME when this shall happen is made clear in the next verse: “For the day of the Lord is near upon all the heathen …” (verse 15). The “Day of the Lord” is to follow immediately the Great Tribulation — compare Matthew 24:21-22, 29 with Joel 2:31. It is the time when God will first intervene supernaturally in this world’s affairs, to END the Great Tribulation, into which the world is now heading, and to punish the Gentile nations for having so frightfully punished Britain-U.S. and the Jewish people in World War III, and the imminent Tribulation. This “Day of the Lord” — that is, the first phase of it — will climax in Christ’s return to earth as the Messiah, as King of kings and Lord of lords (verse 30 of Matthew 24). Continue in Obadiah, verse 15: “… As thou hast done, it shall be done unto thee …. But upon Mount Zion (Jerusalem) shall be deliverance, and there shall be holiness (at Christ’s coming); and the house of Jacob (U.S.- British, NOT Jews) shall possess their possessions. And the house of Jacob shall be a fire, and the house of Joseph (U.S.-British) a flame, and the house of Esau (Turkey) for stubble, and they shall kindle in them, and devour them; and there shall not be any remaining of the house of Esau; for the Eternal hath spoken it.” And the one-chapter book ends, “… and the kingdom shall be the Eternal’s.” The Kingdom of God set up at Christ’s coming — the world-ruling Kingdom to rule all nations, and to bring PEACE to the whole world! There can be no mistaking the TIME of this prophecy. It is the near future — probably much nearer than you think! Other prophecies, tying in with this are Jeremiah 49:7 and 25:21; and Ezekiel 25:13-14.]]>

♛ After 2,550 Years…JEWS ARE A NATION AGAIN!…Prophesy Fulfilled?


After 2,550 Years…


…Prophecy Fulfilled?


by Herbert W. Armstrong

[Original Publication]

  Here are the real facts back of the strange dilemma in Palestine, exclusive in The Plain Truth, from private interviews with chief leaders of both Arabs and Zionist Jews.  

Read More

Why Did God Raise Up The Nation Of Israel-And Deny Them Spiritual Salvation?

Why Did God Raise Up the Nation Israel — and Deny Them Spiritual Salvation?

by Herbert W. Armstrong

Published in the Good News Magazine, May 1984

Did anyone ever think to ask WHY God raised up the ancient nation Israel, denying them His Holy Spirit and eternal salvation – except their prophets only? Why “chosen people”? WHY were Old Testament Israelites called God’s “chosen people” —and still denied the Holy Spirit to beget them into eternal life? “Chosen”—for what? To be teacher’s pet? For special favors above other nations? Was God a respecter of nations? To understand, we need to start with Adam and Eve. It is an intriguing story, and I have never seen it put together in this manner before. The true reason for ancient Israel is an integral part of God’s supreme master plan.

Read More

THE SPRING HOLY DAYS | Youth Bible Lessons

The YES program of the Worldwide Church of God produced a Youth Bible Lesson program to help the youth of the Church learn more about God and His Master Plan and how the Spring festivals picture it. From Levels Kindergarten to Level 9, each level has a lesson on the Spring Festivals: Passover, Days of Unleavened Bread and Pentecost. Below are picture each lesson from each stage group. Help you child learn more about God’s Word and why we keep God’s Holy Days today.

Read More

'Muslims—Clear the Temple Mount'-asks movement | The Jews In Prophecy

The Temple Mount Movement, which is working on building the third Jewish Temple, is asking Muslims not to come to the compound so as to allow Jews to sacrifice on the eve of Passover. Source: Ynetnews News – ‘Muslims—Clear the Temple Mount’  

“On Monday, April 10, we, the Jewish people, are commanded to perform a special sacrifice on the Temple Mount. Over the years, the Jewish people have been looking forward to the moment when they would be able to renew this mitzvah. So please, evacuate the Temple Mount compound on this day to allow the Jewish people to perform the Passover sacrifice in its rightful time and place,” said Rafael Morris in Arabic  
What about this event? Is this event prophesied in the Holy Bible? Find out. Carn Catherwood goes into detail in his sermon “The Jews in Prophecy”. Listen today. [embed][/embed] “The Jews in Prophecy” by Carn Catherwood.]]>

Jordan's King Hussein-Searching For Peace by Keith W. Stump

(Source) Tensions brewing in the turbulent Middle East may soon thrust Jordan’s King to center stage in the search for peace. Perhaps no king and no people today are more acutely aware of the need for lasting peace in the Middle East than are the King and people of Jordan.

Read More


Mr. Armstrong wrote in his May 2, 1974 Brethren letter: “Now notice I Corinthians 12:  In this chapter God is showing that in THE WORK of the Church — proclaiming the Gospel to the world, and feeding the flock, there are different ADMINISTRATIONS, different OPERATIONS, in the Church, and for these, God has given various spiritual GIFTS, or empowerments, by His Holy Spirit. ADMINISTRATORS refer to performance of executive duties, MANAGERIAL responsibilities, rather than policy-making.” He continues, “The ADMINISTRATIONS in the Church refers to executive performance and managerial responsibilities, NOT to policy-making. In other words, adapting the method of functioning, according to the PRINCIPLE which GOD (the Policy Maker and Law Giver), not we, has laid down.”

Read More