Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
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