No, I’m not talking about Knesset members in Jerusalem doing the Limbo. An acrobatic dance to see how low one can go by bending over backwards, while passing under a horizontal pole low enough to step over.
Lately there has been very little bending over backwards of Israel’s leaders. Or for that matter leaders of virtually every country on earth, what with the pitiful polarization of people between and from within nations.
I’m referring to that other kind of limbo, defined by Webster’s Dictionary: “a place or state of restraint or confinement; an intermediate or transitional place or state.”
For the first time since Israel was reborn as a sovereign Jewish State in 1948 and following unscheduled mid-term elections just three months ago, the Israeli Knesset failed to establish a majority coalition.
Nonetheless, despite the (sometimes) perplexing parliamentary paradigm of Israel’s government and election process, it truly is one of the most democratic systems in the world. Reason: It combines the best of pure democracy and a representative republic by giving voice to many more platforms than those nations which have just two parties, or even three or four.
When Israelis participate in national elections they vote for a party, not for an individual. Parties that garner the minimum number of votes required (which also determines the number of Knesset representatives) then decide which of their associates will serve in the Knesset. The ruling coalition, which can consist of several blocs, must have a minimum of 61 of the 120 Knesset seats. Israel’s Prime Minister is the recognized leader of the largest party of the majority coalition. In this case, it would have been a reelected Benjamin Netanyahu.
(Interior of Knesset)
(The graph on the left represents the 20th Knesset before mid-term elections were held this past April. With the 61 Knesset members to the right on that graph part of the Likud-led majority coalition)
You may not know about this situation in Israel. Or, if you do, you may not be familiar with the details, some of which will be provided in the context of today’s focus: the prophetic destiny of Israel’s national redemption and restoration. And how that destiny will determine the fate of the entire world.
I’d like to begin with an excerpt from my first book—a novel entitled O Israel. Which was also quoted in a prior Eye of Prophecy article: The Jewish Dichotomy In & Outside Israel (posted 6-20-18). It summarizes the intriguing divergence of the Jewish people (unity despite disunity) as seen through the eyes of one of the main characters—Avram Levitt, a Jewish Scribe:
Avram marveled at Israel and its people. For a country not much larger than the state of New Jersey, with a population smaller than many of the world’s cities, Israel’s cultural, religious, and political diversity equaled that of many larger countries. No better expression of variance could be found than in the two cities that characterized Israel: Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. They balanced on the distant points of the cultural and religious pendulum, yet both cities were distinctively Jewish.
…It was Tel Aviv that best expressed and defined Israel’s remarkable progress: …beautiful galleries, grand theatres, contemporary concert halls, modern restaurants, seaside skyscrapers, and luxurious beach hotels…
Jerusalem was always the “ancient city.” Here you will find the long, storied past of Israel, with its patriarchs, judges, prophets, kings, and divinely appointed destiny of land and people.
…If a citizen of Israel preferred the label of Israeli, there was a good chance that person lived in Tel Aviv. In Jerusalem or surrounding towns, residents embraced the time-honored appellation of Jew. After all, the word Jew originated from Judah, one of the twelve sons of Jacob and ancestor of one of the twelve tribes of Israel.
Any Jew who had read the Torah, attended synagogue, or passed bar mitzvah, knew that Jacob blessed each of his twelve sons. For Judah, the blessing included two remarkable predictions. Like a lion, Judah would defeat its enemies. And “the scepter will not depart from Judah … until the coming of the one to whom it belongs, the one whom the nations will honor.”
In Israel, the majority of Jewish Israelis agreed they were either hiloni (secular) or masorti (traditional). For Jacob’s descendants who practiced Judaism, whether conservative, orthodox, or ultra-orthodox, Jerusalem was the main attraction. The secular, the atheistic, and the liberals preferred Tel Aviv. For the reformed, either city would do.
But all Israelis passionately exhibited one unifying trait and defended one ultimate purpose: the survival of Israel as a people, as a sovereign democratic state, as a nation reborn from the floods of dispersion and from the fires of Nazi death camps.
Jews synthesized over another common denominator, which Avram had not been afraid or embarrassed to articulate: “an enemy who wants to reduce them to ashes, to drown them in the sea, to erase Israel from memory, from all maps of the civilized world.” (Pages 15-16).
In the article referenced above, I wrote:
In much larger geographic and demographic nations like the United States of America (population 327 million) you’d expect a wide range of political, social, economic, cultural, and religious diversity. But with only 6.6 million Jewish citizens of Israel and only 14+ million Jews on the planet you would anticipate fewer differences and certainly not such dramatic dichotomies within Israel nor among Jews throughout the world.
At the same time, both Israelis and Jews outside of Israel are an extraordinary example of a cohesive dichotomy (an oxymoron) unparalleled on Planet Earth.
Nevertheless, differences between Jews themselves can be troublesome, especially when the Jews as a people and Israel as a nation have so many adversaries….
Though there is significant solidarity of Jews within and outside of Israel, there are three basic Jewish dichotomies.
I went on to identify those dichotomies, with the most noticeable difference between secular and observant Jews, which will be the prominent point of this week’s post.
A Remarkable Turn of Events
On April 9th, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party received enough of the popular vote to guarantee 35 seats. But with the same number of seats voted to the (newly formed just for this election) opposition party, Blue and White; co-led by former IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz and head of another party (Yesh Atid) that joined Blue and White—Yair Lapid. However, Netanyahu’s ruling right-wing alliance won the election with a coalition total of 65 potential Knesset seats, four more than the required minimum. Or, so everyone thought.
(Leaders of the Blue & White Party, the name of which represents the blue and white Star of David Israeli flag, Left to right are: Moshe Ya’alon; Benny Gantz; Yair Lapid; Gabi Yshkenazi … Gantz and Lapid are the two main representatives)
By Israeli Law, the winning coalition—comprised of smaller parties that unite with the leading vote-getting party—must formally structure a majority government, which is normally not that difficult. This must be done within 42 days after an election, which includes a two-week extension granted by the President (more of a ceremonial position in Israel, but important during the election process) if necessary. In this case, President Rivlin gave Benjamin Netanyahu one more week … to May 28th.
By the time of the extended deadline, the Likud party and its supporting factions could muster only 60 seats—a deadlock. Consequently, the 21st Knesset voted to dissolve itself and schedule another snap election on September 17, 2019.
Why did that happen?
Answer: Even though there were smaller parties supporting Likud (35 seats) with a total of 30 additional would-be Knesset representatives, it took just one party and its leader to dissolve the new Knesset, an unparalleled event in Israel’s modern history. The party: Yisrael Beiteinu (Israel is our Home). Its leader: Avigdor Liberman. I mentioned him in Eye of Prophecy article: Peace Between Israel & Judah … Then World Peace! (Posted 12-8-18).
As a background, here is an excerpt from that article:
About three weeks ago, another crisis developed in Israel’s government.
Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman resigned his post (in protest over the government’s alleged lack of toughness with Hamas’ launching of some 450 rockets into Israel as well as the now eight-month Palestinian rioting at the Gazan border with Israel) and withdrew himself and his coalition party…. Thereby, reducing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s governing coalition from 67 to the bare minimum of 61 seats.
Shortly thereafter, Education Minister Naftali Bennett and Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked (leaders of the Jewish Home Party—8 Knesset seats) threatened to exit the majority coalition government if Netanyahu didn’t appoint Bennett to Defense Minister to replace Lieberman.
If Bennett and Shaked didn’t back down, then the regular election scheduled for November 2019 likely would have taken place in 2-3 months. Netanyahu called the bluff of the Jewish Home party and Naftali Bennett withdrew his demand.
However, as a result of other developments—of which Liberman was the main catalyst—the Knesset ended up scheduling a mid-term election anyway (for April 9th, 2019). In principle, both Lieberman and his party had agreed to back the Likud. As a result of the April 9th election, his party was reduced from six to five Knesset members; still resulting in a convincing mandate of 65 seats for the majority coalition. Yet, they reversed their support after the election.
This abrupt turnaround came with an ultimatum imposed by Liberman, summarized in this quote from a June 4, 2019 Associate Press article reposted in the online news source World Israel News: “After appearing to win April 9 elections, Netanyahu was blocked from forming a government coalition by his political ally turned rival Avigdor Lieberman, who insisted on passing legislation that would require young ultra-Orthodox men to be drafted into the military like everyone else.”
This issue of observant Jews serving in the IDF has been controversial for years; it is one of the two main platforms of Liberman’s Yisrael Beiteinu party. Even though this debate and/or passage of a law one way or another could have waited for official establishment of the 21st Knesset, Lieberman insisted that legislation be passed immediately that would force ALL Orthodox Jews to serve in the military (there are some who voluntarily report for duty). At the very minimum he insisted that the new government must make an advance commitment to mandatory service for the Orthodox.
Liberman further dug in his heels when he learned that Bezalel Smotrich of the United Right Party (ultra-Orthodox) was being considered as the next Justice Minister. Said Liberman:
“To my sorrow, the State of Israel is going to elections (again in the same year). We are natural partners (but only under his terms) in a right-wing government; we won’t be partners in a halachic government. The Likud failed in this work of building a coalition (thanks to Liberman’s rigid and impatient position) … and they and the Haredim are to blame for Israel going to elections” (emphasis added, parenthesis mine).
(*Note: Haredim is a term applied to observant Jews, particularly the Orthodox … in contrast to secular Jews, who far outnumber their religious kindred. Halachic is a Hebrew expression from the root word, halacha. Which means, “the way” or the “way of walking” or path. It encompasses the Torah commandments from God plus additional man-made rules added by rabbis over the centuries. Also, oral traditions handed down through the ages. In short, it’s the idea of an entire community or even a nation—as a whole, majority—following the instructions of the Lord in all areas of life … including politics. We’ll get back to that a little later.)
Although not nearly reason enough to join the Likud-led conservative coalition, liberal Jewish politicians also adamantly oppose any thought that Judaism would be the (a) governing base for the State of Israel. Said left-wing Meretz party member Tamar Zandberg, “It is clear that there cannot be a justice minister serving in Israel who wants to establish a theocracy.”
Which is, in fact, what ultra-Orthodox Knesset Member Bezalel Smotrich proposed when he said: “The State of Israel will be run, God willing, as it was run during the days of King David and King Solomon—according to Torah law.”
Although Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is passionately patriotic about Israel and gives considerable weight to Jewish tradition and the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) that he often reads; he, too, does not favor what would be tantamount to an Israeli version of a State Church or Church (Synagogue) State. Said Netanyahu in a terse response to Smotrich: “The State of Israel will not be a halachic state.”
When there was some talk that the 21st Knesset might consider the possibility of a 60-seat Likud coalition (instead of the majority of 61 seats) even though it had been dissolved, Liberman again said: “A government of 60 is not a right wing government, but an ultra-Orthodox government that, instead of preserving Israel as a Jewish state, will change it into a theocracy.”
For now, the Knesset remains suspended with the Executive Staff of Israel’s government still intact (on an interim basis). However, no new laws can be introduced or voted on until the 22nd Knesset is formed. Elections are still scheduled for September but not merely because of what Liberman said. Which, in and of itself, is inaccurate, i.e. a 60-seat (or however many seats) Likud coalition government would in no way be an ultra-Orthodox government.
It’s nothing short of amazing that Israel’s dichotomy between secular and observant Jews is, in unparalleled fashion, the overriding reason that this mid-term election (April) did not result in a new government. Instead, another mid-term election is forthcoming. Of all the variables that could have blocked Netanyahu’s Likud-led government from being reinstated (renewed), it was Liberman’s party withdrawal from the conservative bloc that reduced the majority from 65 seats to a deadlock of 60 seats. Moreover, this withdrawal was driven by fear that the Israeli government would be heavily influenced, if not dominated, by the religious minority.
Even to the point of a Theocracy!
Should there be a theocracy in Israel? Yes!
But not the kind that many equate with a man-made Church State or State Church system. A hierarchal system such as found with the Roman Catholic Church which dominated many European kingdoms (nations) for hundreds of years, until the Reformation and Renaissance took hold. Or the past and threatening present-day geopolitical/religious Islamic Caliphate sought by both radical and moderate (if there is such a thing) Muslims. Or the antithesis of a government run by a religion (the true Christian faith is NOT a religion but a personal relationship with Messiah Jesus), found in agnostic state secular systems like Socialism, Communism, Fascism, and the like.
Which is why the Crusades, the Catholic Inquisitions, or Muslim conquest of much of the Middle East in the 20th & 21st centuries and a part of Europe hundreds of years ago bear absolutely no resemblance to Biblical Christianity. Simply put: God graciously gives us his precepts as the source of light and life for individuals and for nations, but he NEVER forces anyone or any government to trust and obey him. That’s why he gave us free will. To choose him because we want to, because we love him and are immensely grateful for the salvation freely given to us through his Son.
The following is an excerpt from Part II of, A Religion of Peace? (posted 4-18-15):
…Then by guilt through association, the observable connection between political and religious Islam and Muslims. Indeed, it is virtually impossible to separate the two; because the Koran doesn’t distinguish between Islamic political and religious decrees or demands. Although the number of Islamic militants (including the actual terrorists among them) is relatively small, the prevailing belief of Muslims the world over is that the Koran not only encourages submission to Islam by force if necessary, but actually demands it.
The practical painful result of this religious government can vividly be seen in the Middle East through brutal enforcement of Islam by terrorist atrocities; and to a lesser (in terms of the level of violence) but nevertheless large-scale implementation of Sharia law by national governments, such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Syria. And Turkey is becoming more and more Islamic in its daily administration of national affairs.
Only Messiah Jesus can and will one day establish an absolutely Divine Government on this earth, one that will bring universal peace and prosperity. Indeed, he will administer the Kingdom of God on the earth, and the entire world will be the better for it.
Read with me the inspiring prophecy from Isaiah: “The government will rest on his shoulders … His government and its peace will never end. He will rule with fairness and justice from the throne of his ancestor David for all eternity. The passionate commitment of the Lord of Heaven’s Armies will make this happen” (Isaiah 9:6-7).
This magnificent Kingdom will be in its purest form a Divine Monarchy, based on God’s truth and justice. But until that time, Jesus, himself, recognized the necessary distinction between governmental administration and personal belief and conduct; between man’s individual interaction with God and his collaboration with the lawmakers and law enforcers of the land, when he said, “Render to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s” (Mark 12:14, NASB).
This was an amazing response (one of many) given by Christ. The implications include acknowledgment that God is ultimately in control, but that he allows and even ordains that men shall be governed by higher authorities. With the strong inference that (given the fallibility of man) governments and administrative authorities cannot successfully legislate morality or spirituality, nor should they try. Meaning the Ten Commandments, as an illustrative example, came directly from God, not from a king or human ruler or government official or even a constitution. A constitution can and should reflect divine values from the true and living God of the Bible and enforce the legislative laws of the land; but a constitutional government of any kind (monarchy, parliamentary, democratic or representative republic) should not dictate its own (dictatorial) scruples, whether religious or secular, whether godly or ungodly. That belongs to the individual, and that person’s relationship (or lack thereof) with Almighty God.
Scripture is fundamentally clear that it is impossible for man (without God’s direct and personal authority through Messiah Jesus) to establish and execute a governmental system built on and from a religion, which is exactly what the Roman Catholic Church and the Islamic Caliphates have attempted to do down through the ages, often with tragic results. Even the Mosaic and Levitical laws (decrees, regulations, commandments) handed down by God to the Israelites were designed for two purposes: (1) A God-like high standard of excellence for human interaction, but also (2) to demonstrate to the Jews and all of mankind that they could not effectively keep God’s laws, either individually or nationally. That only Jesus Christ perfectly fulfilled the law and, thus, qualified as God’s divine sacrificial offering for the sins of every man, woman, and child.
In this context, here is an excerpt from Part I of A Religion of Peace? (4-11-15):
The contextual, historical comparison that needs to be made between God’s instructions to the Israelites to vanquish some of the original tribes of Canaan and the commands from the god of Islam found in the Koran is this: The Old Testament provides an account of a particular historical episode at a specific time in Israel’s (beginning) history, for a precise duration of time, for a special purpose. The Israelites were to be the instrument of God’s judgment on a very perverse people while taking over a relatively small portion of the earth (all of which belongs to God in the first place) to live and serve God. Whereas, the Koran’s instructions to all Muslims is a perpetual edict (to subjugate Christians and Jews and kill them if they don’t submit) that has no historical parameters, no national boundaries (world-wide), and is to continue indefinitely. It is, in effect, an unlimited Koranic license to suppress and kill infidels, i.e. all who refuse to become Muslims. There is a world of difference between these antithetical models.
The State of the State of Israel
What we see taking place in Israel is of Biblical proportions! It is yet another dynamic prophetic development in these last days. It is a dispute between religious and secular Jews in Israel serious enough to temporarily topple a democratically elected government. Unwittingly, both sides are preparing themselves and the nation of Israel for the glorious return of Jesus of Nazareth, their Messiah and Savior.
He is the Jewish Messiah who will first bridge the gulf within Israel and between Jews everywhere. When that takes place, then:
The Orthodox among them have rekindled a burning desire to acknowledge the God of Israel in the affairs of state. This is generally good. What is not so good is that the religious Jews are still in denial that their Temple is gone and with it the all-important Levitical Sacrificial system for atonement of sin. They have refused to accept the reality that the New Covenant prophesied by Jeremiah to replace the Old Covenant of the Law came to pass when Messiah Jesus died on the cross for their sins (and of the whole world) and rose from the dead to prove that he is God’s own Son.
King David himself recognized that God has a Son, and this Son was also David’s Lord! (Psalm 2 & Psalm 110).
What the Jewish Apostle Paul wrote nearly 2,000 years ago still applies today. Especially now that Israel has been reborn, and observant Israelis once again are able to freely practice their version of the Law of Moses (minus the sacrifices):
“Dear brothers and sisters, the longing of my heart and my prayer to God is for the people of Israel to be saved. I know what enthusiasm they have for God, but it is misdirected zeal. For they don’t understand God’s way of making people right with himself. Refusing to accept God’s way, they cling to their own way of getting right with God by trying to keep the law. For Christ has already accomplished the purpose for which the law was given. As a result, all who believe in him are made right with God” (Romans 10:1-4).
On the other hand, many secular Jews or those just partially observant possess a passionate hope for Messiah to arrive. Even though they know little of their own Scriptures, they have as much or more desire for Israel’s place in the family of nations that affords at least a measure of peace and security, than many observant Jews do. This perplexes the Haredim as their emphasis is on a Messiah who they say will not come until Jews begin to return in greater numbers to halachic (the practice of) Judaism, i.e. keeping of the Torah.
The following are the opening words from Eye of Prophecy article: Where is Messiah … Is He Already Here? (posted June 2016):
Globally, especially in Israel, both religious and secular Jews are longing for redemption.
Yet, they do not all agree on the scope of this redemption. Will it be individual, national, or both? Will it be physical, spiritual, or both? Orthodox Jews, particularly Rabbis, contend that penitence is a prerequisite to their redemption. But they differ on what constitutes repentance … to what degree or for what exactly should they repent. Most Jews simply don’t know what’s expected of them, if anything.
Tens of thousands of Messianic Jews have embraced Jesus as Messiah; they have accepted Scripture’s claim that only he can redeem individuals and nations. They believe (along with their Gentile believer counterparts) that redemption is precisely what the Bible and Jewish tradition says it is: a purchase or buy back from slavery. Which is, Biblically, first and foremost an enslavement to sin and its consequences—eternal separation from God.
It is what Webster’s Dictionary defines as: “to free from captivity by payment of ransom.”
The Bible says: “The Redeemer will come to Jerusalem to buy back those in Israel who have turned from their sins, says the Lord” (Isaiah 59:20).
…Isaiah is referring to the initial appearance of Messiah for individual salvation; but also, his return to accomplish Israel’s national redemption.
Many Jews see redemption almost entirely from a more secular meaning of the concept:
“To free from what distresses or harms; to extricate from or help to overcome something detrimental; to change for the better; to get or win back.” (Webster’s Dictionary).
Thus, redemption to them means freedom from the constant distress and brutal harm from Palestinian terrorist attacks. They long for peace to overcome and replace the incessant detrimental threats of entire Muslim nations seeking Israel’s annihilation. They seek to exchange the relentless BDS actions against them for a better life of personal and national well-being and security. Some want to get back all the land that has been given to them by God, himself, some 4000 years ago—the entire Promised Land of Israel, including but not limited to Judea and Samaria (the West Bank).
Prophet, High Priest, and King
Returning to the statement made by the ultra-Orthodox politician Bazalel Smotrich: Israel should be, run as it was run during the days of King David and King Solomon—according to Torah law.
Is he right about the reign of King David and his son Solomon, according to Torah law?
In all due respect to his honorable intentions, he is not correct. Why? Because he’s not factoring in all that happened in Israel’s ancient history, including the glory years of David and Solomon.
For that matter, there was a marked distinction between the roles of executive leaders (beginning with Moses) and the mediators (beginning with Moses’ brother, Aaron—the High Priest) who offered sacrifices for themselves and the people when they broke God’s laws given to/through Moses and other national leaders. Whether guided by the mighty prophet Moses, then the warrior-leader Joshua, followed by several judges (like Gideon), and finally kings, Israel’s government wasn’t run by the Torah as such, on anything approaching a consistent basis. Not even during the reign of King David and King Solomon. Time/space doesn’t permit citing several examples.
A true theocracy? It should have been, but it wasn’t.
God through Moses answers that question:
(New Living Translation: Four times the word choose, or choice is used!)
Who is the Lord addressing here? Israel’s government? No, there was no government as such then. He was speaking directly to the people, every individual. Did he say that his instructions would be forced on them one way or another—by a judge or a king or a prophet or a government? (Note: I’m not referring to the enforcing of ceremonial or civil or criminal laws; that’s not the main point here). No, it must be from their heart. A willing choice to love and obey Him. From the inside out, not outside in.
Though both sought God’s wisdom and counsel to govern Israel, neither King David nor King Solomon made keeping of the Torah compulsive. They knew that the best they could do was to seek and love the Lord themselves, follow his instructions, and be an example to their people. In today’s terminology, they didn’t legislate morality (or godliness). Rather, they endeavored to exemplify God’s standards of righteousness and holiness. But even they failed from time to time.
God’s main purpose for choosing David was threefold: (1) To unite the 12 tribes of Israel into one cohesive nation—Israel, with Jerusalem as its capital. (2) to complete the task that even Joshua didn’t—that of conquering parts of the Promised Land that God had given exclusively to his people. (3) Through David, a King would come who could and would do things even David couldn’t do. This King would redeem and restore Israel to God’s original plan for his special possession … Israel and the Jews. That of being blessed internally and an external blessing to the nations.
Although it was God’s preference not for Israel to have a king, he gave his people what they wanted. But he is omniscient, and he knew full well that His Law given through Moses wasn’t the problem. Rather it was the deliberate disobedience of his people. This is expressed explicitly and frequently in the Bible, both Old and New Testaments. For example, in Psalms 78:
“…for they did not believe God or trust him to care for them” (Psalm 78:22).
“But in spite of this, the people kept sinning. Despite his wonders, they refused to trust him” (Verse 32).
And, “Their hearts were not loyal to him. They did not keep his covenant” (Verse 37).
Again, “But they kept testing and rebelling against God Most High. They did not obey his laws” (Verse 56).
Thus, invariably and inevitably, it was the preponderance of the people that determined their fate—individually and nationally. Because God has given them/us free will to decide right from wrong, good from evil, he wants everyone to willingly and eagerly choose him and his life-giving salvation. Accordingly, the Lord struck a balance between a nation’s government (governing officials) and its spiritual (Biblical) leaders. He doesn’t want kings (today’s Presidents and Prime Ministers) or their governments to assume the role of ministering to the people as do synagogue or church leaders. And vice versa.
Which is why a priest could be a prophet (example, Ezekiel) and a king could be a prophet (King David). But a priest could never be a king; nor a king be a priest.
Look no further than Judah’s King Uzziah, who for the most part, “…did what was pleasing in the Lord’s sight…” (II Chronicles 26:4). But later in Uzziah’s reign, he entered the inner sanctuary of Solomon’s Temple to personally burn incense; thereby, arrogantly assuming the role and audaciously acting on behalf of the priests.
Big mistake! God struck him with leprosy while he was still in the Temple.
Government leaders are to administrate to/for the outer needs of the people. Spiritual leaders are to minister to the inner needs of people. Neither in terms of time nor talents, should one role assume the other. Am I, as a born-again believer in Messiah Jesus, suggesting a separation of Church and State? Yes, but not as perceived by the secular liberals among us, who want all vestiges (even symbolic ones) of God removed from government or public places. That is missing the point ENTIRELY! For a more detailed presentation of this topic, please refer to Eye of Prophecy articles, Separation of Church & State … For or Against? Part I & II (4-2 & 4-9-16).
(President George Washington often prayed in public, before people. Is that a lack of separation of Church and State?!)
Things to Ponder
The Lord doesn’t want his Word and the truth/source of redemption therein that produces eternal life, as well as the powerful promises and precious provisions for everyday living—no matter the kind of government—to be forced (legislated) on the individual or the nation. Even by or through a ruler and/or government whose intentions may be good, but whose faults and frailties and failures will sooner or later lead to laws and enforcement thereof which are detrimental to the greater populace. Producing the opposite effect to which they were intended.
He wants people to seek and serve him because they love and fear him (hold in awe, respect). The more of these people there are in a nation, the greater the Lord will bless that nation (Psalm 33:12; II Chronicles 7:14).
There’s only One Person—he who was, who is, and who is to come—who has accomplished and will one day soon completely fulfill for individuals and nations the redemptive role and governmental authority of Prophet, Priest, and King. He is, MESSIAH JESUS.
The prophet Zechariah spoke of him: “…Then he will receive royal honor and will rule as king from his throne. He will also serve as priest from his throne, and there will be perfect harmony between the two roles” (Zechariah 6:13).
“…For the gifts and sacrifices that the priests offer are not able to cleanse the consciences of the people who bring them. For that old system deals only with food and drink and various cleansing ceremonies—physical regulations that were in effect only until a better system could be established. So Christ has now become the High Priest over all the good things that have come. He has entered that greater, more perfect Tabernacle in heaven, which was not made by human hands and is not part of the created world. With his own blood—not the blood of goats and calves—he entered the Most Holy Place once for all time and secured our redemption forever” (Hebrews 9:9-12, italics for emphasis).
In closing here is an excerpt from Eye of Prophecy article, Kingdom of God (posted 1-17-15):
Jesus spoke often of the Kingdom of God; for example, comparing it to a mustard seed … the smallest of seeds that when planted grows into an enormous tree. Which is exactly what has happened to the body of Christ; an exponential growth down through the ages, to now consist of believers from virtually every nation and language on earth. It is the Kingdom of Heaven in the hearts and minds of those who have been redeemed by the shed blood of Christ. Next, will come the final physical Kingdom of God on this earth; at which time all people, all governments, all nations will be brought under the authority of God’s magnificent Son. He will rule the nations with firmness, but fairness.
Isn’t that what most people want? They want law, order, equality, safety, peace. And they want someone who has the kind of authority to realize those dreams, but also someone who is kind and considerate with that authority. One who truly cares about people and what’s best for them; who can rule and judge with impartiality and kindness. A truly wise and benevolent King whose attributes perfectly reflect who and what he is: Love, Truth, Justice, Mercy.