Update 1156

On April 26, 2025, Michael Link will present the first split sermon, titled, “Fall Before Spring” and Norbert Link will present the second split sermon, titled, “Sweet Aroma or Foul Odor–Which?”

The live services are available, over video and audio, at http://eternalgod.org/live-services/ (12:30 pm Pacific Time; 1:30 pm Mountain Time; 2:30 pm Central Time; 3:30 pm Eastern Time; 8:30 pm Greenwich Mean Time; 9:30 pm Central European Time). Just click on Connect to Live Stream.

In 1901, Guillermo Marconi sent the first wireless telegraphy message from his base at Poldhu on the Cornish Coast in the UK, to a station at Newfoundland in North America. To say the message was short and sweet was an understatement. Marconi received the single letter, S, sent by Morse telegraphy. The age of transatlantic wireless communication had begun, and like all new technologies, the opportunity for misuse had also commenced. The friction between the still new telephonic technology, and space telegraphy was robust throughout the mid-1800’s, with luminaries of the age arguing the superiority of each.

The development of both telephone and telegraph led to strange attempts to use the devices to communicate with those who have died. This unusual interest was stimulated in part by the odd noise on the wires, or wireless that resulted from electromagnetic signals that some during that era mistook for conversations and signals from beyond the veil of the living. Nonsense, of course, yet rather than seeking God, people of the day devoted their time and money to such evil and demonic pursuits.

Interestingly, the common, and internationally agreed-upon telegraphic signal for crisis or emergency was three dots, followed by three longer dashes, and then three dots once again. These dots and dashes translated into what we came to know as SOS—which was designated around the globe as: Save Our Souls. This was the standard for emergency signals from the 1912 Titanic tragedy, all the way to 1999 when a new global maritime signal convention was put in place.

Many nominal Christians waste time on the search for signals and signs from God. Like the sounds on the telegraph system, people see the hand of God in many strange things. As true Christians however, we have the penultimate sign and promise that we can rely on as we consider Luke 2:12: “And this will be the sign to you: You will find a Babe wrapped in swaddling cloths, lying in a manger.” These simple words are reinforced in Isaiah 9:6: “For unto us a Child is born, Unto us a Son is given; And the government will be upon His shoulder. And His name will be called Wonderful, Counselor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”

These words in the Gospel according to Luke and the Book of Isaiah are familiar to many, but for true Christians, they evoke emotion and confidence in God’s promise of a boundless future and the coming Kingdom of God. In these verses, God made it clear that He loves us and sent His Son to be our Savior. This should result in our having great confidence that God will fulfill His promises and cause each of us to reciprocate with our obedience and faithfulness.

There is a popular post circulating on social media that pictures three young women enjoying coffee together at an outdoor cafe. The post makes the ridiculous suggestion that if you squint at the photo, you will see the face of Jesus Christ in the space between girls. People from various religions and backgrounds around the world have posted as to how moved they were by this. This sort of foolishness is just what Satan would like to have us focus on and become distracted by. God has no need for ridiculous signs, and this sort of thing is tantamount to idol worship.

In the Old Testament, as God was leading Moses and the Israelites out of captivity, he worked through Moses to care for His people and had chosen Moses to deliver them from the Egyptians. No further signs or signals were necessary, though the people eventually chose evil and sin by turning to symbols and idols to comfort them in the wilderness.

Imagine being a disciple during Christ’s ministry on earth. To walk beside the Son of God each day, and to witness miracles. Still, in the case of the apostle Thomas, he sought one more sign that this indeed was the risen Christ standing before him.

Although we do not see God directly in our daily lives, if He has called us, we can be certain that He is there, even when, or perhaps especially when the situation we may be in is tough.Consider Isaiah 41:10: “Fear not, for I am with you; Be not dismayed, for I am your God. I will strengthen you, Yes, I will help you, I will uphold you with My righteous right hand.”

We know that He is there with us because He tells us so in Scripture. We can read many instances in the Bible that begin as follows: This shall be a sign to you. In the case of Jeremiah 44, we read of God’s anger towards those Jews living in Egypt who were worshiping idols and other false Gods. God makes it crystal clear that there is a penalty for such behavior and disobedience to His commandments. He tells His people that their calamity shall be a sign to them of His righteous anger towards them.

Notice the account of this in Jeremiah 44:29: “And this shall be a sign to you, says the LORD, ‘that I will punish you in this place, that you may know that My words will surely stand against you for adversity.”Now, we can also signal our intentions to God. Consider Psalm 119:105: “Your word is a lamp to my feet And a light to my path.”This Scripture illustrates a true Christian’s belief that God’s Word should be the light in our lives. However, the best way to affirm this is to obey Him. The Greek word for obey translates to hearing under authority, or, to listen attentively, and to heed. As Jesus Christ said to His apostles in John 14:15: “If you love Me, keep My commandments.”

So let those of us in God’s true Church focus on sending clear signals to God the Father and His Son, by praying, greeting them each morning and each night, and by obeying and repenting when we fail. God assures us that if we do this, we can have a place in His coming Kingdom.

by Norbert Link

We report on the death of Pope Francis; President Trump’s fight with foreign tourists and the court system; Trump’s peace plans for the war between Russia and Ukraine; lost weapons in Afghanistan; and Italy’s Giorgia Meloni’s visit to Washington.

We speak on Turkey’s hostility against Israel; and address Germany’s coming new government and its botched coalition agreement; as well as interesting German personalities, including Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg and Jens Spahn.

Please view our new StandingWatch program, titled, “The Pope Is Dead… Now What?”

Throughout this section, we have underlined pertinent statements in the quoted articles, for the convenience and quick overview of the reader.

The Pope Is Dead…

AFP and Barron’s wrote on April 21:

“Pope Francis, who died on Monday aged 88, aroused both fervour and fury within the Church… Here are the main disputes, which set ultra-conservatives within the Catholic Church against the pope. 

“Francis in 2021 signed a decree limiting the use of the Latin Mass, reversing a more flexible edict from 2007 by his predecessor Benedict XVI. The decision provoked incomprehension and anger among part of the clergy and Catholics attached to the so-called ‘Tridentine’ Mass — which is conducted entirely in Latin with the priest facing the altar, like the congregation. Some went so far as to accuse him of preventing them from practicing their faith.

“Pope Francis attracted the wrath of several cardinals, the red-hatted prelates who are supposedly his closest collaborators, but also next in command in the hierarchy of the Church. In 2017, Francis spoke out against unnamed ‘traitors’ who were holding back his institutional reforms. The bad blood was aired in public in 2023, when an Italian journalist named then-recently deceased Australian Cardinal George Pell as the author of an anonymous note attacking Francis. In the note, Pell — previously a close advisor to Francis — described the papacy as a ‘disaster in many respects’ and slammed ‘serious failures’ of diplomacy, particularly regarding the Ukraine war.

“The same year, German Cardinal Gerhard Mueller, former prefect of the powerful Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, published a book in which he railed against Francis’s governance.

He denounced an influential ‘coterie’ around Francis, and criticised the pope’s ‘doctrinal confusion’.

“Francis had a particularly conflictual relationship with Georg Gaenswein, private secretary to his predecessor Benedict XVI. After Benedict’s death in 2022, Gaenswein said Francis had ‘broken’ the retired pope’s heart by limiting the use of the Latin Mass. Francis hit back, saying he regretted that Benedict’s death had been ‘instrumentalized’ by ‘people without ethics, who act for partisan ends’.

“In a rare move in 2023, Francis ousted US Bishop Joseph Strickland, one of his fiercest enemies, who had accused the pope of being lax on abortion and too open towards homosexuals and divorcees. In 2024, it was the turn of ultra-conservative Italian bishop Carlo Maria Vigano, who accused Francis of ‘heresy’ and ‘tyrannical’ behaviour. Vigano, a former ambassador of the Holy See to the United States, was excommunicated — expelled outright — for rejecting the authority of Francis, head of the world’s nearly 1.4 billion Catholics.

“In 2023, the Vatican published a document which paved the way for blessings for same-sex couples, provoking an outcry in the conservative Catholic world, particularly in Africa and the United States. The wave of criticism forced the Vatican to make a ‘clarification’ to defend itself from any doctrinal error, while acknowledging it may be ‘imprudent’ to apply it in certain countries. ‘In their opposition to blessings for same-sex couples, the African bishops are criticising what they call European moral decadence or European Catholicism. They include the pope in that,’ Francois Mabille, director of the Geopolitical Observatory of Religion, told AFP in February 2025.

“The Argentine also irritated far-right Catholics with his calls for migrants to be given welcome in the Old Continent, with some warning Europe could lose its Christian identity.”

He also spoke against Trump’s immigration policy and especially the American-Mexican border, and he seemingly advocated open borders, while at the same time closed access for most immigrants to the Vatican State. He also locked down Vatican City during the coronavirus crisis. “His greatest test came in 2018 when he botched a notorious case of clergy sexual abuse in Chile, and the scandal that festered under his predecessors erupted anew” (The Associated Press, April 21).

He died on “Easter Monday,” apparently of a stroke. It will be interesting to see whether the liberals (referred to in the press as the “reform-oriented group”) or the conservatives (the “traditionalists”) win in electing the new pope by about 120 cardinals. The shenanigans behind the scenes were portrayed quite remarkably in the recent award-winning movie, “Conclave.”  Of course, many critics have attacked and rejected the movie. However, the movie might even be harmless in comparison to what really might be going on behind closed doors. Ultimately, the candidate will emerge who is supposed to enhance the development of biblical prophecy. 

Francis’ Anti-Israel Legacy 

Israel 365 News wrote on April 21: 

“[According to] Cardinal Kevin Farrell, ‘… we commend the soul of Pope Francis to the infinite merciful love of the One and Triune God’… Francis was the first pope from the Society of Jesus (the Jesuit Order), the first from the Americas and the Southern Hemisphere, and the first pope born or raised outside Europe since the 8th-century Syrian pope Gregory III. Following Pope Benedict XVI’s resignation on 28 February 2013, a papal conclave elected Bergoglio as his successor on 13 March.

“The pope frequently omitted Judaism when discussing other religions. This was clearly expressed in 2021 when Francis became the first pope to visit Iraq. While there, he hosted an inter-religious prayer service at a ziggurat. The structure is an ancient Mesopotamian site built in the 21st century BCE, built on the purported site of the city of Ur, the birthplace of Biblical Abraham. The prayer event was named ‘Prayer for the sons and daughters of Abraham.’  No Jews were invited to the event… 

“In 2019, Francis and Mohammed VI, King of Morocco, signed a statement about Jerusalem, referring to Israel’s capital as Al-Quds Acharif, the Arabic name for Jerusalem… 

“Pope Francis’ anti-Israel/pro-Palestinian agenda has led him into bizarre theological territory that diverges from traditional Catholicism…

“Pope Francis called for an investigation into claims that Israel is carrying out a ‘genocide’ in Gaza… The Vatican supports a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians that would establish an unprecedented militarized Palestinian state inside Israel’s borders that has been ethnically cleansed of Jews, with its capital in an exclusively Muslim Jerusalem… In 2015, just a few days after the Vatican officially recognized the Palestinian state, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas was granted an audience in the Apostolic Palace. After the meeting, Francis gave Abbas a special medallion, representing the angel of peace ‘destroying the bad spirit of war.’ The Pope explained to Abbas that the gift was appropriate since ‘you are an angel of peace.’”

It will be interesting to see whether Pope Francis’ distorted ideas will be adopted or rejected by the new pope.

The Prophecy of the Popes

Daily Mail wrote on April 21, 2025:

“The 12th-century ‘Prophecy of the Popes’ — reportedly uncovered in the Vatican’s secret archives — claims to predict the identity of Francis’ successor and even foretells the return of Christ.

“The document [starts] with Celestine II in 1143 and [ends] with ‘Peter the Roman’ in 2027… Fanning the flames is the eerie fact that there are currently nine frontrunners to succeed Pope Francis — and three of them are named Peter. 

“The renewed interest has also reignited fears about one of the prophecy’s more chilling predictions: that Judgment Day is near… According to the final entry surrounding Peter the Roman, the ‘last pope’ will preside over the Church during a time of great turmoil, culminating in the destruction of Rome and the end of the papacy. ‘In the final persecution of the Holy Roman Church there will reign Peter the Roman, who will feed his flock amid many tribulations, after which the seven-hilled city will be destroyed and the dreadful Judge will judge the people. The End,’ the last passage of the book reads…

“Although some scholars have claimed the text is a 16th century forgery, Malachy allegedly wrote Prophecy of the Popes in 1139 after receiving a vision during a visit to Rome…”

If the text is not a forgery, but legit, it would have been written under demonic influence, which can be seen, amongst other things, by the wording “dreadful Judge,” in appliance to Jesus.  We know, of course, that Christ could not possibly come back in 2027; and we also know that demons, even though they may know future events, are lying spirits; so one never knows when they lie or when they tell the truth.

Europe Mainly Catholic

Breitbart wrote on April 21: 

“Much of Europe has, historically, been Catholic and remains officially so… In Paris, the bells of the recently restored Notre Dame rung out 88 times for the Pope’s 88 years of age, and the Eiffel Tower will not be illuminated this evening. In churches throughout Catholic Austria, bells will ring simultaneously for ten minutes this afternoon and football matches planned for today across Italy are cancelled in mourning…

“In a statement Catholic-faith politician Prime Minister of Italy Giorgia Meloni said: ‘Pope Francis has returned to the Father’s house… We bid farewell to the Holy Father with hearts full of sorrow, but we know that he is now in the peace of the Lord.’…

“In the United Kingdom Buckingham Palace published a statement from King Charles III [stating] ‘our heavy hearts have been somewhat eased’ by knowing the Pope was able to celebrate Easter before his passing…’”

There is not much difference between the (unbiblical) faith and practices of the Catholic Church and of the Church of England.

Trump’s Fight With (German) Tourists Continues

Newsweek wrote on April 21:

“Two German teenage girls were detained and deported from the United States after arriving in Hawaii without a hotel reservation. The case highlights how minor oversights can trigger severe immigration enforcement under President Donald Trump’s aggressive border policies.

“International travelers face increased scrutiny under the Trump administration’s stringent immigration policies. This case exemplifies how minor oversights can lead to severe consequences, raising concerns about the treatment of tourists and the potential detrimental effect on international travel to the U.S…

“Maria Lepère and Charlotte Pohl, both recent high school graduates from Rostock, Germany, embarked on a world tour, visiting countries like Thailand and New Zealand… Their journey took an unexpected turn when they arrived in Hawaii without pre-booked accommodations. Immigration officials, suspecting potential unauthorized work intentions due to the lack of hotel reservations, detained them. They arrived in Honolulu on March 18, planning to spend five weeks exploring the islands before continuing to California and then Costa Rica following their graduation. The duo spent several days in a detention facility before being deported, despite holding valid travel documents (through ESTA) and having no prior infractions…

“The teens said they were questioned for several hours at Honolulu Airport before allegedly being subjected to full-body scans and strip searches… They were then dressed in green prison uniforms and placed in a holding cell alongside long-term detainees, some reportedly facing serious criminal charges…

“This incident is not isolated, as reports indicate a rise in detentions of European tourists under the current U.S. administration, including the recent detention of three German nationals by border authorities under Trump’s watch. Meanwhile, Germany has issued travel advisories warning its citizens about the threat of deportation under Trump’s rule. The Foreign Ministry said that neither approval through the U.S. ESTA system nor a U.S. visa means people will be granted entry every time.

“The German Foreign Office is monitoring the situation and may engage in diplomatic discussions with U.S. counterparts to address the treatment of German nationals. Travelers are urged to meticulously plan their trips, including securing accommodations in advance, to mitigate the risk of detention or deportation.”

This is SO crazy and SO alarming!!!

The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals Rules Against Trump

The Hill wrote on April 17:

“The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday declined to lift a judge’s order that the Trump administration ‘facilitate’ the return of Kilmar Abrego Garcia…  The 4th Circuit declined to put Xinis’s ruling on hold just one day after the administration filed the appeal, a swift order that came without waiting for Abrego Garcia’s lawyers to file their response… ‘we shall not micromanage the efforts of a fine district judge attempting to implement the Supreme Court’s recent decision,’ U.S. Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson wrote for the unanimous three-judge panel…

“‘The government is asserting a right to stash away residents of this country in foreign prisons without the semblance of due process that is the foundation of our constitutional order,’ he continued. ‘Further, it claims in essence that because it has rid itself of custody that there is nothing that can be done. This should be shocking not only to judges, but to the intuitive sense of liberty that Americans far removed from courthouses still hold dear.’

“Wilkinson, an appointee of former President Reagan, was joined on the panel by U.S. Circuit Judge Robert King, who is an appointee of former President Clinton, and U.S. Circuit Judge Stephanie Thacker, who is an appointee of former President Obama.” 

The Alien Enemies Act of 1798

npr wrote on April 19:

“The act has only been invoked three previous times in U.S. history, most recently during World War II to hold Japanese-American civilians in internment camps. The Trump administration contended it gave them power to swiftly remove immigrants they identified as members of the gang, regardless of their immigration status…” 

What does the Alien Enemies Act of 1798 actually say? Here is the wording: 

“Whenever there is a declared war between the United States and any foreign nation or government, or any invasion or predatory incursion is perpetrated, attempted, or threatened against the territory of the United States by any foreign nation or government, and the President makes public proclamation of the event, all natives, citizens, denizens, or subjects of the hostile nation or government, being of the age of fourteen years and upward, who shall be within the United States and not actually naturalized, shall be liable to be apprehended, restrained, secured, and removed as alien enemies. 

“The President is authorized in any such event, by his proclamation thereof, or other public act, to direct the conduct to be observed on the part of the United States, toward the aliens who become so liable; the manner and degree of the restraint to which they shall be subject and in what cases, and upon what security their residence shall be permitted, and to provide for the removal of those who, not being permitted to reside within the United States, refuse or neglect to depart therefrom; and to establish any other regulations which are found necessary in the premises and for the public safety.” 

Clash Between Trump and the Courts

npr wrote on April 21: 

“In the early hours of Saturday, the U.S. Supreme Court seemed to signal it is losing its patience with the Trump administration. On April 7, the high court clearly said that if the government intends to deport a foreign-born resident, it must notify the individual ‘within a reasonable period of time’ so that the individual has the ability to challenge the removal in court prior to deportation. In the nearly two weeks that followed, however, the Trump administration dragged its feet, avoiding meaningful compliance with the court’s order. Then late Friday afternoon, on Good Friday, the court had a new deportation case on its docket, one that suggested the Trump administration was violating the terms of the earlier order. Racing to the Supreme Court, lawyers for the ACLU told the court that dozens of Venezuelan detainees were about to be deported. They said that the men were notified, in papers written in English, which they didn’t understand, that they were eligible to be deported under the Alien Enemies Act. And, the ACLU said, the men were being loaded on to buses that presumably were going to take them to the airport for deportation. 

“This time the high court acted swiftly, releasing a one-paragraph order so quickly that the court did not even wait for the two dissenters to file their opinion explaining their disagreement. That was not the only extraordinary feature of the court’s order. Although couched in legal terms, the order reeked of mistrust for the government. ‘The government is directed not to remove any member of the putative class [of detainees] from the United States until further order of this court,’ the justices said.

“The court went on to note that the detainees’ case is pending before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, and that pending the outcome in that most conservative court, the solicitor general ‘is invited to file a response’ to the still pending application for review by this court ‘as soon as possible.’ In other words, the court was saying to the administration, whether you win in the Fifth Circuit or not, this isn’t over yet…

“Today, with many Republicans terrified of crossing Trump, it is not clear that Donald Trump could do anything to lose his GOP support in Congress. But in a clash with the Supreme Court, he could lose a lot. So too could the court, because it has few tools to actually make a president do something. And if a president succeeds in defying the court, the whole system of government, and of checks and balances, would be in peril. So, are we in a constitutional crisis?…

“But at some point in the not too distant future, the high court may have to confront the president head on… Chief Justice John Roberts, at his confirmation hearing 20 years ago, opined that ‘judges have to have the courage to make the unpopular decisions when they have to,’ including striking down as unconstitutional acts of the executive. ‘That is the judicial oath,’ he said. But he likely never imagined a president as insistently recalcitrant as Trump.”

Trump’s Attack Becomes More Desperate 

Newsmax wrote on April 20:

“President Donald Trump called the opposition [to his immigration procedures, especially in regard to Garcia] ‘despicable,’ ‘un-American,’ and premised on a ‘blatant and dangerous lie.’… ‘Those lying to the American People on behalf of violent criminals have to be held responsible by the Agencies and the Courts.’… 

“Sen. John Kennedy, R-La., criticized Trump and his administration Sunday for talking about sending American citizen criminals to foreign prisons. Kennedy was asked… if he thought the law allowed sending U.S. citizens who were criminals to foreign prisons. ‘No, Ma’am. Nor does it, nor should it, nor should it be considered appropriate or moral. We have our own laws,’ he said. ‘We shouldn’t send prisoners to foreign countries in my judgment.’

“Trump has said he wants to deport some violent criminals who are U.S. citizens to Salvadoran prisons, a move experts said would violate U.S. law.”

Trump’s lack of support for some of his actions seems to bother him very much. 

Supreme Court to Weigh In on Trump’s Plans to Restrict Birthright Citizenship 

USA Today wrote on April 17: 

“The Supreme Court on Thursday said it would weigh in on the Trump administration’s request that it be allowed to broadly enforce its new restrictions on birthright citizenship while the policy is being litigated. The court said it will hear oral arguments on May 15. 

“The [14^th] amendment states that all ‘persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside.’ The Trump administration maintains that right was intended to help formerly enslaved people after the Emancipation Proclamation and doesn’t cover children of people who entered the country without proper authorization… 

“Twenty Republican attorneys general backed Trump’s Supreme Court appeal, as did gun rights groups. Attorneys for immigrant rights groups… said Trump’s order violates the plain text of the Constitution, common law history, Supreme Court precedent and more than a century of consistent practice.” 

Losing Faith in the USA 

npr wrote on April 21: 

For decades, the U.S. financial system has been regarded as one of the most stable and powerful in the world. Now, there are fears that something unprecedented may be happening as a result of President Trump’s tariffs: Investors everywhere may be losing their faith in the United States… 

“Stocks, U.S. government bonds, and the dollar are all taking a hit at the same time…” 

US Weapons Left Behind in Afghanistan 

BBC News wrote on April 17: 

“Half a million weapons obtained by the Taliban in Afghanistan have been lost, sold or smuggled to militant groups… with the UN believing that some have fallen into the hands of al-Qaeda affiliates. 

“The Taliban took control of around one million weapons and pieces of military equipment – which had mostly been funded by the US… As the Taliban advanced through Afghanistan in 2021, many Afghan soldiers surrendered or fled, abandoning their weapons and vehicles. Some equipment was simply left behind by US forces… 

“This is very much a political issue, and US President Donald Trump has repeatedly said that he will reclaim weapons from Afghanistan. He said that $85bn (£66bn) of advanced weaponry was left there. ‘Afghanistan is one of the biggest sellers of military equipment in the world, you know why? They’re selling the equipment that we left,’ Trump said during his first cabinet meeting of the new administration. ‘I want to look into this. If we need to pay them, that’s fine, but we want our military equipment back.’… 

“Whether Trump will take any action remains to be seen, but, in the meantime, concerns about the spread of weapons in the region and access by militant groups remain unresolved.” 

Meloni in Washington 

Die Welt wrote on April 18: 

“Donald Trump… has alarmed the European Union. And prompted it to undertake previously unthinkable efforts. The EU is now supposed to become a serious global political force… Germany, France, Poland, and Great Britain as the driving forces of a post-Carolingian Europe – this quartet gives hope. But that’s not enough. Because at least one important state is missing from the new alliance: Italy. The country has been almost written off north of the Alps… But that’s unfair. And short-sighted. 

“Unfair because it ignorantly disregards Italy’s historical significance for the formation of Europe. And because Italy was an important founding nation of the European unification process. The contemptuous treatment of Italy is short-sighted because the largest EU state on the Mediterranean coast plays a significant role in the EU’s migration policy.” 

“Italy is needed. Like Donald Trump, Giorgia Meloni is also a nationalist. This is one of the reasons why they are close. Meloni, who wants to play a prominent European role, has been striving to mediate between the EU and the US since Trump’s election as US president… 

“When she was received by the US president at the White House on Thursday evening as the first European head of government, she vigorously countered Trump’s disparaging remarks about President Volodymyr Zelensky with her conviction that Ukraine still deserves Western support. She did, however, agree with Trump in her disdain for all things woke and, like Trump, sees migration as a warning sign for the West.

“The meeting with Trump has not (yet) produced any tangible results. There was a lot of smiling and laughing. But Giorgia Meloni seems wise enough not to allow herself to be expelled from the EU community, even by a fiercely flattering Trump.” 

Italy is indeed an indispensable part of Europe. Not so Great Britain.

Trump’s Peace Proposals

Bild Online published an analysis by Bild deputy editor Paul Ronzheimer on April 24:

“Above all, there is one feeling that characterizes political Kyiv these days: disbelief. The behavior of US President Trump, his threats and insults against the Ukrainian President Zelenskyy – we had almost become accustomed to all of this. But for a long time, no one wanted to believe that Trump really seemed willing to give Russian President Vladimir Putin everything he wanted. But after Trump’s peace plan was confirmed, everything changed…

“It has long been clear to Ukraine: They cannot rely on the US. The other question is: Can Ukraine rely on Europe?…

“Trump has repeatedly announced that he no longer wants to deliver. He wants the deal now. Come what may… It’s not just about the recognition of Crimea, but also about the regions Russia is fighting over in the east and south…

“In fact, that’s Zelensky’s problem: He not only has to negotiate with the US and Russia, but also achieve a result that would be acceptable to the Ukrainian people. Putin, on the other hand, is making maximum demands because he assumes that time is on his side. The calculation: The US will withdraw, stop delivering – and Europe cannot provide what Ukraine needs. The result would be a situation that is even worse for Ukraine than it already is. An absolute dilemma…”

Ultimately, Russia and Ukraine will unite.

Boris Johnson Explodes at Donald Trump

Express wrote on April 24:

“The former Prime Minister has raged against Washington over the treatment of Ukraine in peace proposals… claiming they reward Vladimir Putin in five key ways… Mr Johnson wrote: ‘Putin indiscriminately butchers more Ukrainian civilians, killing and injuring 100 in Kyiv including children. And what is his reward under the latest peace proposals?’

“The former Conservative leader then listed the five ‘rewards’ he believed President Putin was getting from the current US deal.

“He wrote: ‘1, The right to keep sovereign Ukrainian territory he has taken by violence and in breach of international law, 2, The right to control Ukraine’s destiny by forbidding Nato membership, 3, The lifting of sanctions against Russia, 4, An economic partnership with America, 5, The chance to rebuild his armed forces for the next attack in a few short years’ time.’

“Mr Johnson, 60, added: ‘As for Ukraine – what do they get after three years of heroic resistance against a brutal and unprovoked invasion? What is their reward for the appalling sacrifices they have made – for the sake, as they have endlessly been told, of freedom and democracy around the world? Apart from the right to share their natural resources with the United States they get nothing. What is there in this deal that can realistically stop a third Russian invasion? Nothing…’

“It comes as President Trump launched an extraordinary attack on the Ukrainian wartime leader after the latter said Ukraine was not prepared to recognise Russian control of the Crimea, a part of Ukraine annexed by the Kremlin in 2014…”Subsequently, in response to Russia’s attack on Ukraine on Thursday, Trump wrote: “I am not happy with the Russian strikes on KYIV. Not necessary, and very bad timing. Vladimir, STOP! 5000 soldiers a week are dying. Let’s get the Peace Deal DONE!”

Turkey Greatest Danger to Israel 

The Atlantic wrote on April 19: 

“Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, its would-be sultan, dismantles the country’s secular democracy… While Erdoğan consolidates power at home and prepares to project it abroad, he has set the stage for a clash with Israel. Indeed, Turkey has quickly emerged as perhaps the greatest danger to the Jewish state in the Middle East, escalating the threat of a conflict he won’t be able to avoid… 

“Erdoğan’s grand designs appear to include establishing himself as the Muslim world’s principal champion of anti-Zionism. The president has routinely hosted Hamas leaders for official visits and has referred to the architects of the October 7 attack as a ‘liberation group.’…  In turning against Israel and in favor of Hamas, Erdoğan is riding a wave of anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism that has been rising in Turkey since at least the 1980s, especially on the secular left… 

“The Turkish president has intensified a long-held desire in his country to gain greater distance from the United States and NATO…” 

Merz’s Coalition Deal: ‘Betrayal’ of Germany? 

The Week (UK) wrote on April 20: 

“When the incoming chancellor, Friedrich Merz, won the election in February,  he promised to be bold and brave: to tighten our borders, unshackle our low-growth economy, bolster our defences, and wean us off our dependence on the United States. Last week… the CDU leader unveiled his coalition deal with the SPD – and it was full of the same tired old policies: no military conscription; no social and tax reform; no major migration measures… With war raging in Europe, the far-right on the rise, and the US intent on destroying the global economic order, we need our leaders to be courageous. Instead, we have a ‘coalition of the timid.’… 

“It had barely begun, but the honeymoon is definitely over for Merz… His approval ratings have plunged ten points since the election. The world needs Germany’s new leader to succeed… The stakes are incredibly high… With liberalism, freedom and democracy under threat, it’s a time for ‘giants’ – yet sadly we have no Helmut Kohl, no Gerhard Schröder, no Merkel. All of them have experience of governing during international crises. Our incoming chancellor and his coalition partners do not…” 

Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg Suddenly in Favor of Conscription 

ZDF Heute wrote on April 18: 

“[Former Defense Minister] Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg… spoke out… in favor of reintroducing conscription: ‘I was a supporter of conscription and I still am today, if it is properly implemented. We can and should return to that point…’ As Defense Minister, he was responsible for the suspension of conscription in 2011… ‘We were faced with the decision: Can we still fulfill our alliance obligations (…) or can we afford a non-functional conscription?’ 

“We were dealing with a conscription period of ‘only six months’. In six months, you barely learn to distinguish a combine harvester from a tank. At that time, we only recruited 16 percent of young men. We had to fear that conscription would be completely abolished by the Federal Constitutional Court… At the same time, there is a… need to bring a Bundeswehr that has been run down for decades to a level (…) that allows it to act in some form both in the European context and in a tense NATO context…'” 

Spahn on the Rise 

Bild Online wrote on April 20: 

“BILD reported that Merz wants to appoint former Health Minister Jens Spahn as parliamentary group leader. Only the final go-ahead from CSU leader Markus Söder (58) is still missing. According to BILD information, the appointment could officially be made as early as the end of April at the CDU party conference. Or shortly before Merz’s swearing-in as Chancellor on May 6th… 

“The Spahn appointment is causing a stir in the party and parliamentary group – and it is also causing resentment among some… Critics cite the debate Spahn sparked about how to deal with the AfD as an example. He believes: It needs to become more normal… Added to this is the fear of many in the parliamentary group about Spahn’s past as Corona Health Minister, and long-simmering scandals surrounding mask deals… 

“Conservative CSU MPs, who appreciate Spahn’s course on migration policy, for example, are not the only ones satisfied with Spahn’s solution at the parliamentary group’s leadership. According to BILD, a ‘young group’ in the parliamentary group supports Spahn… Merz has already decided on Spahn, as BILD reported. The SPD, but especially the Greens, are barraging criticism of the appointment. The soon-to-be opposition party is targeting Spahn…” 

Die Welt wrote on April 15:

“Jens Spahn (CDU) has sharply criticized the charter flights planned by the outgoing federal government for people from Afghanistan to Germany. ‘I find this fundamentally wrong and presumptuous,’ said Spahn… The caretaker government ‘doesn’t even have a majority in parliament,’ complained the CDU politician. ‘Our coalition agreement states very clearly: The reception programs should end…’ 

“The CDU and SPD agree ‘that these flights must be stopped… We don’t want any more flights from Afghanistan to Germany, but rather fly criminals and threats back to Afghanistan,’ Spahn emphasized.” 

Acknowledgement and Disclaimer:

These Current Events are compiled and commented on by Norbert Link. We gratefully acknowledge the many contributions of news articles from our readership. The publication of articles in this section is not to be viewed as an endorsement or approval as to contents or accuracy of the selected articles, but they are published for the purpose of pointing at worldwide developments in the light of biblical end-time prophecy and godly instruction. Our own comments are provided in italics.

What is the “Oral Law?” When we read of Jesus’s interactions with the Pharisees, we find that they had many laws and procedures that were not mentioned directly in the Law that God inspired Moses to write down. So, did the Pharisees or their predecessors create these, what could be termed oral law, sometime after the close of the Old Testament period?

Actually, the oral law was first mentioned directly in the book of Deuteronomy, and the necessity for oral law arises in the book of Exodus, and it may well be referred to in the book of Genesis, as will be mentioned later. So, what is the oral law, and why was it necessary, and when were parts of it created? In actual fact, there are three basic categories of oral law, each with a different purpose.

What we mean by the term oral law can be described loosely as additions to the written Law, sometimes called the Torah, which are needed if one is to carry out specific commanded activities in the way God intended. In other words, for some of the specific commands that God gave to His people, you could not possibly carry them out as God intended, based on what is written in the text. You have a need for additional instruction if you are to correctly carry out the specific commands in the fashion and manner in which God intended. This is one category of these additions to the written Law.

The second category contains additions to the written Law which are expansions on the intent of specific laws, which enable men to apply that intent to situations, or cases, not specifically mentioned in the text. In this second case, there are specific laws governing a particular type of situation. Then you come up with a situation which is of the same general type but is not specifically addressed, so you look for the intent behind the first judgement, to discern the principle and then you apply that same principle in the new situation which is not specifically mentioned in the text. The reasoning is that God would want the same intent followed in all situations in cases that are of the same category.

Then there is the third category of the oral law. This consists of additions to the written Law which are voluntarily assumed obligations, which then became binding on the people. Category three involves things that the people of their own free will have bound themselves to observe or to do. They were never specifically commanded by God. But the leaders and the people voluntarily assumed the responsibility for doing these things, and thereafter their descendants were bound to continue observing them in the same fashion.

An example of the first category is in Exodus 29:38-42, “Now this is what you shall offer on the altar: two lambs of the first year, day by day continually. One lamb you shall offer in the morning, and the other lamb you shall offer at twilight. With one lamb shall be one-tenth of an ephah of flour mixed with one-fourth of a hin of pressed oil, and one-fourth of a hin of wine as a drink offering. And the other lamb you shall offer at twilight; and you shall offer it with the grain offering and the drink offering, as in the morning, for a sweet aroma, an offering made by fire to the LORD. This shall be a continual burnt offering throughout your generations at the door of the tabernacle of meeting before the LORD, where I will meet you to speak with you.”

A number of questions arise from this instruction. We know the age of the lambs, and Numbers 28:3 states that the lambs were to be without blemish. Numbers 28:4 states that when we read twilight in Exodus 29, we read evening in Numbers 28, however they are both translated from the same two Hebrew words.  Actually, Young’s literal translation and two other literal translations correctly translate these two words as “between the evenings”; that is between sunset and nightfall. The New King James Bible also says in the margin that “twilight” literally means, “between the two evenings.” The first question to be asked is; who provides the lambs? Are they raised by Levites, or do some local farmers sell them to the priests? Or do volunteers offer them? Does it matter if they are male or a female?

The next question is; who sacrifices them? Is it only the high priest or any priest? And next; were they sacrificed as a whole or in parts? And does it matter what time of day these burnt offerings are made? Morning could be between sunrise and noon and evening might be between noon and sunset. The term evening, as distinguished from twilight, is believed by some to mean late afternoon, but still, how late? However, when literally translated as “between the evenings”, as mentioned above, this strongly indicates the correct time for the offering was just after sunset. When considering these questions, we must remember that the answers are important to God. And He must have informed Aaron through Moses, or Aaron personally, how He wanted these procedures to be carried out.

When we compare this with the instructions regarding the burnt offering in Leviticus 1:10-13, we find that, in this case, the sheep had to be male and cut into various pieces, parts of it washed, and it was to be laid on the altar by the priests, Aaron’s sons, and burnt. If the burnt offering was a bull, according to Leviticus 1:6, the one bringing the offering had to skin the animal. Even the place where the animal was to be killed and what to do with its blood was specified.

Other sacrifices had different requirements for how they were to be carried out. For example, in Leviticus 5:6 we read regarding a trespass offering, “…and he shall bring his trespass offering to the LORD for his sin which he has committed, a female from the flock, a lamb or a kid of the goats as a sin offering. So the priest shall make atonement for him concerning his sin.”

Further detailed instructions were given for this offering depending on the financial situation of the one bringing it. Actually, for all the sacrifices, God gave very specific instructions as to how they were to be carried out. So we would expect the morning and evening sacrifices to also have more specific instructions than we read in the text. 

We must always remember the example of Nadab and Abihu who did something God had not required. In Leviticus 10:1-2, “Then Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, each took his censer and put fire in it, put incense on it, and offered profane fire before the LORD, which he had not commanded them. So fire went out from the LORD and devoured them, and they died before the LORD.” Here God shows us that He considers obedience of His laws important especially when carried out by the priests, as we read in Leviticus 10:3. “And Moses said to Aaron, ‘This is what the LORD spoke, saying: “By those who come near Me I must be regarded as holy; And before all the people I must be glorified.”’”

Therefore, for the morning and evening sacrifices to be offered in a consistent manner, more instructions were needed, and these would have to have been passed down from the older priests to the younger ones following, learning from them. These instructions would form a part of the oral law.

Another example of the necessity for oral law is found in Deuteronomy 24:1-4. “When a man takes a wife and marries her, and it happens that she finds no favor in his eyes because he has found some uncleanness in her, and he writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, when she has departed from his house, and goes and becomes another man’s wife, if the latter husband detests her and writes her a certificate of divorce, puts it in her hand, and sends her out of his house, or if the latter husband dies who took her as his wife, then the former husband who divorced her must not take her back to be his wife after she has been defiled; for that is an abomination before the LORD, and you shall not bring sin on the land which the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance.”

This Law was given in the fortieth year of the wanderings of the children of Israel in the wilderness, just before they were about to enter the Promised Land. And as a functioning society, divorces would have taken place. So, as we read the instruction, what questions arise? The most obvious one, and most important, is what is defined as uncleanness.

In Matthew 1:19, we see the example of Joseph, the husband of Mary, of what he intended to do when Mary was found to be pregnant.  “Then Joseph her husband, being a just man, and not wanting to make her a public example, was minded to put her away secretly.” He assumed she had committed adultery and that would be considered to be uncleanness.

What else could constitute uncleanness?  Anything that they thought was uncleanness, or were there some specified categories?

This became quite a matter of dispute in the days of Jesus. At this time, there were two schools of Pharisees, Shammai and Hillel. There is some debate over which of the two schools was more liberal than the other, especially regarding matrimonial law, but the more liberal one allowed more reasons for divorce. However, Jesus made clear what God’s Will regarding marriage and divorce was.

You may remember that some of the Pharisees came to Him to ask for what cause could a man put away his wife? Could it be for just any reason that they might think of? Matthew 19:3-9, “The Pharisees also came to Him, testing Him, and saying to Him, ‘Is it lawful for a man to divorce his wife for just any reason?’ And He answered and said to them, ‘Have you not read that He who made them at the beginning “made them male and female,” and said, “For this reason a man shall leave his father and mother and be joined to his wife, and the two shall become one flesh”? So then, they are no longer two but one flesh. Therefore what God has joined together, let not man separate.’ They said to Him, ‘Why then did Moses command to give a certificate of divorce, and to put her away?’ He said to them, ‘Moses, because of the hardness of your hearts, permitted you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and whoever marries her who is divorced commits adultery.’”

It was a very prominent issue in His day and that’s why they brought it to Him. They weren’t seriously seeking enlightenment. They said this is such a hot issue, with such strong feelings about it, that no matter what He said, it was going to offend people. So, in the days of Moses, what constituted uncleanness had to be defined if it included more than sexual immorality, and not just for any reason, as mentioned in Matthew 19. Also, what does she do with this certificate of divorce? Does she use it to prove that she is legally able to remarry, or is it stored in an official registry with the Levites? Does it have a set format and does the reason for the divorce have to be stated?

The second category of oral law consists of situations that arise that are not mentioned directly in the written law but have similarities. Where questions arose in this type of situation, the people were to go to the priests as is mentioned in Deuteronomy 17:8-11: “If a matter arises which is too hard for you to judge, between degrees of guilt for bloodshed, between one judgement or another, or between one punishment or another, matters of controversy within your gates, then you shall arise and go up to the place which the LORD your God chooses. And you shall come to the priests, the Levites, and to the judge there in those days, and inquire of them; they shall pronounce upon you the sentence of judgement. You shall do according to the sentence which they pronounce upon you in that place which the LORD chooses. And you shall be careful to do according to all that they order you. According to the sentence of the law in which they instruct you, according to the judgement which they tell you, you shall do; you shall not turn aside to the right hand or the left from the sentence which they pronounce upon you.”

A typical example of such a situation could be the instance of a master cutting off his slave’s finger. Would that entitle the slave to receive freedom from slavery? The law specifically states in Exodus 21:26-27, “If a man strikes the eye of his male or female servant, and destroys it, he shall let him go free for the sake of his eye. And if he knocks out the tooth of his male or female servant, he shall let him go free for the sake of his tooth.” This has no mention of a finger, so a judgement has to be made if there is a dispute in the matter. It can be seen from Deuteronomy 17:11, that the priests would instruct the people in these matters so they would know how to judge similar matters in the future.

However, we must remember today that the principle of the oral law still exists in the practice of binding and loosing. The leadership of the ministry today still has the responsibility to make decisions regarding certain practices within the spirit and intent of God’s Law that are not in the written Law.

There is a Law that forbids taking certain items as security for a debt. Deuteronomy 24:6 states, “No man shall take the lower or upper millstone in pledge, for he takes one’s living in pledge.” So, what about a stove used for cooking? Or even some other essential item? Would this also be counted as one’s living? Again, a decision needed to be made about this question.

Now it is interesting, and this has nothing to do with the Biblical period, but in the 18^th century, in the closed Jewish ghettos in Eastern Europe, a question made its way to the Rabbis. Can a man who has lent money to a certain family demand that the wife’s pearls be held as a pledge? Why pearls, you might ask? Because in that closed community, the pearls were the highest and most important part of her adornment. And every man would try to give his wife more than any other kind of jewelry, a quality string of pearls. And she usually would wear them, especially on the Sabbath, as a means of adorning herself to show her delight in the Sabbath. If she suddenly appeared one Sabbath without the pearls, there would be an obvious statement made without having to say it in so many words, that her family was so poor that she had to pawn her pearls. It would be a significant blow to the prestige and status, and the way the family was regarded in the community. So, it was ruled that the man could keep the pearls during the week, but had to return them to her by Friday afternoon for her to wear on the Sabbath, so no one else would know, to avoid embarrassment.

This has similarities to the principle in the Bible, which is mentioned about the man’s garments. Exodus 22:26-27, “If you ever take your neighbor’s garment as a pledge, you shall return it to him before the sun goes down. For that is his only covering, it is his garment for his skin. What will he sleep in? And it will be that when he cries to Me, I will hear, for I am gracious.” This shows that you must give it back to him before nightfall because he needs it at night to cover himself. That was the same rationale that was applied to the pearls. They were applying oral law to situations that were never even dreamt of in the Biblical legislation, to keep the spirit and intent as they understood it.

Jeremiah 17:21-22 would need some determination. “Thus says the LORD: ‘Take heed to yourselves, and bear no burden on the Sabbath day, nor bring it in by the gates of Jerusalem; nor carry a burden out of your houses on the Sabbath day, nor do any work, but hallow the Sabbath day, as I commanded your fathers.’” The obvious question here is, what constitutes a burden? In Christ’s day, the Pharisees considered any amount of food heavier than a dried fig to be a burden. That was contained in their oral law. Actually, carrying was only one of their thirty-nine activities that were prohibited on the Sabbath. Of course, these thirty-nine activities were broken down into many sub-activities to help the people understand what physical activities would be a cause of breaking the Sabbath commandment. 

We have to understand here that most of their oral law was unbiblical. In Matthew 23, Christ condemns the Scribes and Pharisees because of the additional burdens they placed on the people that God did not require. So we cannot judge our behavior today by their oral law. Regarding the Sabbath, it was wrong, as Christ explains. That also goes for eating without “washed” hands (see below) or for Corban or treating Samaritans as dogs and unclean, or refusing to speak with a woman in public.

Mark 7:6-9 describes what Christ taught about the commandments of men. “He answered and said to them, ‘Well did Isaiah prophesy of you hypocrites, as it is written: “This people honors Me with their lips, But their heart is far from Me. And in vain they worship Me, Teaching as doctrines the commandments of men.” For laying aside the commandment of God, you hold the tradition of men—the washing of pitchers and cups, and many other such things you do.’ He said to them, ‘All too well you reject the commandment of God, that you may keep your tradition.’”

(To Be Continued)

Lead Writer: Paul Niehoff (Australia)

compiled by Dave Harris

“The Pope Is Dead… Now What?” is the title of a new StandingWatch program, presented by Evangelist Norbert Link. Here is the summary:

Pope Francis aroused much anger and fury within the Catholic Church, dividing the Church between the “reform-oriented group” and the “traditionalists.” This program addresses the main disputes and wonders what position the next pope will adopt. We also address a prophecy about popes that gives us food for thought. Will the next pope be the last?

“Der Papst ist tot… was nun?” is the title of a new AufPostenStehen program, presented by Norbert Link. This German program covers the same topics as described above.

“Unentdeckte Sünde – Der Grund für unsere anhaltenden Probleme?” the Offertory for the Last Day of Unleavened Bread presented by Robert Macher, is now posted. Title in English: “Undiscovered Sin – The Reason For Our Ongoing Problems?”

A new Member Letter (April 2025) has been posted and mailed to our subscribers. Pastor Dave Harris draws a contrast with nominal Christianity and those who have the assurance of being true Christians, adding that we must stay strong and not let down.

“Abraham’s Calling” is the latest video in our Bible Story Series on YouTube.

“The Gift God Really Wants,” the Offertory for the Last Day of Unleavened Bread presented by Kalon Mitchell, is now posted.

“Who Are the Two Witnesses?” the sermon for the Last Day of Unleavened Bread presented by Norbert Link, is now posted. Here is the summary:

What does the Bible tell us about the Two Witnesses? Are they Moses and Elijah? Will they possibly be raised from the dead to fulfill their roles as the Two Witnesses? Or are they angels? What about Enoch or John the Baptist? How should we understand the miracles which the Two Witnesses will perform? What will the Two Witnesses preach? When will their resurrection from the dead take place?