When God Is in Control

By Dr. William L. Krewson
The United States of America clearly leads the world. From technology to debauchery, this one nation stands above the rest. But it will not continue forever. History clearly teaches that empires rise and fall. America’s two-hundred-year history is brief compared to Egypt, whose kingdoms endured for almost three thousand years. What is the reason for such ebb and flow of nations? The answer is simple: Kingdoms rise and fall because God is in control.

The prophet Daniel recorded amazing prophecies of God’s sovereign control of history. He lived during two great kingdoms, the Babylonian and Persian empires. He was a political statesman whose career spanned the demise of the former and the rise of the latter. Daniel was also a prophet. Through him, God revealed to His people Israel a vast vision of the future. In the following two dreams, Daniel recorded the rise and fall of all human empires and the establishment of God’s eternal kingdom.

THE PROPHECY DELIVERED
The King’s Dream—Daniel Chapter 2.
King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon faced a night of turmoil that continued into the next day (Dan. 2:1–30). A frightening dream kept haunting him. His counselors offered to interpret the dream if the king would tell them its details. The king refused. The wise men would have to prove their wisdom by providing both the dream and its interpretation—or die. The advisors realized their doom. But their hopes awakened when word came from a young Jewish man who offered to reveal the contents of the dream as well as its interpretation, but only because his God had revealed it to him. As Daniel approached the king, Nebuchadnezzar listened in utter amazement.

In the dream stood a huge statue (Dan. 2:31–35).
Daniel described it thoroughly. Its head was made of pure gold, shining in all its splendor. It had a chest and arms of silver. The belly and thighs were made of bronze. The statue had iron legs, and the feet were a combination of iron and clay. Suddenly a stone smashed the statue’s feet, causing the entire image to crumble and be blown away. The stone then became a great mountain that filled the entire world.

Then Daniel told the meaning (Dan. 2:36–45).
Daniel declared that Nebuchadnezzar himself, the king of Babylon, was the head of gold. The remaining parts of the statue represented successive kingdoms whose identities in history are now known. The silver chest stood for Medo-Persia, the bronze thighs for Greece, and the iron feet for Rome. The mixed iron and clay represented a kingdom that would be divided—strong yet fragile. The Lord apparently revealed a twofold appearance of the Roman Empire. There is a difference between the Rome of old (the iron legs) and the Rome to come (the iron and clay feet). The strong yet fragile feet represent the second phase of the Roman Empire.

This dream recorded a humanistic vision of mankind.
The governments of the world seemed like a colossal statue of man’s greatness. Yet the progress of that greatness diminished. As the value of the metal decreased, its strength increased, except for the feet. Humanity’s achievements are top-heavy with pride and will eventually collapse. The dream also revealed that the Gentile world would, for a time, rule the people of Israel. Israel could have been the head; it has instead become the tail (Dt. 28:13, 44). Disobedience caused this reversal, but it is temporary. Notice how the dream continues:

“The God of heaven [will] set up a kingdom, which shall never be destroyed; and the kingdom shall not be left to other people, but it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it shall stand for- ever” (Dan. 2:44).

The stone that smashed the kingdoms of mankind represents the Kingdom of God. This cataclysmic event will signal the end of man’s rebellious kingdom, and God’s righteous reign on earth through His Messiah will begin. Daniel ended his prophecy to the king with these words:

“God hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter; and the dream is certain, and the interpretation of it sure” (Dan. 2:45).

The Prophet’s Dream—Daniel Chapter 7.
Not only did the pagan king have a dream, but the holy prophet Daniel experienced one also (Dan. 7:1–8). He saw four huge beasts coming up from the wind-tossed sea. The first was like a lion with eagle’s wings. The second appeared to be a bear with three ribs in its mouth. The third resembled a leopard with four wings on its back. The fourth beast was incomparable to any other. Daniel could only describe it as “dreadful and terrible, and strong exceedingly” (Dan. 7:7). He also noted that it had iron teeth and trampled the rest of the beasts. It did have one notable feature—ten horns. Yet, while Daniel was watching, another little horn emerged and uprooted three horns. This “little horn” had two human features: two eyes and a boastful mouth.

Daniel’s dream also included a scene in heaven (Dan. 7:9–14).
On a blazing throne sat the Ancient of days. With thousands of beings attending Him, a judgment scene unfolded. Then the little horn’s boastful words were heard, and the fourth beast was slain and burned with fire. Daniel then saw a person, the “Son of man,” standing before the Ancient of days. This one was to receive authority over God’s kingdom, “that all people, nations, and languages should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed” (Dan. 7:14). Daniel clearly saw the Messiah, who would be both human and divine.

These images perplexed the prophet (Dan. 7:15–28).
A heavenly messenger provided the interpretation. The four beasts symbolized four kings and their kingdoms. The ten horns of the last beast represented ten kings. The little horn will be another king who will oppose God and oppress His people. He will change established times and laws. Yet his persecution of the saints will last only for a designated period of time. Then God’s heavenly court will convene and condemn the great persecutor. He will be destroyed forever. Finally, “the greatness of the kingdom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him” (Dan. 7:27).

THE PROPHECY FULFILLED
God revealed similar truths to both Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel.
The king’s dream visualized human empires in an imposing statue representing man’s greatness. The prophet’s dream revealed God’s viewpoint of these humanistic attempts at selfish rule—wild beasts. Even the level of animals descends from the stately lion to an ugly, unknown creature. The two dreams share the identical interpretation from two different perspectives. The four metals of the statue and the four beasts from the sea represent the same kingdoms. Babylon ruled from 626 to 539 B.C. Then Medo-Persia dominated the world from 539 to 330 B.C. The Greek empire of Alexander the Great defeated the Persians and ruled from 330 to 146 B.C. Then Rome gained world power and ruled until the western branch of the empire fell in 476 A.D., and the eastern branch fell in 1453. In an amazing way, God unveiled the future to Daniel’s generation, and we have the privilege of looking back on prophecy fulfilled in history.

THE PROPHECY TO BE FULFILLED
A final stage of the Roman Empire will appear near the end of Gentile domination of world history. The stereoscopic prophecies painted this future empire as two figures: first, as iron and clay feet having ten toes (2:33, 41–43) and second, as an indescribable beast having ten horns and one little horn (Dan. 7:7–8, 19–25). No historical evidence exists that matches these descriptions. When the elements of this prophecy are compared with other Scriptures, it is clear that the final Rome is yet to come.

Notice the following parallels: Jesus Christ referred to Daniel’s prophecies as future. He predicted that “Jerusalem shall be trodden down by the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled” (Lk. 21:24). That unique phrase, “the times of the Gentiles,” refers to the period of history that began when Jerusalem was conquered by Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar in 586 B.C. Since then, Gentile domination of Jerusalem has continued and will do so in the future. Only at Jesus’ return will the holy city return to the unqualified control of the Jewish people under their Messiah.

Jesus also described the great event after the future Tribulation.
“And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud, with power and great glory” (Lk. 21:27).

He applied the phrase from Daniel 7:13, “the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven,” to Himself! Jesus Christ, the Son of man, will someday return from heaven and establish His Kingdom on earth. (See alsoRevelation 19:11–21.)

The apostle John introduced the last book of the Bible with words from the prophet Daniel,

“Behold, he cometh with clouds” (Rev. 1:7).
The book of Revelation ends with a description much like Daniel’s dream. Notice the mention of thrones, a court for judgment, and the reign of the saints in Revelation 20:4.

“And I saw thrones, and they sat upon them, and judgment was given unto them…and they lived and reigned with Christ a thousand years.”

The New Testament supplies more details about the ten horns and the little horn of Daniel’s dream. Revelation describes the ten horns as ten kings, correlating with Daniel’s prophecy.

“And the ten horns which thou sawest are ten kings, who have received no kingdom as yet, but receive power as kings one hour with the beast” (Rev. 17:12). (See also 12:3 and 13:1.)

During the future Tribulation period, ten kings will emerge simultaneously and support one who will rule the world. That one is known as Daniel’s “little horn.” John referred to him as “the beast” (Rev. 13:1). Paul called him “the man of sin” and “that wicked one,” who is destined for destruction by the Lord (2 Th. 2:3, 8–9). This Satan-inspired enemy of God is also known as the “antichrist” (1 Jn. 2:18). Daniel’s time reference (a time, times, and half a time) is repeated in Revelation 12:14 and equated with other time designations (1260 days in Rev. 11:3 and 12:6; forty-two months in Rev. 11:2 and 13:5). These all indicate three and one-half years—exactly one-half of the seven-year Tribulation period.

While no one knows when these prophecies will be fulfilled, ominous signs in the present world may foreshadow this coming, evil empire. Europe’s fragmentation is giving way to unification similar to ancient Rome’s. Technology and the Internet are binding the people of many nations together, and formerly independent economies have grown interdependent. Meanwhile, Israel grows increasingly isolated in world opinion, while Christians endure persecution as the new, silent minority. These shadows portend a future reality that matches Daniel’s prophecy of a new world order, led by the “little horn,” against the God of heaven.

God spoke through Daniel to give comfort and hope to His people in exile. Today that Word continues to enlighten and encourage believers to be watchful for the coming of the Lord Jesus Christ. God is in control. The times of the Gentiles will one day give way to the Kingdom of the Messiah! In the future time of Tribulation, God will pour out His wrath upon the great statue and the beast that have stood in defiance against Him. God will then send His Son to declare victory.

“And the seventh angel sounded; and there were great voices in heaven, saying, The kingdom of this world is become the kingdom of our Lord, and of his Christ, and he shall reign forever and ever” (Rev. 11:15).

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

The U.S. is preparing for Military Intervention in Syrian Conflict

By Bob Maginnis
Syria’s dictator will defeat his foes unless America takes the lead and, based on the signals coming from the White House, the odds favor U.S. military action this year.

President Bashir al-Assad, Syria’s dictator, appears to have the upper hand in the 15-month old revolution that has claimed more than 10,000 lives. His security forces remain loyal and his allies—namely Russia and Iran—steadfastly protect him from financial and diplomatic pressure and are keeping him armed to the teeth.

Further, any hope Assad might abandon Damascus was flushed when the United Nations high commissioner announced last week there can be no amnesty for crimes committed under his regime. A similar threat persuaded Libya’s dictator to fight to the death.

ASSAD NOT BACKING DOWN
Assad’s intractable position presents President Barack Obama a tough choice: ignore Syria or intervene. At this point the Obama administration is signaling it might intervene even though no critical American interests are at stake.

But right now he is under increasing pressure from members of congress and his Republican opponent, Mitt Romney, who said “It is far past time for the U.S. to begin to lead and put an end to the Assad regime.” The administration is signaling its intention to act by building a case for action.

Last week White House spokesman Jay Carney said a window of opportunity for a peaceful political transition in Syria “will not remain open for long.” Then Carney cited the same talking points used earlier in the week by U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Susan Rice to predict dire consequences should Assad remain in power: sectarian war that spills into other countries and morphs into a proxy war with Iran.

Connecting America’s Mideast nemesis, Iran, to the Syrian war provides pretext for action because domestic opinion already perceives Tehran as a threat to America’s vital national interests. Carney said the Persian hegemon uses violence in Syria to gain influence by delivering arms and sending troops to advise Assad’s forces.

Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps troops provide operational support to Assad’s security forces and the pro-regime militiamen, the shabiha, many of whom are members of Assad’s minority Allawite Shi’ite sect. Pentagon spokesman Captain John Kirby confirmed Tehran’s complicity in the violence; we “have reason to believe that Iran continues to assist the Assad regime in committing these acts of atrocities,” a reference to the May 25 massacre in Houla that claimed 108 innocent lives.

THE MILITARY OPTION
Press Secretary Carney said Syria is a “matter of great and intense focus” in White House meetings, signaling the crisis is a top national security priority. He acknowledged we “are skeptical [the UN's ceasefire plan] will be complied with [by Assad] ... That is why we are talking with our partners about other options.”

“The president has been in regular consultation with our allies [about the Syrian crisis],” said Josh Earnest, a White House spokesman. Some of our key allies share the view that the time for action is getting close. For example, the British foreign secretary William Hague signaled the situation in Syria has become so grave that military options are being actively considered.

Hague said the United Kingdom is not yet ready to supply arms to Syrian rebels, something the Obama administration is planning to do according to the Associated Press. But he warned should the crisis require military intervention it would be vastly larger than in Libya and would require broad international support.

Syria’s next door neighbor Turkey believes the international community is preparing to go beyond sanctions as well. Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan said last week “There is also a limit to the patience in the UN Security Council” over ending the bloodshed in Syria. The U.S. called for a Security Council meeting this week to debate further action.

CHINA, RUSSIA UNITED AGAINST INTERVENTION IN SYRIA
But the Security Council won’t authorize military action without consent from Russia and China, which have twice vetoed resolutions on Syria. Russian President Vladimir Putin says a political solution is still possible and believes nothing could be imposed by force.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton signaled she believes the Russians and by association the Chinese can be persuaded to back stronger action. “The Russians ... keep telling me they don’t want to see a civil war and I have been telling them their [Syria] policy is going to help contribute to a civil war,” she said.

Clinton likely told Putin violence has already spilled over from Syria into several areas in Lebanon, where riots have caused many deaths. Violence is wracking

Tripoli as intense clashes occur between extremist Islamists and al-Qaeda, who are collaborating with the Syrian rebels and pro-Assad Allawites. Even the capital Beirut has seen fighting between Sunni groups and supporters of the Syrian regime.

EXPECT MILITARY ACTION TO BE INCREMENTAL
The administration is also signaling it has military options. Last week chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey told Fox News “There is always a military option.” He said military leaders are “cautious” about the use of force, “but it may come to [that] point with Syria because of the atrocities.” There was another Syrian atrocity last week.

“We’ll be prepared to provide options if asked to do so,” Dempsey said. The general admits Syria is a “very capable” adversary with a sophisticated, integrated air defense system and chemical and biological weapons.

The administration has already signaled it is preparing to deal with Syria’s weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Earlier in the year the State Department notified Syria’s neighbors of the WMD threat. In fact, the U.S. military is working with the
Jordanians on plans to seize Syria’s WMD arsenal should the regime fall. The administration does not want a repeat of the Libya operation whereby arsenals of sophisticated missiles were carted away by terrorists.

Subject to Obama’s political decision expect military action to be incremental and subject to Assad’s response to steadily increasing pressure. Likely, our first wave will be to arm and train the rebels.

A second wave of military-related actions may become necessary if diplomacy continues to fail and Russia and China acquiesce to a UN resolution authorizing the use of force. That would likely be a decapitation campaign designed to knockout Syria’s key leaders and their security centers using cruise missiles and stealth-delivered precision-guided bombs.

A third wave of incremental military action would be the creation of a no-fly zone like the 2011 Libya campaign. That will first require softening Syria’s air defences followed by a persistent aerial presence using bases in Turkey and Jordan and carriers in the Mediterranean Sea. This step would include partitioning Syria to create safe havens for rebel forces and refugees.

The final wave would be an invasion to carry out regime change that must come with a clear UN mandate and significant Arab participation. This would be an Iraq-style operation requiring perhaps 200,000 troops and years of post-invasion stabilization.

The Obama administration has already created the pretext to intervene in Syria and now is signalling its intent. The next step is for the president to make the political decision that is expected very soon.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

The World's Largest Biometric Database

A new biometric database that is now in the process of identifying 1.2 billions citizens of India is very much a precursor to what Bible Prophecy warns will come for all citizens of the world.

The book of Revelation tells us that every person will be required to accept a "mark" which will both identify the holder as a follower of the Antichrist, as well the mark will allow that person to buy and sell.

ID DATABASE FORGES AHEAD
The new biometric ID database in India will have various biometric data on each Indian citizen, (iris scan, fingerprints, photographs), and will issue a new unique number to each citizen.

It will also make it much simpler for that person to open bank accounts and receive and make payments simply by authenticating himself or herself using a biometric reading devise, (the reader will scan their iris, fingerprints or face).

We certainly cannot be far from the fulfilment of this prophecy, when we hear that 1.2 billion of the 7 billion people on the earth will soon be marked with a new ID that allows them to receive payments and make withdrawals with the wave of a scanned hand or face.

16 And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:

17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.

18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six. (KJV)

From the article:
In the last two years, over 200 million Indian nationals have had their fingerprints, photographs taken, and irises scanned, and given a unique 12-digit number that should identify them everywhere and to everyone.

This is only the beginning, and the goal is to do the same with the entire population (1.2 billion), so that poorer Indians can finally prove their existence and identity when needed for getting documents, getting help from the government, and opening bank and other accounts.

This immense task needs a database that can contain over 12 billion fingerprints, 1.2 billion photographs, and 2.4 billion iris scans, can be queried from diverse devices connected to the Internet, and can return accurate results in an extremely short time.

The program - dubbed UIDAI—is lead by techno tycoon Nandan Nilekani, and is already a big success, as its effectiveness has been proved by a number of trials that allowed citizens to open bank accounts electronically, receive payments from the government directly into them, and withdrawing the money from them by authenticating themselves on a slew of simple devices....

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

The German Plan for the takeover of the EU sparks outrage in Britain

DEMANDS were growing last night for Britain to act to halt Germany’s relentless march towards creating a European superstate.

Fury erupted after German Chancellor Angela Merkel yesterday cranked up her plans for political union.

On the day she met David Cameron in Berlin to try to tackle the eurozone crisis, she declared:

“We need more Europe. We don’t only need monetary union, we also need a so-called fiscal union. And most of all we need a political union, which means we need to gradually cede powers to Europe and give Europe control.”

Her comments added weight to the Daily Express crusade to get Britain out of the EU. And they triggered a chorus of calls for the Prime Minister to stand up to Germany’s desire to dominate.

Tory MP Philip Davies said: “The euro is beyond fixing, it is a busted flush. The sooner they accept that the better. We don’t need more politics to sort the problem. This Soviet-style political project has failed.”

Fellow Conservative backbencher Douglas Carswell said:

“The German taxpayer is going to be extremely reluctant to take on eurozone debt.

“What we are seeing is a deluded European elite resisting failure at all costs.”

Ms ¬Merkel’s remarks highlighted a growing rift with non-euro member Britain.

At their meeting later, Mr Cameron pledged he would not ask British taxpayers to underwrite the debts of ailing banks in Greece and Spain.

The Prime Minister said he had “no doubt” that the 17 nations of the eurozone would move towards closer fiscal union within the next weeks and months.

But he made clear Britain would not be involved in any such arrangement

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

Nigel Farage on the Who's Who Within the EU Commission

Nigel Farage is at it again as he speaks of the who's who of the EU Commission

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

THE FACE OF CHRIST

We need to remember that people we interact with, speak to, and meet, are created in the image of Christ..

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

Signs of the Times

By Joel C. Rosenberg
Forget the stagnant American economy and our severe debt crisis and the rapidly mounting financial troubles in Greece and Spain, at least for a moment. Consider what’s driving American headlines these days.

Pornography – Did you know the #1, #2 and #3 books on the New York Times fiction best-seller list, and on the USA Today best-seller list, and on Amazon for the last few weeks have been the Fifty Shades of Grey erotic novels by E.L. James that are being widely described as “Mommy Porn”? The sexually explicit trilogy, which revolves around adultery and BDSM (sexual bondage, discipline, sadism and masochism) has become an overnight, viral phenomenon among American girls in their young teens all the way up through grandmothers in their seventies and eighties and is making headlines across the nation. The novels have sold more than 10 million copies in just six weeks.

Yes, you read that right — 10 million copies in six weeks.

A backlash is beginning on Facebook, blogs and other social media by women who are revolted by such pornography and warning of its dangers, but it’s coming slow and late. “The series portrays BDSM in the context of an engaging, passionate, tender, romantic relationship that culminates in the characters falling in love, and the conflicted girl assuaging the billionaire’s troubled soul,” wrote Mary Kassian, author of the “Girls Gone Wise” blog. “But it doesn’t matter to me how the author sweetens it up. The tasty red Kool-Aid doesn’t offset the bitter poison. Smut is still smut.” (See “Hotel in ‘Mommy Porn’ novel offering 50 Shades-themed packages,” Fox Oregon, May 23, 2012; “How ‘Fifty Shades of Grey’ Is Shaking Up the Business of the Romance Genre,” The Daily Beast, June 6, 2012)

Cannibalism — Have stories about human beings eating other human beings ever been a major story in the United States, much less a series of headlines that lasted day after day? Not that I recall in my forty-five years. But the Drudge Report and media outlets across the U.S. have been dominated in recent weeks by stories of six different instances of cannibalistic acts, some here in America and some around the world. “Miami police shot and killed Rudy Eugene, 31, on May 26 after he refused to stop eating another man’s face,” read one news story. “The victim, Ronald Poppo, a 65-year-old homeless man, remains hospitalized in critical condition. Alexander Kinyua, a 21-year-old student at Morgan State University in Maryland, was arrested May 30 on suspicion of killing his roommate, Kujoe Bonsafo Agyei-Kodie, and then eating his heart and portions of his brain.”

Such stories are almost too horrifying to read, yet where is the outrage? People are almost treating these stories as bizarre but even a bit humorous, it as if it were no big deal, just another news story. (See “Exclusive: Causeway Cannibal Had Bible, Recently Smoked Pot When He Attacked,” CBS Miami, June 6, 2012; “Cannibal Copycat? Police Say Man High On Bath Salts Threatened To Eat Officer,” CBS Tampa, June 6, 2012; “Cannibalism Trend Can Feed On Itself, Experts Say: 6 Acts Of Human Consumption Draw Lurid Attention,” ABC Indianapolis, June 6, 2012)

Gay Marriage – For thousands of years, society believed that marriage was a sacred union between one man and one woman. In 1996, only 27 percent of Americans supported homosexual marriages. But by 2011, support had grown to 53 percent. Governor Mitt Romney, the GOP presidential presumptive nominee, doesn’t want “social issues” to be prominent in the 2012 campaign.

But last month, President Obama came out in favor of gay marriage, and homosexual activists are determined to force the issue not only into the headlines but all the way to the Supreme Court, hoping to force gay marriage (already legal in some states) on the entire country. This is a very serious development, as I am not certain by any means that there are five votes on the High Court to protect the sanctity of marriage between one man and one woman. (See “Obama says he supports gay marriage,” Wall Street Journal, May 10, 2012; “Prop. 8: appeals courts set stage for Supreme Court review of gay marriage,” Christian Science Monitor, June 6, 2012)

Abortion – Since 1973, Americans have aborted more than 53 million babies. Before long, we will reach the point where the U.S. will have murdered ten times more human beings than the Nazis murdered during the Holocaust. Try as we might, we cannot seem to get the atrocious Roe v. Wade decision overturned, and the murders just go on and on. How much longer can this go on until God intervenes? And if that were not bad enough, last month President Obama and 168 Congressmen decided to go on the record in support of sex-selection abortions. (See “President Obama, 168 House Members Defend Sex-Selection Abortion,” National Right To Life news story, May 31, 2012)

What in the world is going on? With a stagnant U.S. economy, more than $15 trillion in national debt, and some $65 trillion in unfunded federal liabilities fast coming due, America faces the very real possibility of an economic collapse in the not-too-distant future. But is it possible we’re already imploding culturally? The country is deep in a full blown political war between Democrats and Republicans, but do we honestly believe either party – or either presidential nominee – knows how to fix the mess we’re in? And where is the Church? In a nation of tens of millions of self-professed born-again, evangelical Christians, how can we be in so much trouble? And is there any hope of turning this around?

In my new non-fiction book, Implosion: Can America Recover From Its Economic and Spiritual Challenges In Time? (which releases on Tuesday, June 12th), I write that these are not normal times. Americans have been gripped by a widespread and deeply rooted pessimism in recent years. They are openly asking whether our nation can survive. A growing number of Americans fear that this period of our history is different and the crises we face today – and those coming up over the horizon – may be far worse than anything we have experienced in the past. Many Americans genuinely fear that God is preparing to remove his hand of protection and blessing from our country, or perhaps already has. The fear that unlike previous dark times in our national history, God may not intend to help us turn things around and get us back on the right track.

We must not kid ourselves. The evidence suggests we may very well be aboard the Titanic, heading for icebergs and inexplicably increasing our speed toward disaster. So many on board are unaware of the dangers fast approaching and not concerned in the slightest. We haven’t hit the icebergs yet, but if we don’t make a sharp turn fast, we soon will, and we will sink. Who will serve as our captain and crew going forward? Will they understand the gravity of the threat and have the wisdom, courage and speed to take appropriate action before it is too late? What is our role as passengers? Are we to succumb to decadence, indulging ourselves in amusements and entertainment and alcohol with no regard for our own safety or the safety of others aboard? Or will we rise up, sound the alarm, and take action will we can?

The good news is that God has shown mercy to our country in the past. In the early 1700s we experience what became known as the first Great Awakening. In the early 1800s, we experienced the Second Great Awakening. As I describe in Implosion, these were massive, widespread, game-changing eras of spiritual revival in which millions of people became deeply devout and passionately evangelistic followers of Jesus Christ. In 1770, for example, there were fewer than two dozen Methodist churches in America. By 1860, there were nearly 20,000. In roughly the same time frame, the number of Baptists went from under 200,000 to more than one million.

These revivals were not a panacea. They did not save every soul or solve every social ill. No revival ever has or will. But the good news is this: the historical evidence is clear and compelling that many Americans found salvation during these periods, and American society as a whole was dramatically impacted and improved by both of these revivals. One piece of observable evidence in this regard is the explosive growth in the number of church congregations that were established in the wake of both Great Awakenings.

At the same time, Christians during this period sought to put their faith into action to improve their neighborhoods and communities and the nation as a whole. They persuaded millions of children to enroll in Sunday school programs to learn about the Bible and pray for their nation. They opened orphanages and soup kitchens to care for the poor and needy. They started clinics and hospitals to care for the sick, elderly and infirm. They founded elementary and secondary schools for girls as well as boys.

They established colleges and universities dedicated to teaching both the Scriptures and the sciences. They led social campaigns to persuade Americans to stop drinking so much alcohol and to abolish the evil of slavery. These Christians didn’t expect the government to take care of them. They believed it was the Church’s job to show the love of Christ to their neighbors in real and practical ways. They were right, and they made America a better place as a result – not perfect, but better.

Today, the central question of our time for Americans is this: Will God in his grace and mercy decide to allow the American people to experience a Third Great Awakening? If so, may this spiritual renaissance begin immediately, for we are desperate for God’s help. If not, then I believe our days are numbered and a terrible implosion is coming. There is no more middle ground. It is one or the other.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

Is Iran ready to mount a resistance against a possible outside attack on Syria?

Iran is ready to mount a resistance against a possible outside attack on Syria, two senior generals of the Islamic Republic said. The statements come as the level of violence in war-torn Syria continues to escalate.

¬The pro-Assad “resistance” would ensure that aggressors do not survive the conflict, a senior commander of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards, Brigadier Gen. Massoud Jazaeri told Mashregh, a media outlet run by the Guards.

“A conflict in Syria will engulf the region and its main victims will be the people of Syria themselves,” he also noted. “The Zionist regime and the interests of the enemies of Syria are all within range of the resistance fire.”

“The defeat of the enemy at this stage will be a big event and, God willing, we will witness that,” Jazaeri added.

Mashragh earlier reported that Iran’s armed forces had formed a joint war room with officers from “the resistance,” which includes Iran, Syria and Hezbollah, which controls parts of Lebanon.

Brigadier General Mohammed Reza Naqdi, (left) the head of Iran’s Basij militia who was sanctioned by the US Treasury Department for alleged human rights abuses, said Tehran would not tolerate foreign interference to topple President Bashar al-Assad. He alleged that the United States was considering taking action in Syria to protect Israel.

“After the expulsion of the Americans from Iraq, and the disruption to their defensive posture in protecting the Zionist regime, America in order to defend the regime of the occupier of the Quds [Jerusalem] is after a new scenario in Syria,” he said. “But they will be defeated.”

Furthermore, he stressed that any attack on Syria or Iran would have negative consequences for Israel.

“Today all the people of the region are ready for wiping out this cancerous tumor and reaction to any aggression will be the freedom of Quds,” he said.

The statements come as violence in Syria continues to spiral out of control. Massacres of civilians, many of them women and children, have become routine, with the latest bloodshed happening earlier this week in the Hama province. Up to 78 people died in the mass killing, which came just a day before UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon and UN-Arab League envoy to Syria Kofi Annan addressed the General Assembly and the Security Council on the situation in the country.

The UN largely put the blame on the Syrian government and called for all parties to follow Annan’s six-point peace plan. The United States, the United Kingdom, France and others were quick to draw conclusions and called for more drastic measures to be taken against President Assad. Russia and China urged caution in pointing fingers, saying both sides were to blame.

Iran has been a staunch ally of the Assad government. Some analysts believe that the ongoing Syrian conflict is largely rooted in religion. Assad and the ruling elite are mostly members of the Alawite group, an offshoot of Shiite Islam. Analysts argue that Shiite-dominated governments, such as Iran and Syria, have been pitted against Sunni countries and groups, including the Syrian opposition, Saudi

Arabia and Qatar. Western nations have traditionally relied on the Sunni side, though this has not always been the case. End of Quote

http://www.rt.com/news/iran-syria-resistance-intervention-441/

The late and great Barry R Smith once said that one has only to read the headlines, as the rest of the article was only just someone's opinion. Accordingly, all that we are able to do in this instance is to take what the writer has said with a grain of salt as all that he is proposing is just one potential scenario, out of a million possibilities.

In the short term both sides are going to continue on with pointing the finger of blame at the other side with no real outcome looking likely on the horizon until we see the emergence and intervention of the Antichrist with a peace treaty sure to be implemented.

That looks like being the substance of the matter what other promises either side manages to come up with?

What we see going on in the Middle East and the Euro Zone in crisis seems to be just the tip of the iceberg with what is ready to emerge out of all of this is going to be the start of something quite out of the box.

In other words, all of this is going to come to some sort of shattering climax, such as the arrival of the Antichrist onto the scene to take control before too much water passes under the bridge. Even though I do not favour the Antichrist, there is still hope that he is able to intervene before the Syrian situation spirals out of control and spreads to other nations in the Middle East.

That seems to be the main problem on the minds of the diplomats (such as Kofi Annan) particularly in the light of the recent announcement that Iran is a staunch ally of the Assad government and will side with their friends should push come to shove: see the attached article.

If looking to identify the Antichrist, look for someone who is a clever diplomat, someone who is able to bind nations together, and someone who is, or has been in politics. Most importantly, look for someone who is able to bring a temporary type of peace to the whole world, (starting in the Middle East) for a very brief period. If there is anyone, you know who has achieved all of the aforementioned than more than likely he would score quite high on the scorecard as possible Antichrist suspects.

However, at the stage of this writing there is no one who has been able to come up with the goods. Accordingly, all that we are able to do is to keep watching and waiting to see how all of this is going to pan out eventually, as per usual.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.

George Soros remarks at the Festival of Economics in Trento, Italy

Ever since the Crash of 2008 there has been a widespread recognition, both among economists and the general public, that economic theory has failed. But there is no consensus on the causes and the extent of that failure.

I believe that the failure is more profound than generally recognized. It goes back to the foundations of economic theory. Economics tried to model itself on Newtonian physics. It sought to establish universally and timelessly valid laws governing reality. But economics is a social science and there is a fundamental difference between the natural and social sciences. Social phenomena have thinking participants who base their decisions on imperfect knowledge. That is what economic theory has tried to ignore.

Scientific method needs an independent criterion, by which the truth or validity of its theories can be judged. Natural phenomena constitute such a criterion; social phenomena do not. That is because natural phenomena consist of facts that unfold independently of any statements that relate to them. The facts then serve as objective evidence by which the validity of scientific theories can be judged. That has enabled natural science to produce amazing results.

Social events, by contrast, have thinking participants who have a will of their own. They are not detached observers but engaged decision makers whose decisions greatly influence the course of events. Therefore the events do not constitute an independent criterion by which participants can decide whether their views are valid. In the absence of an independent criterion people have to base their decisions not on knowledge but on an inherently biased and to greater or lesser extent distorted interpretation of reality. Their lack of perfect knowledge or fallibility introduces an element of indeterminacy into the course of events that is absent when the events relate to the behavior of inanimate objects. The resulting uncertainty hinders the social sciences in producing laws similar to Newton’s physics.

Economics, which became the most influential of the social sciences, sought to remove this handicap by taking an axiomatic approach similar to Euclid’s geometry. But Euclid’s axioms closely resembled reality while the theory of rational expectations and the efficient market hypothesis became far removed from it. Up to a point the axiomatic approach worked. For instance, the theory of perfect competition postulated perfect knowledge. But the postulate worked only as long as it was applied to the exchange of physical goods. When it came to production, as distinct from exchange, or to the use of money and credit, the postulate became untenable because the participants’ decisions involved the future and the future cannot be known until it has actually occurred.

I am not well qualified to criticize the theory of rational expectations and the efficient market hypothesis because as a market participant I considered them so unrealistic that I never bothered to study them. That is an indictment in itself but I shall leave a detailed critique of these theories to others.

Instead, I should like to put before you a radically different approach to financial markets. It was inspired by Karl Popper who taught me that people’s interpretation of reality never quite corresponds to reality itself. This led me to study the relationship between the two. I found a two-way connection between the participants’ thinking and the situations in which they participate. On the one hand people seek to understand the situation; that is the cognitive function. On the other, they seek to make an impact on the situation; I call that the causative or manipulative function. The two functions connect the thinking agents and the situations in which they participate in opposite directions. In the cognitive function the situation is supposed to determine the participants’ views; in the causative function the participants’ views are supposed to determine the outcome. When both functions are at work at the same time they interfere with each other. The two functions form a circular relationship or feedback loop. I call that feedback loop reflexivity. In a reflexive situation the participants’ views cannot correspond to reality because reality is not something independently given; it is contingent on the participants’ views and decisions. The decisions, in turn, cannot be based on knowledge alone; they must contain some bias or guess work about the future because the future is contingent on the participants’ decisions.

Fallibility and reflexivity are tied together like Siamese twins. Without fallibility there would be no reflexivity – although the opposite is not the case: people’s understanding would be imperfect even in the absence of reflexivity. Of the two twins, fallibility is the first born. Together, they ensure both a divergence between the participants’ view of reality and the actual state of affairs and a divergence between the participants’ expectations and the actual outcome.

Obviously, I did not discover reflexivity. Others had recognized it before me, often under a different name. Robert Merton wrote about self-fulfilling prophecies and the bandwagon effect, Keynes compared financial markets to a beauty contest where the participants had to guess who would be the most popular choice. But starting from fallibility and reflexivity I focused on a problem area, namely the role of misconceptions and misunderstandings in shaping the course of events that mainstream economics tried to ignore. This has made my interpretation of reality more realistic than the prevailing paradigm.

Among other things, I developed a model of a boom-bust process or bubble which is endogenous to financial markets, not the result of external shocks. According to my theory, financial bubbles are not a purely psychological phenomenon. They have two components: a trend that prevails in reality and a misinterpretation of that trend. A bubble can develop when the feedback is initially positive in the sense that both the trend and its biased interpretation are mutually reinforced. Eventually the gap between the trend and its biased interpretation grows so wide that it becomes unsustainable. After a twilight period both the bias and the trend are reversed and reinforce each other in the opposite direction. Bubbles are usually asymmetric in shape: booms develop slowly but the bust tends to be sudden and devastating. That is due to the use of leverage: price declines precipitate the forced liquidation of leveraged positions.

Well-formed financial bubbles always follow this pattern but the magnitude and duration of each phase is unpredictable. Moreover the process can be aborted at any stage so that well-formed financial bubbles occur rather infrequently.

At any moment of time there are myriads of feedback loops at work, some of which are positive, others negative. They interact with each other, producing the irregular price patterns that prevail most of the time; but on the rare occasions that bubbles develop to their full potential they tend to overshadow all other influences.

According to my theory financial markets may just as soon produce bubbles as tend toward equilibrium. Since bubbles disrupt financial markets, history has been punctuated by financial crises. Each crisis provoked a regulatory response. That is how central banking and financial regulations have evolved, in step with the markets themselves. Bubbles occur only intermittently but the interplay between markets and regulators is ongoing. Since both market participants and regulators act on the basis of imperfect knowledge the interplay between them is reflexive. Moreover reflexivity and fallibility are not confined to the financial markets; they also characterize other spheres of social life, particularly politics. Indeed, in light of the ongoing interaction between markets and regulators it is quite misleading to study financial markets in isolation. Behind the invisible hand of the market lies the visible hand of politics. Instead of pursuing timeless laws and models we ought to study events in their time bound context.

My interpretation of financial markets differs from the prevailing paradigm in many ways. I emphasize the role of misunderstandings and misconceptions in shaping the course of history. And I treat bubbles as largely unpredictable. The direction and its eventual reversal are predictable; the magnitude and duration of the various phases is not. I contend that taking fallibility as the starting point makes my conceptual framework more realistic. But at a price: the idea that laws or models of universal validity can predict the future must be abandoned.

Until recently, my interpretation of financial markets was either ignored or dismissed by academic economists. All this has changed since the crash of 2008. Reflexivity became recognized but, with the exception of Imperfect Knowledge Economics, the foundations of economic theory have not been subjected to the profound rethinking that I consider necessary. Reflexivity has been accommodated by speaking of multiple equilibria instead of a single one. But that is not enough. The fallibility of market participants, regulators, and economists must also be recognized. A truly dynamic situation cannot be understood by studying multiple equilibria. We need to study the process of change.

The euro crisis is particularly instructive in this regard. It demonstrates the role of misconceptions and a lack of understanding in shaping the course of history. The authorities didn’t understand the nature of the euro crisis; they thought it is a fiscal problem while it is more of a banking problem and a problem of competitiveness. And they applied the wrong remedy: you cannot reduce the debt burden by shrinking the economy, only by growing your way out of it. The crisis is still growing because of a failure to understand the dynamics of social change; policy measures that could have worked at one point in time were no longer sufficient by the time they were applied.

Since the euro crisis is currently exerting an overwhelming influence on the global economy I shall devote the rest of my talk to it. I must start with a warning: the discussion will take us beyond the confines of economic theory into politics and the dynamics of social change. But my conceptual framework based on the twin pillars of fallibility and reflexivity still applies. Reflexivity doesn’t always manifest itself in the form of bubbles. The reflexive interplay between imperfect markets and imperfect authorities goes on all the time while bubbles occur only infrequently. This is a rare occasion when the interaction exerts such a large influence that it casts its shadow on the global economy. How could this happen? My answer is that there is a bubble involved, after all, but it is not a financial but a political one. It relates to the political evolution of the European Union and it has led me to the conclusion that the euro crisis threatens to destroy the European Union. Let me explain.

I contend that the European Union itself is like a bubble. In the boom phase the EU was what the psychoanalyst David Tuckett calls a “fantastic object” – unreal but immensely attractive. The EU was the embodiment of an open society –an association of nations founded on the principles of democracy, human rights, and rule of law in which no nation or nationality would have a dominant position.

The process of integration was spearheaded by a small group of far sighted statesmen who practiced what Karl Popper called piecemeal social engineering. They recognized that perfection is unattainable; so they set limited objectives and firm timelines and then mobilized the political will for a small step forward, knowing full well that when they achieved it, its inadequacy would become apparent and require a further step. The process fed on its own success, very much like a financial bubble. That is how the Coal and Steel Community was gradually transformed into the European Union, step by step.

Germany used to be in the forefront of the effort. When the Soviet empire started to disintegrate, Germany’s leaders realized that reunification was possible only in the context of a more united Europe and they were willing to make considerable sacrifices to achieve it. When it came to bargaining they were willing to contribute a little more and take a little less than the others, thereby facilitating agreement. At that time, German statesmen used to assert that Germany has no independent foreign policy, only a European one.

The process culminated with the Maastricht Treaty and the introduction of the euro. It was followed by a period of stagnation which, after the crash of 2008, turned into a process of disintegration. The first step was taken by Germany when, after the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, Angela Merkel declared that the virtual guarantee extended to other financial institutions should come from each country acting separately, not by Europe acting jointly. It took financial markets more than a year to realize the implication of that declaration, showing that they are not perfect.

The Maastricht Treaty was fundamentally flawed, demonstrating the fallibility of the authorities. Its main weakness was well known to its architects: it established a monetary union without a political union. The architects believed however, that when the need arose the political will could be generated to take the necessary steps towards a political union.

But the euro also had some other defects of which the architects were unaware and which are not fully understood even today. In retrospect it is now clear that the main source of trouble is that the member states of the euro have surrendered to the European Central Bank their rights to create fiat money. They did not realize what that entails – and neither did the European authorities. When the euro was introduced the regulators allowed banks to buy unlimited amounts of government bonds without setting aside any equity capital; and the central bank accepted all government bonds at its discount window on equal terms. Commercial banks found it advantageous to accumulate the bonds of the weaker euro members in order to earn a few extra basis points. That is what caused interest rates to converge which in turn caused competitiveness to diverge. Germany, struggling with the burdens of reunification, undertook structural reforms and became more competitive. Other countries enjoyed housing and consumption booms on the back of cheap credit, making them less competitive. Then came the crash of 2008 which created conditions that were far removed from those prescribed by the Maastricht Treaty.

Many governments had to shift bank liabilities on to their own balance sheets and engage in massive deficit spending. These countries found themselves in the position of a third world country that had become heavily indebted in a currency that it did not control. Due to the divergence in economic performance Europe became divided between creditor and debtor countries. This is having far reaching political implications to which I will revert.

It took some time for the financial markets to discover that government bonds which had been considered riskless are subject to speculative attack and may actually default; but when they did, risk premiums rose dramatically. This rendered commercial banks whose balance sheets were loaded with those bonds potentially insolvent. And that constituted the two main components of the problem confronting us today: a sovereign debt crisis and a banking crisis which are closely interlinked.

The eurozone is now repeating what had often happened in the global financial system. There is a close parallel between the euro crisis and the international banking crisis that erupted in 1982. Then the international financial authorities did whatever was necessary to protect the banking system: they inflicted hardship on the periphery in order to protect the center. Now Germany and the other creditor countries are unknowingly playing the same role. The details differ but the idea is the same: the creditors are in effect shifting the burden of adjustment on to the debtor countries and avoiding their own responsibility for the imbalances.

Interestingly, the terms “center” and “periphery” have crept into usage almost unnoticed. Just as in the 1980’s all the blame and burden is falling on the “periphery” and the responsibility of the “center” has never been properly acknowledged. Yet in the euro crisis the responsibility of the center is even greater than it was in 1982. The “center” is responsible for designing a flawed system, enacting flawed treaties, pursuing flawed policies and always doing too little too late. In the 1980’s Latin America suffered a lost decade; a similar fate now awaits Europe. That is the responsibility that Germany and the other creditor countries need to acknowledge. But there is no sign of this happening.

The European authorities had little understanding of what was happening. They were prepared to deal with fiscal problems but only Greece qualified as a fiscal crisis; the rest of Europe suffered from a banking crisis and a divergence in competitiveness which gave rise to a balance of payments crisis. The authorities did not even understand the nature of the problem, let alone see a solution. So they tried to buy time.

Usually that works. Financial panics subside and the authorities realize a profit on their intervention. But not this time because the financial problems were reinforced by a process of political disintegration. While the European Union was being created, the leadership was in the forefront of further integration; but after the outbreak of the financial crisis the authorities became wedded to preserving the status quo. This has forced all those who consider the status quo unsustainable or intolerable into an anti-European posture. That is the political dynamic that makes the disintegration of the European Union just as self-reinforcing as its creation has been. That is the political bubble I was talking about.

At the onset of the crisis a breakup of the euro was inconceivable: the assets and liabilities denominated in a common currency were so intermingled that a breakup would have led to an uncontrollable meltdown. But as the crisis progressed the financial system has been progressively reordered along national lines. This trend has gathered momentum in recent months. The Long Term Refinancing Operation (LTRO) undertaken by the European Central Bank enabled Spanish and Italian banks to engage in a very profitable and low risk arbitrage by buying the bonds of their own countries. And other investors have been actively divesting themselves of the sovereign debt of the periphery countries.

If this continued for a few more years a break-up of the euro would become possible without a meltdown – the omelet could be unscrambled – but it would leave the central banks of the creditor countries with large claims against the central banks of the debtor countries which would be difficult to collect. This is due to an arcane problem in the euro clearing system called Target2. In contrast to the clearing system of the Federal Reserve, which is settled annually, Target2 accumulates the imbalances. This did not create a problem as long as the interbank system was functioning because the banks settled the imbalances themselves through the interbank market. But the interbank market has not functioned properly since 2007 and the banks relied increasingly on the Target system. And since the summer of 2011 there has been increasing capital flight from the weaker countries. So the imbalances grew exponentially. By the end of March this year the Bundesbank had claims of some 660 billion euros against the central banks of the periphery countries.

The Bundesbank has become aware of the potential danger. It is now engaged in a campaign against the indefinite expansion of the money supply and it has started taking measures to limit the losses it would sustain in case of a breakup. This is creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Once the Bundesbank starts guarding against a breakup everybody will have to do the same.

This is already happening. Financial institutions are increasingly reordering their European exposure along national lines just in case the region splits apart. Banks give preference to shedding assets outside their national borders and risk managers try to match assets and liabilities within national borders rather than within the eurozone as a whole. The indirect effect of this asset-liability matching is to reinforce the deleveraging process and to reduce the availability of credit, particularly to the small and medium enterprises which are the main source of employment.

So the crisis is getting ever deeper. Tensions in financial markets have risen to new highs as shown by the historic low yield on Bunds. Even more telling is the fact that the yield on British 10 year bonds has never been lower in its 300 year history while the risk premium on Spanish bonds is at a new high.

The real economy of the eurozone is declining while Germany is still booming. This means that the divergence is getting wider. The political and social dynamics are also working toward disintegration. Public opinion as expressed in recent election results is increasingly opposed to austerity and this trend is likely to grow until the policy is reversed. So something has to give.

In my judgment the authorities have a three months’ window during which they could still correct their mistakes and reverse the current trends. By the authorities I mean mainly the German government and the Bundesbank because in a crisis the creditors are in the driver’s seat and nothing can be done without German support.

I expect that the Greek public will be sufficiently frightened by the prospect of expulsion from the European Union that it will give a narrow majority of seats to a coalition that is ready to abide by the current agreement. But no government can meet the conditions so that the Greek crisis is liable to come to a climax in the fall. By that time the German economy will also be weakening so that Chancellor Merkel will find it even more difficult than today to persuade the German public to accept any additional European responsibilities. That is what creates a three months’ window.

Correcting the mistakes and reversing the trend would require some extraordinary policy measures to bring conditions back closer to normal, and bring relief to the financial markets and the banking system. These measures must, however, conform to the existing treaties. The treaties could then be revised in a calmer atmosphere so that the current imbalances will not recur. It is difficult but not impossible to design some extraordinary measures that would meet these tough requirements. They would have to tackle simultaneously the banking problem and the problem of excessive government debt, because these problems are interlinked. Addressing one without the other, as in the past, will not work.

Banks need a European deposit insurance scheme in order to stem the capital flight. They also need direct financing by the European Stability Mechanism (ESM) which has to go hand-in-hand with eurozone-wide supervision and regulation. The heavily indebted countries need relief on their financing costs. There are various ways to provide it but they all need the active support of the Bundesbank and the German government.

That is where the blockage is. The authorities are working feverishly to come up with a set of proposals in time for the European summit at the end of this month. Based on the current newspaper reports the measures they will propose will cover all the bases I mentioned but they will offer only the minimum on which the various parties can agree while what is needed is a convincing commitment to reverse the trend. That means the measures will again offer some temporary relief but the trends will continue. But we are at an inflection point. After the expiration of the three months’ window the markets will continue to demand more but the authorities will not be able to meet their demands.

It is impossible to predict the eventual outcome. As mentioned before, the gradual reordering of the financial system along national lines could make an orderly breakup of the euro possible in a few years’ time and, if it were not for the social and political dynamics, one could imagine a common market without a common currency. But the trends are clearly non-linear and an earlier breakup is bound to be disorderly. It would almost certainly lead to a collapse of the Schengen Treaty, the common market, and the European Union itself. (It should be remembered that there is an exit mechanism for the European Union but not for the euro.) Unenforceable claims and unsettled grievances would leave Europe worse off than it was at the outset when the project of a united Europe was conceived.

But the likelihood is that the euro will survive because a breakup would be devastating not only for the periphery but also for Germany. It would leave Germany with large unenforceable claims against the periphery countries. The Bundesbank alone will have over a trillion euros of claims arising out of Target2 by the end of this year, in addition to all the intergovernmental obligations. And a return to the Deutschemark would likely price Germany out of its export markets – not to mention the political consequences. So Germany is likely to do what is necessary to preserve the euro – but nothing more. That would result in a eurozone dominated by Germany in which the divergence between the creditor and debtor countries would continue to widen and the periphery would turn into permanently depressed areas in need of constant transfer of payments. That would turn the European Union into something very different from what it was when it was a “fantastic object” that fired peoples imagination. It would be a German empire with the periphery as the hinterland.

I believe most of us would find that objectionable but I have a great deal of sympathy with Germany in its present predicament. The German public cannot understand why a policy of structural reforms and fiscal austerity that worked for Germany a decade ago will not work Europe today. Germany then could enjoy an export led recovery but the eurozone today is caught in a deflationary debt trap. The German public does not see any deflation at home; on the contrary, wages are rising and there are vacancies for skilled jobs which are eagerly snapped up by immigrants from other European countries. Reluctance to invest abroad and the influx of flight capital are fueling a real estate boom. Exports may be slowing but employment is still rising. In these circumstances it would require an extraordinary effort by the German government to convince the German public to embrace the extraordinary measures that would be necessary to reverse the current trend. And they have only a three months’ window in which to do it.

We need to do whatever we can to convince Germany to show leadership and preserve the European Union as the fantastic object that it used to be. The future of Europe depends on it.

WHY I AM NOT A DISPENSATIONALIST; John Nelson Darby is recognized as the father of dispensationalism later made popular in the United States by Cyrus Scofield's Scofield Reference Bible. Charles Henry Mackintosh, 1820–1896, with his popular style spread Darby's teachings to humbler elements in society and may be regarded as the journalist of the Brethren Movement. CHM popularised Darby more than any other Brethren author. As there was no Christian teaching of a “rapture” before Darby began preaching about it in the 1830s, he is sometimes credited with originating the "secret rapture" theory wherein Christ will suddenly remove His bride, the Church, from this world before the judgments of the tribulation. Dispensationalist beliefs about the fate of the Jews and the re-establishment of the Kingdom of Israel put dispensationalists at the forefront of Christian Zionism, because "God is able to graft them in again," and they believe that in His grace he will do so according to their understanding of Old Testament prophecy. They believe that, while the methodologies of God may change, His purposes to bless Israel will never be forgotten, just as He has shown unmerited favour to the Church, He will do so to a remnant of Israel to fulfill all the promises made to the genetic seed of Abraham. I am not a dispensationalist; it is unbiblical.