Download Chapter 1: 1492 - God`s Kingdom Ministries

The Prophetic History
of the United States
By
Dr. Stephen E. Jones
Published by:
God’s Kingdom Ministries
6201 University Ave. N.E.
Fridley, MN 55432 (USA)
www.gods-kingdom-ministries.net
Suggested Price:
$3.00 each
Permission is granted to copy and quote freely
from this publication for non-commercial purposes.
© copyright 2006
All Rights Reserved
Printed in USA
The Prophetic History
of the United States
By Dr. Stephen E. Jones
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: 1492 The Beginning ..........................................1
Chapter 2: 1776 The New Nation ........................................6
Chapter 3: 1860 The Civil War ............................................10
Chapter 4: 1914 The Babylonian Captivity ..........................19
Chapter 5: 1917 The Rise of Modern Edom ........................24
Chapter 6: 1937 The Unrecognized Jubilee ........................32
Chapter 7: Summary ...........................................................36
Chapter 1
1492 The Beginning
All of the major events in U.S. history have occurred on known
biblical time cycles. Knowing these time cycles will help us to
understand America itself, our national purpose, and our destiny. As we
study this little-known topic, we will obtain a better understanding of
where we are today in this progression of prophetic history. That is the
purpose of this book.
We must begin with a study of the year 1492 and how it relates to
biblical history. As most of you know, the year 1492 changed the course
of world history. It was the year that Columbus sailed across the Atlantic
Ocean and landed on an island of the Bahamas which he named El
Salvador. He then proceeded to discover (and claim for Spain) many
other islands of the Caribbean.
The expedition had two purposes: religious and economic. One was
to convert the natives to the Roman Church; the other was to find gold
for Spanish coffers. The result, whatever the original intent, was the
extermination of the vast majority of the natives. In fact it was so bad
that a century later, in the struggle between the Jesuits and King Henry
IV, Antony Armaud of Paris used this sordid fact to show the true
character of the Jesuits. Cormenin's 1850 History of the Popes, Vol. II, p.
275 records part of the speech:
" ‘It is time that the world had learned to know the Jesuits,’ exclaimed
the eloquent advocate, in the warmth of his discourse; ‘it is time that
the nations were doing justice on these sanguinary vampyres who hover
over our heads and are making ready to devour us. People, learn that
these execrable props of the pope wish to do in France as they have
done in America, where twenty millions of men, women, and children
have been polluted, burned, or murdered under the pretext of religion.
Learn that their love for gold is as insatiable as their thirst for blood,
and that they have depopulated whole islands to assuage their
cupidity--forcing men to bury themselves alive in the mines, and
constraining women to labour on the land red with the blood of their
children.
" ‘Learn that they are the inventors of those new tortures which they
have made four thousand men undergo at once, who remained exposed
for whole months to all the inclemencies of the seasons, attached to
each other by iron chains, entirely naked, and whipped three times a
1
day until they shall point out the place where supposed treasures are
concealed; and as these unfortunate men have nothing to discover, they
become enraged at them and kill them by blows of clubs; so that these
unfortunate Indians, in order to escape the barbarity of the Jesuits, fly
to the mountains, where, in despair, they hang themselves in the trees
of the forest with their wives and children’."
Cormenin himself comments on this:
"The Jesuits, unable to free themselves from all these charges, which
had been sustained by incontestable witnesses and irresistible proofs,
turned towards Rome and besought Clement the Eighth to interfere in
the quarrel."
Our question, though, is how 1492 was significant in Bible prophecy.
The roots of this date go back to Noah's curse upon Canaan in the year
1660 (years from Adam). This put Canaan on Cursed Time, as I
explained in my book, Secrets of Time, chapter 4. Cursed Time is a
period of 414 years (or a multiple of 414).
In this case, Canaan was brought into judgment 2 x 414 years after
Noah’s curse in the year 2488 (from Adam). 1660 + 828 = 2488. This is
when Joshua entered Canaan and brought judgment upon those people.
Another 7 x 414 years brings us to the year 1492 A.D. That is the
connecting link that ties Joshua’s conquest of Canaan to the European
conquest of the American hemisphere.
The war against the Canaanites, though commanded by God, was not
really the ultimate solution to the problem. As I showed in chapter 2 of
my book, The Laws of Spiritual Warfare, Israel rejected the spiritual
sword when they refused to hear the Holy Spirit at Mount Sinai. Exodus
20:18-21 says,
18
And all the people perceived the thunder and the lightning
flashes and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain
smoking; and when the people saw it, they trembled and
stood at a distance. 19 Then they said to Moses, “Speak to us
yourself and we will listen; but let not God speak to us, lest
we die.” 20 And Moses said to the people, “Do not be afraid;
for God has come in order to test you, and in order that the
fear of Him may remain with you, so that you may not sin. 21
So the people stood at a distance, while Moses approached
the thick cloud where God was.
2
This occurred on the day that later came to be known as Pentecost,
when God spoke the Ten Commandments to the people. If they had been
able to overcome their fear and hear His voice, they would have fulfilled
the day of Pentecost as in Acts 2. But they did not, and so Pentecost was
delayed another 1500 years, and they were left only with a physical
sword with which to conquer Canaan.
In other words, Israel might have had opportunity to conquer Canaan
by the power of the Spirit, rather than by the power of the sword, if they
had been able and willing to hear the voice of God at Sinai. Potentially,
they could have had the power of God and the sword of the Spirit with
which to conquer Canaan. That would have truly been the method that
was in accordance with the heart and mind of God. But such a method of
conquest was not within their reach at that time.
In the New Testament, the greater "Joshua" (Yeshua, or Jesus)
foresaw the day of Pentecost when He told His disciples in Mark 16:15,
16,
15
. . . Go into all the world and preach the gospel to all
creation. 16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall
be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.
This command runs directly parallel to the Old Testament method of
dealing with the Canaanites under the first Joshua. The difference is in
the type of weapon used. A physical sword can only separate head from
body; a spiritual sword, as described in Heb. 4:12, can do so much more
in a bloodless manner:
12
For the Word of God is living and active and sharper than
any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of
soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge
the thoughts and intentions of the heart.
The Sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God, can separate soul
and spirit and can discern the thoughts and intentions of the heart. Now
THAT is a sharp sword. As Christians in the New Testament era, we
have a much sharper sword than the people did under Joshua. Just read
the book of Acts to see how this powerful Sword was implemented.
But after the first century the Church largely lost that Sword. They
ceased to have the ability to hear the voice of God. Except for some
individual believers, the Church itself (the institution and leaders) ceased
to be truly led by the Holy Spirit.
3
The most glaring evidence of this is in the simple fact that, by the
fourth century, they felt it necessary to take up the physical sword to
convince men of the "orthodox truth." They were not alone, of course,
for many religions and philosophies have done this throughout history.
But Christians are without excuse, because their Founder taught no such
thing. In fact, He clearly taught the very opposite. Their Founder gave
them a spiritual sword and expected them to use it and not lose it.
Thus, by the time we came to the year 1492, the Roman Church was
long settled in their opinion that the force of the sword was necessary
when the power of the Spirit was lacking. In my opinion, if the Church
had remained as vibrant and alive as in the first century, the physical
sword would have been completely unnecessary. People would have
been converted by the evidence of divine power, not by force or torture.
Religions with a sword can force people to join their church
organization, but they cannot force them to join the true Church, whose
names are written in the Lamb’s book of Life. They can force men to
have a relationship with the Church, but they cannot force men to have a
personal relationship with Jesus Christ. The problem comes, however,
when Christians assume that the religious organization is the Church and
that one must become members of the organization to have a relationship
with Jesus Christ.
And so in the year 1492 we saw the Church being given opportunity
to preach the gospel to all creation, but they had long lost their New
Testament swords. Thus, they used their physical swords, which brought
massacres instead of genuine conversion by the power of the Holy Spirit.
Thus, while the year 1492 had the potential to begin a new era of
bringing the Gospel of Peace to the rest of the world, man had largely
lost the ability to do that work properly. Years later, when the United
States became a nation, they improved somewhat on the Jesuit method of
conversion, particularly among the Puritans, Quakers, and Mennonites,
who were peace-loving people. Unfortunately, the United States
government was not as Christian and broke countless treaties with the
Indian population. Its generals were usually more skilled with physical
swords than with spiritual swords, and blood flowed freely.
Thus, the settlement of this "New World" was a "mixed bag" at best.
I believe that this nation had--and still has--a calling, but we will not be
able to fulfill this destiny apart from the power of the Holy Spirit. I
believe also that no nation can fulfill such a destiny unless it is ruled by
4
the manifested sons of God, for without proper leadership, our efforts
will always be in vain.
One of the most important requirements of the Sons of God is to
know the proper use of the Sword of the Spirit, for only by this Sword
can men truly be converted to Jesus Christ and not merely to a Christian
religious organization.
So we see that in Joshua’s day the Israelites took up physical swords
against the ungodly to establish that first Kingdom in the land of Canaan.
In the Pentecostal Age, the Church reverted to the same Old Covenant
method in establishing the Kingdom of God.
But there is another move of God coming, which will be the true
establishment of the Kingdom of God. It will come by the power of the
Sword of the Spirit, a fiery sword from the mouth of Jesus and the Sons
of God. It will be the preaching of the Word with signs following. It will
be irresistible, because when men see who Jesus really is—as manifested
in His Sons—they will want to be part of His Kingdom. Love conquers
all.
5
Chapter 2
1776 The New Nation
The United Kingdom of Israel, particularly under King Solomon,
sent ships to both North and South America at least 1000 years before
Christ. This is evidenced by the gold mining operations in the Upper
Peninsula of Michigan that is identical to Solomon's mines in the Sinai
Peninsula. No doubt this was a three-year journey, as described in 2
Chron. 9:21,
21
For the king had ships which went to Tarshish with the
servants of Huram; once every three years the ships of
Tarshish came bringing gold and silver, ivory and apes and
peacocks."
Historians now understand that the Israelites and their allies from
Tyre were collectively called by the Greeks, "Phoenicians," and that they
traveled to the New World during the Golden Age of Israel to mine gold
and silver. They crossed the Atlantic from the horn of Africa to Brazil,
which was less distance than the length of the Mediterranean Sea.
Evidence has it that they mined iron in Brazil and gold in Michigan.
The Vikings re-discovered the New World no later than 500 years
after Christ. They traveled across the northern Atlantic by way of Iceland
and Greenland to Nova Scotia. From there they found their way south all
the way to the Mississippi River. Their writings (in Ogam script) are
found in Oklahoma. Furthermore, the Ten Commandments, in old
Hebrew-Phoenician script are engraved on a large flat rock on the side of
a mountain near Los Lunas, New Mexico.
But regardless of this, the New World remained unknown to the rest
of Europe. Columbus is the one who opened up the New World to
European exploration and settlement in 1492. Because Columbus came
under the Catholic Spanish flag, it was argued years later that the whole
of North and South America belonged to the Roman Church. But this is
the same logic as the Russians used in the 1960's when they sent an
unmanned space ship to shoot their flag to the moon's surface to claim
the moon for the USSR.
Though the Catholics came first in 1492, there is an IsraelitePhoenician connection that goes back many centuries. But that Israelite
connection does not really surface prophetically until the year 1776,
6
when representatives of the 13 American colonies drew up their
Declaration of Independence. The year 1776 happened to be 2,520 years
after the beginning of the dispersion of the House of Israel in 745 B.C.
The number 2,520 is one of the most significant numbers in
mathematics as well as in prophecy. The ancient Greeks discovered that
2,520 was the lowest common denominator divisible by all the numbers
from 1-10. In Bible prophecy, it is set forth as “seven times." In Daniel
7:25 the kingdom of the beast is said to be for "a time, times, and half a
time," or three and a half "times." This is interpreted for us in Rev. 13:5
as being "forty-two months," 1,260 days, or three and a half years.
Since a prophetic year is the mean distance between a lunar year
(354 days) and a solar year (365 days), the prophetic year is set at 360
days, or a "time." Thus, three and a half "times" is equal to 1,260 days,
and a full seven times is equal to 2,520 days.
When God gave the law to Israel, He warned them that if they
refused to follow it, they would be judged "seven times" for their sin
(Lev. 26:18). While this has usually been taken to mean seven times
more intense, Daniel and Revelation interpret it literally as a TIME
period. Moses defines it purely in terms of what will happen to them, but
Daniel identifies it as a period of time—though yet undefined. In the
book of Revelation, John interprets in the clearest manner of all, making
a "time" equal 360 days in short-term prophecy and 360 years in longterm prophecy.
Thus, the judgment of God upon the House of Israel, which began in
745 B.C. was to continue for 2,520 years. This time period ended in 1776
A.D. Was it just a coincidence that the Declaration of Independence was
proclaimed in that same year? I think not. Although the nation was small
at the time, history has proven just how important this event would
become in the history of the modern world.
Even more interesting is the fact that the United States' Capital,
Washington D.C., was completed in the year 1800. This happened to be
precisely 2,520 years after Israel's capital, Samaria, had been destroyed
in 721 B.C.
These ancient dates are substantiated by the Assyrian Eponym
Calendar as referenced in my book, Secrets of Time, pages 26, 81, 146,
156, and 163.
7
The parallel between ancient Israel and the United States was so
striking that virtually every preacher and theologian in early America
saw it and mentioned it in some way in their sermons. They called this
land the "New Israel," "God's Vineyard," and even "The Kingdom of
God," which may have been a bit optimistic, but revealing nonetheless.
Historians would have us believe that the term "America" probably
was derived from a relatively obscure and unknown Italian explorer
named Amerigo Vespucci. This is highly unlikely. The Catholics coming
up from the South preferred "Columbia," named after Columbus. Many
of the English settlers in the North were highly educated and even
contemplated making Hebrew our national language. They were well
acquainted with many languages, and so it is no stretch to say that they
would know the origin of the term, America.
America is an old Saxon and Danish compound word: Amer means
"heavenly," and ric means "kingdom." It literally means "the Heavenly
Kingdom," or the Kingdom of Heaven. The Pilgrims undoubtedly knew
this, so if by chance they really had named it after Amerigo Vespucci, it
was only because his name, coincidentally, described this land precisely
as they viewed it.
If we study the etymology of the entire name of this nation, "The
United States of America," we find an even more interesting and
complete meaning. The means "God's," that is, owned by God. This is
why THEology is the study of God. In Greek, theos means God. And
another connection is this: the Spanish word for "the" is EL, which is
also the Hebrew word for God.
The word United means "greater." The word State means "estate."
Thus, if we put all of this together, it means "God's Greater Estate of the
Heavenly Kingdom."
The name does not manifest our actual national character, for we are
anything but a righteous people. So please do not misunderstand this.
The name indicates our national goal as envisioned by our founders. I am
the first to admit that we have fallen far away from that lofty goal, and
for this reason, as we will see in a later chapter, we have again come
under the judgment of God for our national sins.
And yet the very fact that God judges and disciplines us for our sins
is good news. If the judgments of the law in Lev. 26 and Deut. 28 are
indeed applicable to us as a nation, it means that we are, in some way, a
8
manifestation of true "Israel" in the modern world. As Hebrews 12:6 tells
us, "those whom the Lord loves He disciplines, and He scourges every
son whom He receives."
Early American sermons clearly show the wide-spread belief that
this new nation was the fifth kingdom of Daniel, the "stone" kingdom
that was destined to finish the work that the Reformation had begun and
ultimately smash the feet of the Babylonian image. To them, Babylon
was political Europe and Papal Rome, both of which were based upon
aristocratic or monarchical foundations. America, they felt, was to be a
beacon of light and a model of hope to those who are enslaved to
absolute power—whether political or religious.
This was the original "American Dream," our national purpose. It
was not secular, but neither did it establish a "religion." It established
God and His Word as King and put all men and religions under His
authority.
America will yet fulfill her original Dream, but it cannot be done
under a mere Pentecostal anointing. Pentecost only gave us an earnest of
the Spirit (2 Cor. 5:5; Eph. 1:14). Furthermore, Pentecost was a leavened
feast (Lev. 23:17), which was designed to show us that we cannot be
perfected by an earnest of the Spirit. Perfection requires the full
anointing of the Feast of Tabernacles.
Likewise, for America—and any other nation—to fulfill its national
destiny in the furtherance of the Kingdom of God, its leaders must have a
Tabernacles anointing. These are the Sons of God, who are called to set
creation free by the power of the Gospel of Christ (Rom. 8:19).
As we will see in later chapters, America rejected God and finally
came under divine judgment of a new Babylonian captivity in 1914. But
I believe that God is about to do a new thing in the earth. He is about to
set America free, along with the rest of the earth, by the power of His
Spirit. Then and only then will His glory begin to cover the earth as the
waters cover the sea.
9
Chapter 3
1860 The Civil War
In our study of the year 1776, we noted that this date fell 2,520 years
after the beginning of Israel's captivity in 745 B.C.
We also noted that Samaria, the capital city of Israel, fell in 721 B.C.
and that 2,520 years later Washington D.C. was built in 1800.
The year 1860 brought the United States into another type of
judgment that indicates "late obedience." Our founders postponed the
slavery issue in 1776 when they signed the Declaration of Independence
and again in 1787 when they drafted the Constitution. "Late obedience"
is manifested by the number 434 or a multiple of it. In this case, from
745 B.C. to 1860 A.D. is precisely 6 x 434 years. I explained this
principle of Judged Time in detail in chapter seven of my book, Secrets
of Time.
Judged Time is relatively rare, but a good example of it is found in
the story of King Saul and the Amalekites. Amalek was an Edomite
tribe, since he was the grandson of Esau (Gen. 36:12). The people of
Amalek had attacked Israel as they left Egypt, and after the battle, God
put a curse upon Amalek (Ex. 17:14-16). This put Amalek on Cursed
Time, which means that their judgment was to occur 414 years later. By
the time 414 years had passed, King Saul was king in Israel. In fact, it
was the 18th year of Saul. Thus, in 1 Samuel 15:2, 3 the prophet Samuel
told Saul,
2
Thus says the Lord of hosts, I will punish Amalek for what
he did to Israel, how he set himself against him on the way
while he was coming up from Egypt. 3 Now go and strike
Amalek and utterly destroy all that he has. . ."
In the story, Saul did a partial job, but spared King Agag, the
Amalekite, who (as king) represented the heart of the problem of
Amalek. A judge does not have the power to judge beyond the
parameters of his mandated authority. Part of Saul’s duty as king was to
act as a judge to enforce the decree of God against Amalek. The only
way a judge can suspend a sentence is if he is willing to pay the penalty
himself. Thus, by sparing King Agag, Saul took upon himself the curse
of Amalek, and I believe that Saul would have died soon thereafter.
10
But Samuel took a sword and executed King Agag on behalf of Saul.
This act took Saul out of Cursed Time and put him on Judged Time for
"late obedience." Thus Saul was given another 22 years of life and died
on a Judged Time cycle. He died 434 years after Israel as a nation had
refused to enter the land in the year 2450 from Adam. Israel did enter the
land, of course, but they did so 38 years late. Hence, their time of
judgment for late obedience occurred coincidentally with the death of
King Saul who was also under judgment for late obedience.
This story is told more fully in Chapter 6 of Secrets of Time. I am
briefly explaining it here to give you a good example of how Judged
Time works in prophecy.
With this in mind, let us ask ourselves what our founders left undone
in 1776 and 1787 that caused us "late obedience" problems in 1860. In
the year 1860 A.D. the United States came to the end of a Judged Time
cycle, and this is the real underlying prophetic cause of the Civil War
from the long-term divine perspective.
There were certainly many economic, political, and social causes of
the Civil War. But none of these would have been sufficient in
themselves to cause such a deep divide in the nation. Prophetically
speaking, the Civil War was caused by late obedience in regard to the
slavery issue. The American colonies should have resolved the slavery
issue at the time they drew up the Constitution. However, they postponed
the slavery issue in 1776, because South Carolina and Georgia refused to
ratify it unless it protected their "right" to hold slaves.
However, we should also take note that in Georgia, slavery had been
outlawed until 1752, when it became a Royal Colony, at which time they
were forced to recognize slavery. Even by 1776 there were many
Georgians who still disavowed slavery. They recognized that all rights
come from God alone, who has not given any man the right to force any
man into servitude except as payment for sin. And certainly no one had a
divine right to kidnap people from Africa and bring them to America as
slaves—or to buy slaves from the kidnappers.
The great issue at the time of the early American colonies was
whether or not certain men were privileged to rule over the "common"
people. The right of kings and popes had long been established and
assumed to be true. But the Protestant Reformation had sparked an
entirely new look at the Bible, and this led to an entirely new theory of
government based upon the concept of "equality."
11
Prior to 1776 the people focused primarily on the equality of the
people as opposed to the privileged classes of the monarchy, aristocracy,
and religious hierarchy. Yet there was also the growing concern about
the black and Indian slaves, particularly among the Puritans in New
England, who were the first to legislate against slavery of all forms.
By way of contrast, the Virginia Colony adopted slavery, though
gradually. Their loyalty to the Stuart kings of England in the 1600's (who
were Catholic at heart, if not in name) added to their acceptance of the
philosophy of slavery (as did the Catholic Church itself). Thus, as Wayne
Holstad points out in his book, Leviticus v. Leviathan, p. 95, "New
England was fiercely fundamentalist and democratic. The South was
traditional and aristocratic." Thus, it was inevitable that these two
religious cultures would eventually clash over the application of
"equality." The South largely believed in freedom and equality for white
people; the North largely extended the principles of freedom and equality
to all men regardless of race.
The Declaration of Independence, as originally written, explicitly
disavowed slavery, but after the objections from southern states, it
retreated to an acceptable vagueness. Yet it states that "we hold these
truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights." Though the
finished text does not enter the racial debate, it does set forth the root of
Puritan-Reformation philosophy and that of William Blackstone, who
had written that slavery violated Common Law. The real question was
whether “all men” included those of all races or just the white race.
Definitions could always be contested.
Because the Declaration is vague as it was adopted on July 4, 1776,
few realize that the issue of slavery had indeed been discussed and
debated among the delegates. Wayne Holstad points out on page 97 of
his book,
"In the first draft of the declaration, among the list of claims against
King George, Jefferson had written:
" 'He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its
most sacred rights of life and liberty in the persons of a distant people
who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery
into another hemisphere.'
"Southern delegates to the Continental Congress demanded that this
statement be deleted from the Declaration."
12
According to General John A. Logan's 1885 book, The Great
Conspiracy, which is one of the great books showing the background and
progression of the American Civil War, there was more that was deleted
from the Declaration of Independence. He makes the point that the
writers of the Declaration defined "men" (as in "all men are created
equal") as being irrespective of race:
"Determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought and
sold, he [King George] has prostituted his negative for suppressing
every Legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable
commerce [as in the case of Georgia in 1752]. And that this assemblage
of horrors might want [lack] no fact of distinguished dye, he is now
exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and purchase that
liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people on
whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed
against the Liberties of our people with crimes which he urges them to
commit against the lives of another." (pp. 2, 3)
As the term "men" is used in the context of black slaves being sold in
the open market, it is apparent that the black slaves were included in the
previous statement that "all men are created equal." The term was not to
be taken in contrast to women, but in contrast to only white men.
This statement was omitted in order to secure the votes of South
Carolina and Georgia.
After the Revolutionary War ended, Virginia ceded her claim to the
western territory in 1784, recognizing them to be future United States
territories, rather than simply a greater State of Virginia. It was presumed
that these territories would soon form states that would join the Union.
In 1784 the new Republic began to move toward the abolition of
slavery in all future states. Jefferson wrote that "after the year 1800 of
the Christian era, there shall be neither Slavery nor involuntary
servitude in any of the said States." He said that this fact was
"unalterable but by the joint consent of the United States in Congress
assembled, and of the particular State within which such alteration is
proposed to be made." (Logan, pages 3, 4)
It seemed as if slavery itself would be firmly restricted to a few
southern states with no new states being allowed to enslave others. But
Logan then explains how "a signal misfortune befell." Six States voted
for this 1784 resolution to ban slavery in all new territories and new
States that would yet join the Union. Three states voted against it. North
13
Carolina's two delegates split their votes. So there were 13 votes for the
resolution and 7 votes against it.
One of New Jersey’s delegates was absent. The remaining delegate
from New Jersey voted to retain this prohibition against slavery, but his
14th affirmative vote was lost, because the rules required the vote of two
delegates from each state. A single vote would not count.
The rules also required a majority vote from all states—not merely
all state delegates present. If all delegates from the 13 states had been
present, the outcome of the vote could have been different. But as it
stood, the prohibition resolution only received 13 votes, which was not a
majority out of 26, because the deciding vote from New Jersey was lost.
Logan then concludes:
"Thus was lost the great opportunity of restricting Slavery to the then
existing Slave States, and of settling the question peaceably for all
time" (p. 4).
Three years later, a similar Ordinance called “The Ordinance of ‘87”
outlawed slavery in the new Northwest Territories (Ohio, Indiana,
Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin). Unfortunately, this did not legally
apply to any new Southern territories. The primary difference is that the
Ordinance of ’87 excluded territory south of the Ohio River, whereas the
1784 Ordinance would have included all new southern territories as well.
And so, while the Ordinance of ’87 restricted slavery in the North, it
also established a legislative crack between North and South that only
grew until the Civil War settled the issue by force of arms. Though it was
passed under the authority of the old Confederation of States prior to the
passage of the Constitution, it still carried weight and proved to be the
first of a long string of compromises over the slavery issue that seemed
necessary at the time to hold the Union together. The majority had to
yield to the minority in order to keep from losing everything.
And yet it was understood from an economic point of view that
slavery would fall of its own accord because it could not compete with
the labor of free men in the North. And so, the necessary compromises
were made in drafting the Constitution. Logan writes on page 6,
“Thus it was, that instead of an immediate interdiction of the African
Slave Trade, Congress was empowered to prohibit it after the lapse of
twenty years”.
14
Wayne Holstad writes about the debate among the delegates at the
Continental Congress in 1789 in his book, Leviticus vs. Leviathan,
“The founding fathers agreed that the slave trade would end in 20 years
after the adoption of the Constitution. That would allow current slave
owners, including some of the southern delegates to the Constitutional
Convention, to make adjustments in how they did business, while, at
the same time, essentially prohibiting the impairment of current slave
contracts. The delegates all planned that slavery would end in a
generation.” (p. 98)
“Rufus King of Massachusetts and Governour Morris of Pensylvania
bitterly opposed slavery. But because slavery was dying out . . . and
because the South was so economically depressed compared to the
North, they agreed with the majority of delegates that the slavery issue
could be avoided until after ratification.” (p. 99)
“The founding fathers’ hopeful predictions that slavery would simply
disappear were all made wrong because of a revolution in technology.”
(p. 99)
“In 1793, Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin. A new industry,
dependent upon slave labor, was spawned. The South expanded as far
west as New Orleans. Alabama and Mississippi entered the Union as
slave states.” (p. 99)
“The tactical decision to postpone the confrontation with the slavery
issue because it would die a natural death had proven to be disastrous
to the North. The avoidance strategy had failed. An unforeseen
technological invention created a new generation of slave owners. The
South had passed a point from which it could not retreat.” (p. 99)
And so this slavery issue festered for the next half century through
compromise after compromise. The North argued from the standpoint of
morality and natural law—as stated broadly in the Declaration of
Independence—while the South argued from the standpoint of
Constitutionality that gave them the freedom to possess slaves.
The Missouri Compromise of 1820 was one of the most important of
them all. The southern states were fearful that if free states outnumbered
the slave states, the Congress would pass anti-slavery laws by a majority
vote. Likewise, when Missouri applied as a slave state in 1818, the 11-11
balance of slave and free states was jeopardized, and northern states
opposed their entrance into the Union. The Compromise was worked out
later when free-state Maine applied for statehood. The Compromise was
that a free state and a slave state would be admitted to the Union
15
together, so as not to upset the balance of power between the two
philosophies.
This Compromise lasted until 1854 when it was repealed by the
Kansas-Nebraska Act. Tumultuous events in Kansas during the 1850’s
brought the slavery issue to a head. Then in 1857 came the infamous case
of Dred-Scott vs. Sanford, a case involving a slave who had been brought
by his owner to Minnesota, where slavery was prohibited. In this case,
the Supreme Court, led by Chief Justice Roger Taney, went beyond the
question before him, writing that “slavery could not be prohibited by
Congress in the territories of the U.S.” (Funk & Wagnalls Encyclopedia,
“Dred-Scott Case”) This had the effect of permanently incorporating
slavery into the Constitution by direct ruling, and it had the immediate
effect of arousing bitter and even violent opposition in the North.
Taney was a Catholic from Maryland. In 1806 he married the sister
of Francis Scott Key, the author of our National Anthem. He replaced
Chief Justice John Marshall at his death in 1836. Of the Dred-Scott
decision, the Wikipedia says,
“Taney’s intemperate language only added to the fury of those who
opposed the decision. As he explained the Court’s ruling, AfricanAmericans, free or slave, could not be citizens of any state, because the
drafters of the Constitution had viewed them as ‘beings of an inferior
order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in
social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights
which the white man was bound to respect’.
“By the time he wrote his opinion in Dred Scott he labeled the
opposition to slavery as ‘northern aggression,’ a popular phrase among
Southern supporters of slavery. He evidently hoped that a Supreme
Court decision declaring federal restrictions on slavery in the territories
unconstitutional would put the issue beyond the realm of political
debate. As it turned out, he was wrong, as his decision only served to
galvanize Northern opposition to slavery while splitting the Democratic
Party on sectional lines.”
Attorney Wayne Holstad comments on the Supreme Court’s decision
on page 102 of his book, saying,
“At the same time, the United States Supreme Court permanently
incorporated slavery into the Constitution in the infamous case of Dred
Scott v. Sanford (1857). Based upon the dubious attempt of a freed
slave to exercise the rights of a free citizen in the South, the Supreme
Court struck down the Missouri Compromise of 1820. It did so by
16
misinterpreting the reason that the drafters of the Constitution had
postponed the abolition of slavery. The opinion of the Court misstated
Congress’ intent to permit slavery for a period of years as an
unqualified right to own another person. The court incorrectly claimed
that it created a constitutionally protected right to own a person as
property. The Supreme Court’s misinterpretation of the drafters’ intent
is found in the following passage of its opinion:
“The right of property in a slave is distinctly and expressly affirmed in
the Constitution. The right to traffic in it, like an ordinary article of
merchandise and property, was guaranteed to the citizens of the United
States, and every State that might desire it FOR TWENTY YEARS.
And the Government, in express terms is pledged to protect it IN ALL
FUTURE TIME, if the slave escapes his owner.”
Just as our Revolutionary War was caused by bad laws in the time of
King George III, so also was the Civil War. The Dred-Scott decision
made slavery “Constitutional,” but the Constitution was not the highest
law of the land—at least not in 1857 when Dred-Scott was decided. The
Declaration of Independence stood higher, and it recognized the highest
law to be that given by God by right of creation. The Northern states
based their case essentially upon this Declaration.
There were, of course, other causes of the Civil War, particularly
economic causes, but these served only as a further stimulus to bring us
to accountability in 1860 under Judged Time.
The slavery issue became a thorn in the flesh of the new Republic
until it finally erupted in the great culture clash called the Civil War. The
South argued that they had a Constitutional Right to hold slaves--which
technically they did. The North felt betrayed and were angry at itself for
compromising at the beginning. The culture conflict finally came to a
head in 1860 when President Lincoln was elected, and erupted in open
warfare in 1861. They seceded, not because they were being oppressed,
but because they saw that it was LIKELY that anti-slavery legislation
would now be passed which was disagreeable to them.
The southern states began to secede from the Union shortly after
Lincoln was elected, but four months before he was inaugurated. South
Carolina passed the Ordinance of Secession on Dec. 20, 1860.
Mississippi seceded on Jan. 9, 1861; Florida on Jan. 10; Alabama on Jan.
11; Georgia on Jan. 18; Louisiana on Jan. 26; and Texas on Feb. 1. Other
states followed later. On February 18 the Confederate States of America
17
was formed, and Jefferson Davis was elected provisional President,
appointed on Feb. 18, 1861.
But meanwhile, President Buchanan, a southerner, did nothing to
prevent the disintegration of the Union. Meanwhile, President-elect
Lincoln could do nothing but watch in horror as the nation was torn
apart. By the time Lincoln was inaugurated in March of 1861, the revolt
was nearly complete, and he had to deal with this mess during his entire
presidency.
Because the United States is fulfilling the time cycles of the ancient
House of Israel, we became liable for our "late obedience" on a 434-year
cycle dating from the captivity of Israel in ancient times. We were
judged in this, but the Union was saved. In understanding Judged Time,
let us not repeat the mistakes of the past.
18
Chapter 4
1914 The Babylonian Captivity
The year 1914 was 2,520 years after Babylon became an empire (607
B.C.). We see history repeating itself in 1914, when a New Babylonian
Empire was created. The book of Revelation refers to it as “Mystery
Babylon,” because it was a secret empire hidden from ordinary people.
On Dec. 23, 1913 the Federal Reserve Act was passed, and it was
signed into law in February 1914. This Act created a neo-Babylonian
Empire in the modern world and put us into financial bondage to certain
bankers of Europe who controlled political leaders through the power of
money.
Most people who understand the basic problem view this event as
purely the result of smart bankers, ignorant people, and corrupt
politicians. I view it as a judgment from God in the same manner as
Jerusalem was divinely judged in the days of Jeremiah. But let us look
briefly at the rise of this financial Babylon.
In 1604 war ended Spain's dominance in North America and gave
Britain the region known as the Virginia Grant. The Crown was then
anxious to bring settlers to form a colony in this part of the world, and so
gave the colonists much freedom as an incentive to live there. In the first
charter of Virginia in 1606, Article X dealt with financial freedom:
"And that they shall, or lawfully may, establish and cause to be made a
coin, to pass current there between the people of those several
Colonies, for the more ease of traffic and bargaining amongst them and
the natives there, of such metal and in such manner and form, as the
said Councils shall there limit and appoint."
The American Colonists thus created their own money and put it into
circulation by public expenditures until such time as there was sufficient
money in circulation to equal the amount of real wealth and goods being
produced. As long as government kept the amount of money roughly
equal to its actual production, there was neither inflation nor deflation.
But then in 1694 the Bank of England was formed, which gave its
private bankers the right to create money, and it was not long before
these bankers looked upon the Colonists' currency as a competing
currency. They looked upon the prosperity of the Colonies with covetous
19
eyes and began to manipulate the monarchs into oppressive laws that
would transfer Colonial wealth into their own hands.
In 1741 the English government was induced to suppress the Land
Bank in Massachusetts. Ten years later Parliament "enacted a law
forbidding any further issue of legal tender or bills of credit by the New
England Colony, and in 1764 this earlier prohibition was extended to all
other Colonies." (The Money Creators, by Gertrude Coogan, p. 178).
This was "a direct usurpation of the rights granted by the Crown to
the Colonial assemblies. Willing Kings had granted those rights a
hundred years before--several generations before the money creators
usurped money powers in England." (Coogan, p. 183)
Benjamin Franklin wrote often that this was the real cause of the
American Revolutionary War. It was not merely "taxation without
representation," although that was another major Colonial right that had
been usurped.
And so, after Independence had been won, and the new States were
writing their Constitution, Franklin was most vocal in insisting upon the
passage of Article 1, Section 3, Part 3: "Congress shall have power to
coin money and regulate the value thereof."
The value of money is regulated by its quantity in relation to the
amount of production and real wealth which it represents. Too much
money regulates the value downward, with the result that goods cost
more dollars to buy. Too little money regulates the value upward and
constricts commerce, causing recessions and depressions. He felt that no
private party ought to have the right to create money, but that this was
the primary duty of government. This would also largely, if not
completely, finance the government without the necessity of taxing the
people.
Alexander Hamilton opposed Benjamin Franklin. He advocated a
national bank modeled after the Bank of England. He was much younger
than Franklin and only had to await Franklin's death in 1791 to
implement his plan. Hamilton is called the Father of our National Debt,
because on April 30, 1781 he wrote to Robert Morris, "A national debt, if
it is not excessive, will be a national blessing; a powerful cement of
union; a necessity for keeping up taxation, and a spur to industry."
Under this same philosophy, the United States public debt ceiling has
now (2006) been raised to nine trillion dollars, more than the value of the
20
entire nation. If this debt were to be paid, Americans would own nothing
and would still be in debt. All because we have given away the right to
create money to private banking interests, allowing them to create money
out of nothing and loan it to our government at interest. There is no
reason why Congress should not have created the money itself and spent
it into circulation without interest.
Hamilton did not believe that the power to create money ought to be
entrusted to government.
"The wisdom of the government will be shown in never trusting itself
with the use of so dangerous and seductive an expedient" (Coogan, p.
202, quoting from Dewey).
"No, this would never do; far better, in Hamilton's opinion, for this
'dangerous and seductive expedient' to be placed in the hands of private
bankers for their special privilege and private profit. . . ." (Coogan, p.
202)
Of the course, the alternative to trusting government is to trust
bankers with this power. Either way, one has to trust carnally-minded
men. The question, then, is whether we trust carnally-minded men who
represent the people, or carnally-minded men who represent private
financial interests.
The so-called "Bank of the United States" is the name Hamilton
chose for his new bank. It was no more owned by the United States than
the Bank of England was owned by England. It received a 20-year
charter, which expired in 1811. The charter was not renewed, and this
was the real reason that the British money-creators induced Britain to
send troops to fight the "War of 1812."
Though America won that war, the lesson was not lost upon the
politicians. After a bitter debate, the charter for the misnamed "United
States Bank" was established in 1816 for another 20 years. Then
President Andrew Jackson refused to renew the charter in the 1830's.
"From that time until the passage of the National Banking Act in 1863,
the international money powers waged a constant battle to gain,
through a central bank, control of the money creation powers in the
United States" (Coogan, p. 210).
"At the time the ‘National’ Bank Act was passed, President Abraham
Lincoln was honestly teaching the people to understand that nonconvertible paper money created on the authority of the United States
21
government was the only kind of currency that should be allowed."
(Coogan, p. 214).
Lincoln financed the Civil War by issuing $150 million in
"Greenbacks," under the authority of the Constitution. This was, of
course, the unpardonable sin to these top bankers. It is not surprising that
he was assassinated. The next President to commit the same "sin" was
John Kennedy, who issued lawful U.S. Notes in 1962, thus sealing his
doom. These were quickly removed from circulation as soon as President
Johnson succeeded Kennedy. Even so, some remained in circulation. I
have personally seen a few of these bank notes.
Skipping to the year 1914, the Federal Reserve Act created a Central
Bank that consolidated the unlawful and unconstitutional banking
practices into a single private banking system through which the
American economy and government could be controlled and managed
from behind the scenes.
This is what turned Babylon from a mere "country" into an "empire"
in the modern era. It was a repeat performance 2,520 years after the
original biblical empire.
The United States thus found itself under divine judgment. What sins
did we commit? Better yet, what sins did we NOT commit? But
primarily, this neo-Babylon was made possible primarily because we did
not exclude non-Christians from becoming citizens and even from
holding positions in government. Thus, we allowed wicked and greedy
men to gain control over our institutions.
The Christian people in America voted by party, not on Christian
character issues. They convinced themselves that carnally-minded men
could be entrusted with power, if they only promised what the people
wanted to hear. This is, of course, always the downfall of Christian
government whenever it has been attempted. The Bible has given us a
perfect judicial system and form of government, but as long as it is
implemented by imperfect men, it will never become a reality in the
earth. Israel’s history proves this to be the case.
But God has been working to bring forth the Sons of God, so that His
Kingdom will have incorruptible administrators. When this time is
completed, Daniel 7:27 tells us,
27
Then the sovereignty, the dominion, and the greatness of
all the kingdoms under the whole heaven will be given to the
22
people of the saints of the Highest One; His kingdom will be
an everlasting kingdom, and all the dominions will serve and
obey Him.
But before this great event takes place, it was necessary in the divine
plan to see the rise of this end-time Babylonian Empire. It was necessary
to bring the world into a final time of bondage so that the people would
know by experience the bitter alternative to His kingdom. Thus, the
prophecy in Daniel 2, which portrays the succession of oppressive worldempires from ancient Babylon to the present Mystery Babylon, shows
that it will be overthrown in the end. Only then will it be replaced by the
kingdom represented by the Stone, which will then grow until it fills the
whole earth (Dan. 2:35).
23
Chapter 5
1917 The Rise of Modern Edom
I have already shown that 1914 was 2,520 years after Babylon
became an Empire in 607 B.C. Now we will see that 1917 was 2,520
years after Babylon conquered Jerusalem in 604 B.C.
As we showed earlier, 2,520 is the long-term judgment period of
"seven times." Thus, we would logically expect to watch Jerusalem itself
in 1917 to see what events might occur to reverse the events of 604 B.C.
History tells us that General Allenby of Great Britain walked into
Jerusalem on December 10, 1917 after the Turks had been allowed to
evacuate the city. This event had been projected by H. Gratton Guinness
over twenty years earlier. Guinness even pinpointed the precise date
from Haggai 2:18, "the twenty-fourth day of the ninth month" (on the
Hebrew calendar). In 1917 that date turned out to be December 9.
1917 was also the year 1335 on the Islamic calendar. I have in my
possession a commemorative Turkish coin with the date of 1917 on one
side, and 1335 on the other. The number 1335 is the "blessed" number
found in Daniel 12:12, matching the twenty-fourth day of the ninth
month--a day of blessing (Haggai 2:19).
Thus, the year 1917 could be part of a different series called "The
Prophetic History of Great Britain," because that was the year Palestine
came under the authority of "Union Jack" (the nickname for the British
flag). Jack is short for Jacob. The land was thus given back to Jacob in
order that “Jacob” might in turn restore it to Esau (Zionists) for a season,
beginning in 1948. For a full account of that story and the reasons God
allowed Zionism to succeed, see my book, The Struggle for the
Birthright.
The year 1917 was significant in another way as well, for it was the
year of the so-called "Russian Revolution." Why would a "Russian"
event have any connection to the fall of Jerusalem in 604 B.C.? Simply
because it was not a "Russian" revolution at all, but a Jewish revolution
in Russia. This was well documented in 1919 in the U.S. Senate's
"Overman Report" headed by North Carolina Senator Overman.
Thus, in 604 B.C. the Jews (Judahites) were put into bondage to
Babylon; and 2,520 years later, they threw off the yoke of foreign
government from the majority of the world's Jews--the Ashkenazi Jews
24
of Eastern Europe. The vast majority of the Bolshevik leaders were
Jewish, and the first 250 Commissars of Russia were imported from the
Lower East Side of New York City. These included the brilliant rabbi,
Lev Bronstein, who adopted the name, Leon Trotsky.
It is not my purpose here to try to prove all of these historical events.
They are well known to all who have studied history, though often these
facts have been used to foment strife and hatred. I cannot stop the hatred,
for I cannot change men's hearts. But I can put these things into a biblical
and prophetic context, showing the purpose of God in history. To me,
history is the study of the divine Plan. Knowing Scripture and prophetic
time cycles puts our focus upon establishing the Kingdom of God and
prevents men from misusing historical facts by promoting hatred.
The simple fact is that Jacob obtained the Birthright and the blessing
from Esau in an unlawful way, because he did not think God was capable
of doing what He had prophesied without Jacob's help. Esau's
descendants (Edom, or Idumea) were eventually conquered and absorbed
into Jewry in 126 B.C. Josephus tells us in Antiquities of the Jews, XIII,
ix, 1,
“Hyrcanus took also Dora and Marissa, cities of Idumea, and subdued all
the Idumeans; and permitted them to stay in that country, if they would
be circumcised, and make use of the laws of the Jews; and they were so
desirous of living in the country of their forefathers, that they submitted
to the use of circumcision and the rest of the Jews’ ways of living; at
which time therefore, this befell them, that they were hereafter no other
than Jews.”
This is confirmed by The New Standard Jewish Encyclopedia, edited by
Dr. Cecil Roth and Dr. Geoffrey Wigoder (1970 edition), which says
under “Edom,” on page 587,
“The Edomites were conquered by John Hyrcanus who forcibly
converted them to Judaism, and from then on they constituted a part of
the Jewish people, Herod being one of their descendants. During Titus’
siege of Jerusalem, they marched in to reinforce the extreme elements,
killing all they suspected of peace tendencies. Thereafter, they ceased to
figure in Jewish history. The name in the Talmud is a synonym for an
oppressive government, especially Rome; in the Middle Ages, it was
applied to Christian Europe.”
Though the Jews absorbed the Idumeans, they did not want to admit
that they now had to fulfill the end-time prophecies of Idumea-Edom. So,
25
as we read above, they began to apply the term “Edom” to Rome and
later to “Christian Europe.” But the historical fact remains, as they
themselves admit, that Edom was absorbed by Jewry in 126 B.C. Thus,
they are wrong to apply the Edomite prophecies to Christianity, for the
shoe fits perfectly on the other foot.
This meant that the Jews had to fulfill all the prophecies of EsauEdom in the last days--because there was no one else to fulfill them.
In the fall of Jerusalem in 70 A.D., God dispersed that Judah-Edom
nation, putting them under an iron yoke (Deut. 28:48), as described in
The Struggle for the Birthright. The law forbade them from returning
apart from repentance (Lev. 26:40-42). In the early 1900's Zionism was
established as a political movement. But since Judah itself was forbidden
to return without repenting first, the Jews could return only under the
promise given to Esau in Gen. 27:40. Jacob would have to give the
Birthright back to Esau and allow God to give it to the rightful son in His
own appointed time and manner.
Thus, in order for “Jacob” to give the land back to “Esau,” the old
land had to come back under the control of Britain ("Union Jack" flag).
This occurred in 1917, and “Jacob” subsequently gave it back to Esau in
1948. This restored the birthright back to the heirs of Esau within Jewry,
rectifying an ancient wrong perpetrated upon Esau in Genesis 27.
Take note, however, that this means the Zionist State of “Israel” is
really Esau in disguise. Even as Jacob pretended to be Esau to steal the
birthright from him in Genesis 27, so also now has Esau pretended to be
Jacob to get it back. Even as Jacob took advantage of Isaac’s blindness,
so also has Esau taken advantage of the blindness in the Church to get it
back. While this seems unjust, it is actually the justice of “an eye for an
eye.”
So we see that the events in 1917 laid the groundwork for the Zionist
state in 1948. We are now coming to the final resolution of that plan, for
Esau's violent and bloody methods of "taking the kingdom by force" are
proving to all men that he is an unworthy son. In Mal. 1:2, 3 God told the
prophet, “Yet I have loved Jacob, but I have hated Esau.” Such a
statement placed Esau and his descendants under the provisions of the
law of the hated son found in Deut. 21:15-17. It states that a man cannot
disinherit the son of a hated wife. Such a situation would presume that
her son was hated as well.
26
The next verses deal with rebellious sons. The connection is obvious.
A rebellious son could be disinherited, even as Reuben was disinherited
(1 Chron. 5:1). Thus, the law makes it clear that Esau could not be
disinherited until he proved himself to be a rebellious son. Jacob did not
have the patience to wait for Esau to prove himself unworthy. And so
that had to await the 20 th century with the establishment of the Zionist
state.
We are now coming to the climax of history, when God resolves “the
controversy of Zion” (Isaiah 34:8). Verses 5 and 6 tell us,
5
For My sword is satiated in heaven, behold it shall descend
for judgment upon Edom, and upon the people whom I have
devoted to destruction. 6 The sword of the Lord is filled with
blood . . . For the Lord has a sacrifice in Bozrah, and a great
slaughter in the land of Edom. . . 8 For the Lord has a day of
vengeance, a year of recompense for the controversy of Zion.
9
And its streams shall be turned into pitch, and its loose
earth into brimstone, and its land shall be come burning
pitch. 10 It shall not be quenched night or day; its smoke shall
go up forever; from generation to generation it shall be
desolate; none shall pass through it forever and ever.
Isaiah did not know anything about nuclear warfare, so he described
this in terms that he knew. He repeats this description in Isaiah 29:1-6,
where God says that He will fight against Jerusalem:
5
But the multitude of your enemies [i.e., Jerusalem’s enemies,
who are also said to be God’s enemies] shall become like fine
dust, and the multitude of the ruthless ones like the chaff
which blows away; and it shall happen instantly, suddenly. 6
From the Lord of hosts you [Jerusalem] will be punished with
thunder and earthquake and loud noise, with whirlwind and
tempest and the flame of a consuming fire.
So we see that the judgment upon Edom in chapter 34 is similar to
that of Jerusalem and its inhabitants in chapter 29. That is because in that
day Edom will be in control of Jerusalem, as Mal. 1:4 tells us,
4
Though Edom says, “We have been beaten down, but WE
WILL RETURN and build up the ruins;” thus says the Lord
of hosts, “THEY MAY BUILD, but I will tear down; and
27
men will call them the wicked territory, and the people
toward whom the Lord is indignant forever.
Here, then, Edom is portrayed as Zionistic, in that those people have
a desire to inherit the old land that Jacob had stolen from them. So in
spite of their rebellious nature, God had to give the land back to Esau for
a season in order for him to prove himself an unworthy son who could be
disinherited in a lawful manner.
When God takes Jerusalem from the Zionist Edomites, all will know
that God has done this by His perfect justice. Except, of course, for
Esau's descendants, who will be left embittered, disappointed, and angry
with God once again. Yet even their eyes will be opened in the end and
will agree with God that He was just in His judgments.
And so, the year 1917 is a major turning point in world history. It
proved to be the beginning of a century of conflict in Russia, Europe, and
the Middle East. These events are just now beginning to come to a
climax. When God resolves this “controversy of Zion,” I believe the
result will be the dawn of the Kingdom of God upon the earth. That is
where my hope and prayers are centered, and where my citizenship is
recorded.
In the prophecies of Daniel 2, we see that Rome was described in
terms of IRON. Thus, we call this fourth beast (Dan. 7) "the iron
kingdom."
When Constantine (with Licinius) conquered Rome in the early
fourth century, it was not long before Constantine became the sole ruler.
One of the first things he did was to build a new capital city in the East,
which he called Constantinople. Today it is known as Istanbul. Thus,
Constantinople became known as "New Rome." The Emperor never saw
the city of Rome again.
Not long afterward, the empire was divided into two parts in order to
rule it more efficiently. The East and West became the two "legs" of iron
as Daniel 2:33 portrays it. When the Western Roman Empire fell in 476
A.D., the Eastern Empire continued to function with "New Rome" as its
capital. Over the centuries its territory was eroded, but it lasted until
1453 when the city was finally taken by the Ottoman Turks.
Thousands of Greek-speaking scholars from the city flooded Europe,
bringing with them Greek manuscripts of the New Testament and a new
appreciation for Greek culture. But the Eastern Orthodox cultural and
28
religious center had been broken, and it now moved to a new city-Moscow in Russia. Moscow--and Russia itself--became the inheritor of
Roman culture and Orthodox religion from Constantinople. The Roman
Empire thus moved North.
It remained there until 1917 when the Bolshevik Revolution
overthrew the existing order and put the Russian Orthodox Church under
its control. Once again, the cultural and religious center was disrupted,
and it moved South to Kosovo in the Balkans. Thus, Kosovo became the
latest "New Rome." Greek Orthodoxy was then disrupted again in the
1990's in the war in Kosovo. It was really the tail end of a centuries-old
war upon the iron empire of Rome, which even today has not quite fully
ceased to exist.
To really understand the events of the 20th century, we must also
understand the law of tribulation and the laws of captivity. These are
found primarily in Lev. 26 and Deut. 28. I covered this thoroughly in my
book, The Struggle for the Birthright, chapter 4.
The primary concept to grasp is that of the iron yoke and the wooden
yoke. The iron yoke is mentioned in Deut. 28:48 and described in the
context of that passage. If Israel were to receive a iron yoke, it would
mean that a foreign nation would come and war against them, destroy
their nation, and displace them from their land.
The law itself, however, does not describe the alternative judgment-the wooden yoke. This is left to the prophet Jeremiah, who speaks of it in
Jer. 27 and 28. The context shows us that the wooden yoke was where
God would put the nation under the authority of a foreign nation, but
there would be no destructive war. Instead, the people would recognize
the judgment as coming from God's hand and would thus submit to it,
recognizing that God was just in His judgment. The wooden yoke, then,
would place the nation into "tribute." They would simply pay the "tax"
while living in their own land.
The wooden yoke was a merciful judgment, but it required faith in
God. It required acceptance of that judgment. It was Jeremiah's primary
mission to get Jerusalem in his day to accept the fact that God had given
Judah into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon (Jer. 27:6-12).
Of course, they threw him into prison for treason! The Babylonians
finally set him free.
29
Taking this principle to the 20th century, we have already shown that
the United States was conquered by Babylon in 1914 on a 2,520-year
cycle from the original captivity. The question is this: Did the U.S. come
under a wooden yoke, or an iron yoke?
Obviously, since we were not deported or deprived from the right to
own land, we can see that we are under a wooden yoke. In 1916 the
sixteenth Amendment was passed, which was a tax on corporate
“income.” Ultimately, this was interpreted by the IRS to mean that
personal wages could also be taxed. So it is plain to see that we are now
paying "tribute" in a wooden yoke.
This whole captivity to Babylon began with a covert action on Dec.
23, 1913, when just five Senators passed the Federal Reserve Act, while
the rest were home for the Christmas holiday. It was signed by President
Woodrow Wilson, who did not even read this "routine banking bill," and
later admitted that it was the greatest mistake of his career. But was it?
Not from God's perspective, for He was bringing judgment upon us for
our sin.
The conspirators, led by Paul Warburg, had drawn up this bill on
Jekyll Island a few years earlier, as later reported in the media. They
thought they were pretty smart, not knowing that God was behind it all
along. God blinded most Americans from seeing what was going on in
this, because if we had known the facts, the American people would have
taken up arms and driven the money changers from the temple. But God
blinded us in order to ensure that we would accept His wooden yoke.
Otherwise, we would have fallen into the same trap of patriotic rebellion
that Jeremiah faced in his day. God would then have imposed an iron
yoke upon us.
God did, however, give us a sign so that the wise would understand.
The bill was signed by WOODROW Wilson. He gave us the WOODEN
yoke.
But other parts of the world were not so fortunate. New Rome
(Moscow) and its Eastern European satellite nations received the iron
yoke, which historians came to call the IRON CURTAIN. Many of the
people were displaced, driven off their land on to collective farms.
Millions were killed over the first two decades.
Thus, the inheritor of Roman civilization (Russia) received an iron
yoke itself. This lasted precisely 70 years, just like the old Babylonian
30
empire. On the 70th anniversary of the so-called "Russian Revolution,"
(1917-1987), President Gorbachev made his famous anniversary speech
before the Supreme Soviet that broke the back of Communism itself. The
old Soviet Union began to implode, and it soon broke up into pieces. The
iron yoke captivity began to end in 1987, precisely 2,520 years after
Babylon fell to Medo-Persia in 537 B.C.
The Persian King Cyrus allowed the Babylonian captives to return to
their own land, but this event, though good, did not actually set the
Judahites free. It simply ended their iron yoke and put them under the
wooden yoke. So it is with Russia today, though they are still reeling
from the effects of the iron yoke.
When will this wooden yoke finally end? I do not know for sure. But
it is helpful to know how we got to where we are today and to understand
our current position under the wooden yoke. I do know this, however:
The wooden yoke will not end until God sets us free. And God will not
do that until the people repent. And it is doubtful if the people will repent
until they see the manifestation of the sons of God.
Why? Because Daniel 7 makes it clear that the saints of the Most
High will inherit the Kingdom after the fourth beast and its extension
(the "little horn") has run its full course. I believe that this is a reference
to the manifestation of the sons of God, for this is the event that will
qualify people to rule creation justly, peaceably, and with perfect love.
31
Chapter 6
1937 The Unrecognized Jubilee
In my book, Secrets of Time, I calculated that the 119th Jubilee from
Adam occurred in 1937 on the Day of Atonement (Sept. 15, 1937). The
next Jubilee (the 120th) occurred on Oct. 13, 1986.
We will now deal with the importance of 1937 and the Jubilee year
(1937-1938), not only in U.S. history, but throughout Europe and much
of the world.
World War II is said to have been sparked by Lord Halifax's visit to
Hitler in 1937-1938, which began the British policy of appeasement. In
the same year, Prince Konoye was named Japanese Prime
Minister, beginning an aggressive Japanese war policy.
It is not our purpose to deal with the political and economic causes of
World War II, but to focus primarily on the spiritual causes. This is, after
all, "a prophetic history." Thus, we must look at God's reasons for
allowing the nations to be judged by this destructive war.
The year 1937-38 was the culmination of two long-term prophetic
cycles, one affecting Judah and the other affecting Israel. If we add the
total number of rest years (each seventh year) and Jubilees (every 50th
year) dating from the fall of Israel in 721 B.C., we find that by 1937 the
total comes to 434. This is the number indicating "Judged Time," as I
explained in Secrets of Time.
Secondly, if we add up the number of rest years and Jubilees from
597 B.C., which was when King Jehoiachin of Judah (in Jerusalem) was
brought captive to Babylon, we find that by 1937 the total comes to 414.
This is the number indicating "Cursed Time," as explained in Secrets of
Time.
Normally, we would simply view 434 and 414 as a time count in
years, but in this case, it is more complex and hidden. The time cycle is
determined by counting rest years and Jubilees that were never kept
(observed). There is precedent in Scripture to show that Israel and Judah
were judged for not observing their rest years and Jubilees (2 Chron.
36:20, 21; Jer. 34:8-22). Each year that they did not keep added to their
"debt to sin."
One example is found in 2 Samuel 24, where verse 1 says,
32
"And again the anger of the Lord was kindled against Israel,
and He moved David against them to say, Go, number Israel
and Judah."
The Bible does not tell us WHY God was angry with Israel and
Judah, but when we look at the chronology of this, we find that in the
38th year of David, the people had failed to observe 70 rest years and
Jubilees.
God then brought judgment upon them, causing 70,000 people to die
(2 Sam. 24:15). One thousand people died for every rest year that was
owed in their debt to the law.
This judgment paid the penalty and wiped the slate clean. But then
they failed to keep their rest years and Jubilees after that time as well.
When they owed another 70 rest years (Sabbath years) and Jubilees, then
God brought Judah into its Babylonian captivity for 70 years to pay the
debt. 2 Chron. 36:21 gives us the reason for this 70-year captivity:
"To fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah,
until the land had enjoyed her Sabbaths; for as long as she
lay desolate she kept Sabbath, to fulfill threescore and ten
[70] years."
And so by counting Sabbath years from Israel and Judah's
captivities, we find that in 1937-38, Judah owed 414 years, while Israel
owed 434 years. God then foreclosed on the debt through divine
judgment, which history calls "World War II."
From the divine perspective, it was a Civil War between the leading
tribes of Israel. Anyone who takes the time to study history will soon see
that the Assyrians captured and deported the tribes of Israel to the area
around the Caspian Sea from 745-721 B.C. We read in 2 Kings 17:6,
6
In the ninth year of Hoshea, the king of Assyria captured
Samaria and carried Israel away into exile to Assyria, and
settled them in Halah and Habor, on the river of Gozan, and
in the cities of the Medes.
The Assyrians called Israel by another name, because only Israel
called itself Israel. On the Black Obelisk of Shalmanezer, Israel is called
Beth-Khumri, which all historians translate as "House of Omri." (Omri
was one of Israel's greatest kings.) The Israelite "Khumri" later migrated
into Europe, where they became known as the Celts, or Kelts.
33
The Behistun Rock of Darius tells us that the Khumri were also
called Saka and Sakka, whom the Greeks called Sacae and the Romans
called Saxons. Thus, the dispersed Israelites, the so-called “lost tribes,”
were actually Saxons, Celts, Scandinavians, and others, who became the
European people as they migrated West from the land of their captivity.
Thus, in World War II, the tribes of Israel were represented by the
Allies, while the tribe of Judah was represented by Germany and the
Axis nations. It was a Civil War between Israel and Judah, which
brought a "Judged Time" judgment to the Allied nations and a "Cursed
Time" judgment to Germany and the Axis nations.
Jacob-Israel had prophesied in Genesis 49:10 and 1 Chron. 5:1, 2
that Judah was called to provide the monarchs for the House of Israel. In
ancient times, this was fulfilled through King David, who was of Judah.
It also meant that Jesus, the true King, was to come from the tribe of
Judah through the line of David.
In later history, we find that virtually all the monarchs in Europe are
actually German. Even the present British monarchy was imported from
Germany in 1714 (King George I). Thus, Germany has been fulfilling the
prophecies of Judah for many centuries. It is not surprising, then, to find
Germany paying the Cursed Time penalty for Judah in World War II.
Likewise, it is not surprising to find the other Israel nations paying the
Judged Time penalty for Israel in World War II.
And because Cursed Time is a more severe judgment than Judged
Time, we can say that the outcome of the war was set before the first shot
was even fired. All sides were judged with great loss of life, but
Germany lost the war and was judged most severely.
What might have prevented this war? What did God require? The
precedent is found in Jeremiah 34 when Judah was about to go into its
70-year Babylonian captivity to pay the 70 years that it owed God.
Jeremiah was led to tell them that if they would keep that final Sabbathrest year, God would cancel the entire debt and the nation would be
spared.
The people agreed to do this, but then they changed their minds
(34:15, 16). And so the prophet declared that they would have to go into
captivity (34:17-22). God is merciful, but the people simply did not
believe the prophet. They paid for their unbelief and their rebellion with
a destructive war and a 70-year captivity.
34
This is also what occurred in 1937-1938. The policy of
"appeasement" that most historians today condemn was actually the right
policy at the time. Appeasement has to do with Peace, forgiveness, and
release. But Germany misused this peace policy by invading other
nations. Germany was bitter from the oppressive after-effects of World
War I and refused to forgive the injustices imposed upon her.
It takes two to forgive in any dispute. Germany refused to forgive
and received divine judgment for this. However, the allied nations were
judged as well, for their oppressive policies after World War I instigated
the bitterness of the German people. There was wrong on both sides. But
in the Divine Court of Justice, the results of World War II speak for
themselves, for God alone knows how to judge the nations in
righteousness.
Rest years and Jubilees set forth principles of forgiveness. That is the
key. All sin is reckoned as a debt in the Divine Court, and forgiveness of
debt has to do with forgiveness for sin (offenses) done against us. It is
not the way of the world to forgive either monetary debts or sin. But if
we had done so, I believe God would have cancelled our captivity to
Babylon that had been put upon us in 1914-1917 through the Federal
Reserve Act. We could have shortened the captivity. But we did not.
It will be interesting, then, to watch the 70-year cycle from 1937,
which brings us to 2007. It is possible that this could be significant in our
release from the great Babylonian captivity.
35
Chapter 7
Summary
When the Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock in 1620, they
established a Colony based upon Christian ideals. They had come
primarily to enjoy freedom of conscience so that they could worship God
according to the biblical principles that they had learned through the
Scriptures given to them by the Protestant Reformation.
But they were not the only Colony. Earlier in 1607 the Virginia
Colony had been established. While it too was largely Christian, its
primary purpose was economic prosperity. This was made plain in its
first year, when gold was discovered nearby. The Colonists nearly
starved that first year, because they neglected their crops in search of
gold.
These two Colonies had two different goals, ideals, and dreams. One
was to worship God first and foremost; the other was to worship gold
and--by the way--God, insofar as He did not interfere with their search
for wealth. In later years, when these leading Colonies merged into one
nation, the new United States became a double-minded nation. The
American dreams were: (1) to establish the Kingdom of God; and (2) a
chicken in every pot, two cars in every garage, prosperity, and home
ownership.
After we gained our independence in the late 1700's, a great many
idealistic sermons were preached about our national purpose and destiny.
Most of them set forth the belief that this new nation was the fifth
Kingdom, the Stone Kingdom, prophesied by the prophet Daniel. We
were destined to smash the Babylonian image on its feet and bring
"liberty and justice for all" to the whole world. Europe was hopelessly
entrenched in monarchies and feudalism, but the United States had shed
those despotic ideas.
But a nation is only as good as its people. There was no way to keep
non-Christians from immigrating here. There was no way to keep out
those Protestants who believed in monarchies and religious hierarchies.
There was no way to keep out Catholics who fervently believed in the
principles of religious monarchy. The institution of slavery and Southern
Aristocracy had spread from the Virginia Colony throughout the
Southern states. As time passed, it became more firmly entrenched. The
36
Northern Colonies were forced to compromise their Kingdom ideals in
order to have an independent nation at all.
These problems, based upon compromise, did not go away. They
only got larger. They finally led to Civil War in the 1860's. Slavery was
forcibly eradicated, but the law was weak in that it could not change
men's hearts. The bitter experience of war changed the dominant attitude
toward black people from racial inferiority to racial hatred. It took
another century before President Johnson took the next step in passing
Civil Rights legislation in another attempt to rectify what had been left
undone in the 1860's.
Meanwhile, in the 1800's the northern churches also lost their
biblical basis and began to imbibe the Transcendentalist principles of
Emerson, Thoreau, and others. It was based upon morality without God,
a "de-mythologized" Christianity. It was based on the optimistic view
that man could become good without a personal relationship with God. It
soon became nothing more than religious hypocrisy.
So God dealt with both problems. In the early 1900's, we became a
secular nation that repudiated the Creator as the Originator of all human
rights, as declared in the Declaration of Independence. This gave the
North the secularized religion that they desired. Secondly, God gave the
South their desire for prosperity through the Federal Reserve Act.
The 20th century was thus characterized by our captivity and
integration as citizens of Mystery Babylon. In 1948 the Church gave up
its last hope to establish the Kingdom of God by applauding the
establishment of the Zionist state called "Israel." By this, the evangelical
churches placed the burden of establishing God's Kingdom upon nonChristians in the Israeli state. It tacitly gave its approval to the terrorist
practices of Shamir, Begin, and others. Zionist terrorism was rewarded
by recognition and foreign aid. As Church support increased, our
government matched it. By 1967 this terrorist state had obtained nuclear
weapons, and now the United States had no choice but to supply it with
conventional weapons to prevent them from using their nuclear weapons.
But, of course, it was only a matter of time before Arab states would
obtain the same nuclear weapons. Thus, the world was on a collision
course, which we are only now beginning to appreciate fully. I have said
for twenty years that since Persia overthrew ancient Babylon, so also
would modern Persia (Iran) be instrumental in the overthrow of Mystery
Babylon that currently rules us.
37
The United States can trace its history back to the ancient house of
Israel. Though some would glory in this, there is a dark side to it as well.
The house of Israel was divinely judged for its worship of the golden calf
(1 Kings 12:28). Our nation is no better than they, nor has God changed
His opinion of the golden calves. His law is certainly the same, and the
results of sin will always be judged equally.
Thus, our nation, for all of its early idealism, and for all of its partial
success, has nonetheless failed to bring the Kingdom of God into the
earth. This failure ought not to be a surprise, for it is deja vu all over
again. So we may ask: "Have the promises of God failed?" No, they have
not failed. All of this failure was prophesied from the beginning. We may
say again with the Apostle Paul in Romans 11:7,
7
What then? Israel has not obtained that which he seeks for;
but the elect have obtained it, and the rest were blinded.
If you want to be one of the "elect," that is, one who is chosen to
bring the Kingdom of God into the earth--if you aspire to fulfill the call
of Abraham to be a BLESSING to all families of the earth--you cannot
possibly achieve this by claiming American citizenship or even by being
a descendant of the ancient house of Israel. As nations, they have already
failed. Even the Church itself has failed. Pentecost has failed, even as
King Saul failed--though he was crowned on the day of "wheat harvest"
(Pentecost) and was a type of the Church under Pentecost (1 Sam.
12:17).
God is raising up a new body of people, followers of David, rather
than of Saul. These are the overcomers. These aspire to go beyond
Pentecost and attain the promise of the feast of Tabernacles. These aspire
to become manifested sons of God, whom God will send out to dispense
the divine blessings to the world in fulfillment of Genesis 12:3.
These will be sent out wearing the shoes of the gospel of peace (Eph.
6:15). I believe God will send them out with the power of God that will
be greater than what was seen in the book of Acts. However, no man will
need to be afraid of them, because they, like Jesus, will be as powerful as
lions, but they will have the heart of lambs.
The Birthright will soon be given to them, as soon as Esau has fully
proven himself to be unworthy. Though the world is now a dangerous
place, there is no genuine reason to fear. Have faith in the promises of
God, for they will surely be fulfilled.
38