How We Know the Signs of the Times are Being Fulfilled

200 years ago, when war between England and France spread across half the globe, many believed they were seeing "the Sign of the Times." However, Bible scholars of that generation said, ‘This is not the end. The good news of the kingdom has not been preached worldwide.’ (Matthew 24:14)

150 years ago, Babylon the Great – all the world’s false religions taken as a conglomerate – was so strong she crowned and removed kings, made laws, punished wrongdoers, and collected taxes. (Revelation 18:1-4) Even in pre-Constitution America, churches were given parishes by the state. They too made laws, collected taxes and punished wrongdoers. Today, there are only ten countries remaining in Europe where the state gives money to the church, and every one of those countries gives taxpayers the right to opt out of supporting the churches. In most countries today churches have no power over politicians and little over the people; in polls taken nowadays "none" is the fastest-growing reply to 'What church do you belong to?' In the United States there is a law - rarely enforced - against churches influencing elections. There is more and more talk about removing the churches' tax-exempt status. The Bible foretells that the governments will soon turn on religion. 150 years ago such a thing was unthinkable. But if religions were outlawed tomorrow there would be very little protest from the general population.

 

125 years ago, people had to be scratching their heads when they read in the Bible that there would be "from heaven great signs." (Luke 21:11) But within 10 years from the Wright Brothers first powered flight, the airplane was being used 'from heaven' to send terrifying weapons to the earth. Missiles and rockets soon followed.

110 years ago, no one would have found it noteworthy for someone or some group to say “Peace and Security!” Peace was the norm right up until World War broke out. When world events in the near future prompt a cry of ‘Peace and Security!’ it will be a significant departure from what we've become used to. (1 Thessalonians 5:3)

100 years ago, if anyone had said, “Where is this 'coming' he promised? Ever since our ancestors died, everything goes on as it has since the beginning of creation,” (2 Peter 3:3, 4) it would have been a reasonable question. Anyone who has said it since World War One, however, can be viewed as exactly what the prophecy calls them: ridiculous.

75 years ago, anyone who suggested that man had the potential to ruin the earth would have been locked up in an asylum. (Revelation 11:18) The planet was seen as a huge, self-regulating entity that puny man certainly couldn't harm. That view changed with the detonation of atomic bombs in the 1940s. 

 

When the world calmed down after WWII, people tried to go back to normal lives. But they were shocked out of their complacency in the late Fifties when books like Rachel Carson's “Silent Spring” exposed the fact that, rather than “Better living through chemistry,” as the ads were saying, mankind’s chemicals were threatening to destroy the earth. 

 

Today no one questions the very real possibility of man ruining the earth.

65 years ago, The Watchtower Announcing Jehovah’s Kingdom reached a milestone 100 languages, giving it the ability to tell 85% of the world’s population the "Good news" (Matthew 24:14). The other 15% represent languages spoken by fewer than 10,000 people each, and in most cases those individuals are fluent in other, more common languages. In the years since, however, the number of languages of The Watchtower has continued to grow. 

 

Whether you agree or disagree with the teachings of The Watchtower, it cannot be denied that its message has consistently been the "good news of the kingdom", as Jesus foretold would be declared. Today it is the most widely circulated magazine on Earth. Jw.org, is the most widely translated website on earth, currently in over 1000 languages, available to more than 98.8% of the earth’s population. There is virtually no person on earth whose only language is so obscure that he cannot hear the good news of the kingdom. 

To put that number in perspective, the official website of the Catholic Church is in 10 languages (if you count Latin). The next largest 'Christian' religion's official website, for the world's Baptists, is in 7 languages. The Mormon website claims 100 languages, though many of them are machine-generated and, in any case, its message is not the good news of the kingdom. Their message seems to be 'Join the Mormon Church.' Few other religions even have an official, worldwide website.

 

That may seem like religious propaganda, but as we pointed out above, when people in Napoleon's day believed they were seeing the sign, Bible scholars pointed to Matthew 24:14 as a roadblock: The Good News of the Kingdom needed to be preached in ALL the earth before the end came, and that hadn't happened. Even as Bible societies proliferated over the next century their message was consistently, 'Join our church' or 'Buy a Bible'; It was not, 'Let me explain the Good News of the Kingdom.'

60 years ago began what has been called ‘The Golden Age of Terrorism.’ Jesus foretold that the last days would be marked by “fearful sights.” (Luke 21:11) According to Greek scholar A.T. Robertson, the word translated fearful sights means: 

“Terrors. This rare word phobêthra is used only here in the N.T. It is from phobeô, to frighten, and occurs only in the plural as here.” 

While it’s true that people could have understood “terrors” in many ways over the centuries, what we now think of as “terrorism” began in the 1960s. The first mass shooting of random people on a campus happened in Texas in 1966; plane hijackings proliferated from the 1960s on; Muslims killed 11 Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics, and held 56 Americans hostage for a year in 1979 and 80 in Iran. Combined with the ‘terrors’ of airliners flown into buildings, nuclear weapons mounted on missiles, satellite surveillance, stealth drones firing rockets, air-borne radiation from broken reactors and other pollution coming down “from the heavens,” we have seen unprecedented ‘fearful sights and great signs’ in our lifetime.

This generation: Jesus said quite explicitly “when you see all these things, know that he is near at the doors…Truly I say to you that this generation will BY NO MEANS pass away until all these things happen.”  (Matthew 24:33, 34) Since the things discussed here have stretched over the past 110 years or so, there could be no one person who saw them all. But the word "you" here is plural. Jesus was speaking to a group: those future followers of his he called 'brothers', who did see - and understood that they were seeing - the Sign of the Times beginning in World War One. As they aged they also actively shared their observations, and discussed the significance of them, with other younger 'brothers'. The last possible associates of that generation are now in their fifties or older. BY NO MEANS will they all die before the end comes. 

If you struggle with that concept, here's a perhaps not-very-good illustration: The Star Trek show called "The Next Generation" was set a little more than a century after the original series. The title and the story lines had little to do with the children or grandchildren of the original characters. Rather, the term 'Next Generation' described how this new crew was drastically different - in the thinking, the technology, and the problems they faced - from the original crew. In the same vein, the world we live in today, despite computers, the internet, cell phones, walking on the moon,etc., is the same mess that began in the 20th century. A new 'generation' - with a completely different world experience from what we are living through now - would be what? Flying cars? No. How about World peace, clean air, free energy, food for all? That would certainly be a new generation. But it will BY NO MEANS begin until this generation sees the end of the current drama.

 

Please feel free to leave a comment. To read another of my columns on a similar subject, click here. 

Bill K. Underwood is the author of several novels and one non-fiction self-help book, all available at Amazon.com. You can help support this site by purchasing one of his books.

End-of-the-World rumors surround Gulf oil spill

 

BP announced that the cost of their cleanup effort in the Deepwater Horizon Gulf oil spill has surpassed 3 billion dollars. I'm sure we all weep for them...

What can I say about the Gulf oil spill that hasn't already been written?

The spill has been going on long enough now that the conspiracy theorists are having a field day. Some of their conjecture is bizarre; but some of it makes you wonder.

•  Example: BP's cleanup plan, filed months ago, projects work continuing until August, yet the 562-page report makes no mention of hurricanes or tropical storms. (Did no one tell them that this is hurricane season?) According to Massachusetts congressman Ed Markey, that rumor is absolutely true. Several news outlets also reported that the plan includes efforts to be taken with walruses. There are no walruses in the gulf. Oh, and if you need help with wildlife, don't call the number the plan provides for a national wildlife expert: he's been dead for years.
•  Example: There are rumors that it's actually starting to rain oil along the Gulf coast. When I first heard that, I completely discounted the idea. After all, for oil to come down as rain, it would first have to evaporate. And if oil evaporated, there would be no sense in spending billions to clean it up, right? The official website of NOAA, the government's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, when asked about the possibility of a hurricane lifting and raining oil, says: "No. Hurricanes draw water vapor from a large area, much larger than the area covered by oil, and rain is produced in clouds circulating in the hurricane." Nevertheless, there are several videos on YouTube claiming that it rained oil in parts of Louisiana, Mississippi and Florida, and some of the video is compelling. There is also a news story about plants dying in a ten mile swath across Shelby and Tipton counties in Tennessee near the Mississippi river. Your choice who to believe.
•  Example: The spill is not just about the oil. Depending on the well, oil can spew other 'volatile organic compounds.' There are several sites on the Net claiming this spill is emitting Hydrogen Sulfide at levels of 1,200 parts per billion, far beyond the 'safe' level of 5 or 10 ppb; benzene at 1000 times the safe level; Methylene Chloride at 50 times what humans can safely tolerate. That sounds ominous; however, I have to wonder, where did they get their information? BP sure isn't saying... I searched their site for either 'benzene' or 'hydrogen sulfide' and came up empty. The NOAA site referenced earlier is likewise silent on the subject. And the EPA, while difficult to decipher, seems to be saying that H2S levels in the air of the Louisiana coast are at .1 ppb. Who to believe?
•  Example: There are several sites howling calamity regarding BP's use of the dispersant Corexit 9500, and their use of it in unprecedented amounts. Conspiracy theorists particularly love the detail that the EPA told BP to use something else and BP refused, giving as their reason that Corexit ceases to be dangerous after a month, whereas the substitute the EPA wanted is harmful for years. Further, some are claiming that BP is using the dispersant underwater, a use for which it was not designed. The reason given - by the conspiracy theorists - for their doing so? Keeping the oil underwater, so we can't see the huge stain spreading on the surface. And keeping the vast majority of the oil from washing onto the beaches until after the media has moved on to other, more pressing disaster stories. Regardless, according to a story in the European Union Times, Russia's Ministry of Natural Resources warned Russian President Medvedev that use of Corexit in such large amounts will result in toxic rain polluting most of eastern North America. But when I went to the Russian Ministry's own website I found no mention of any such report. Definitely a believable story, but is it true?

Lastly, there is a whole raft of conspiracy theorists out there saying that this oil spill will bring about the end of the world.

•  Example: The Deepwater Horizon well begins under 5,000 feet of water, then drills down some 30,000 feet. Self-proclaimed 'oilfield chaplain' Lindsey Williams claims there is no way to safely drill that deep, as the pressure at that depth creates an 'artesian well' effect that is uncontrollable. Sort of the 'if man were meant to fly...' mentality.
•  Example: "This leak will never stop...when it alters the Gulf Stream and the North Atlantic currents, prepare for an INSTANT ICE AGE..the arctic air will rush in and the methane release from this leak will cause the -150 degree stratospheric air to sink." Yeah, I saw that movie, too...
•  Example: There are actually pundits proclaiming that the Deepwater Horizon well cracked the 'mantle' (I think they mean the crust; the mantle is below the crust) of the earth, and now the surface of the earth will crack and splinter and destroy the world as we know it. I don't think that one deserves comment.

There are no simple comments to make about this disaster. While some rumors may cause a chuckle, I certainly don't mean to make light of this serious situation. Several oil industry experts - speaking anonymously, of course - have already stated that BP was criminally careless with this well, and have suggested that their other well sites need a closer look.

Was this catastrophe caused by greed and carelessness? Absolutely. Does it add to the fulfillment of the prophecy that man would be 'ruining the earth' as the end approaches? (Revelation 11:18) Certainly. But mostly, it adds more proof to the wisdom that "mere mortals can't run their own lives; men and women don't have what it takes to take charge of life." (Jeremiah 10:23)

Your comments are welcome.To read another of my columns on this subject, click here.

Bill K. Underwood is the author of several novels and one non-fiction self-help book, all available at Amazon.com.

Still think global warming is a myth?

The Plaza San Marcos in Venice frequently floods at high tide. When it was constructed in the 12th century, it replaced grass, not ocean.

flickr.com

 

Take any position on anything, and there will always be a group that disagrees with you. Present facts; there will be skeptics with other facts.

Are there facts that support the argument that the earth's climate is changing? Despite Phoenix having just gone through the coldest December on record, the unequivocal answer is: Absolutely.

Should you be worried about pesticides?

“Zika Virus has been around for decades. In fact, it was first observed in monkeys in 1947, when researchers from the Rockefeller Foundation were conducting a research for Yellow Fever in the Zika Forest of Uganda. Instances of Zika virus in humans arose every now and then, but cases were mostly in equatorial regions. The symptoms were also mild enough that it could be left alone until it clears within a week, just like any normal fever,” says an article in Tech Times.  

Florida now has confirmed cases of Zika. Miami is spraying a strong insecticide to kill mosquitoes. The main ingredient in that insecticide is called Naled.

“Naled is one of a class of insecticides referred to as organophosphates. These chemicals act by interfering with ...an enzyme that is essential for the proper working of the nervous systems of both humans and insects…Severe poisoning will affect the central nervous system, producing incoordination, slurred speech, loss of reflexes, weakness, fatigue… Naled is highly to moderately toxic to birds… Naled is toxic to most types of aquatic life… Naled is highly toxic to bees… Protective clothing must be worn when handling Naled. (Given that, what do you see wrong in the picture above?) …Basic manufacturer: Valent U.S.A. Corp…” 

The main pesticide used in Brazil was Pyriproxyfen. Here’s what it does:

“Pyriproxyfen mimics a natural hormone in insects and disrupts their growth. It is a type of insect growth regulator that affects mostly young insects and eggs…In studies with rats, more than three quarters [of the pyriproxyfen] left the body within seven days. However, very small amounts of pyriproxyfen can be stored in fat and breast milk in the body… Two groups of laying hens were fed pyriproxyfen for eight days. A very small amount of the dose was found in the eggs, with most in the yolks…In one study, rats fed high doses of pyriproxyfen during pregnancy did not have any effects on their young. Similarly exposed rabbits had reduced birth rates only at the highest dose tested. In another study with rats, some young had unusual skeletal and digestive changes… Pyriproxyfen is practically nontoxic to birds, mammals, and adult honeybees. However, eggs and larval stages of honeybees and other insects are much more likely to be sensitive than adults…” 

“Starting in 2014, Pyriproxifen was put into Brazilian water supplies to fight the proliferation of mosquito larvae… On February 3, 2016, the [possibility] that Pyriproxyfen, not the Zika virus, is the cause of the 2015-2016 microcephaly outbreak in Brazil was raised in a report of the Argentinean organization Physicians in Crop-Sprayed Villages…On February 13, the Brazilian state of Rio Grande do Sul suspended Pyriproxyfen's use… ‘the city of Recife has the current highest reported amount of cases of microcephaly, yet Pyriproxyfen is not used in the region…’ Manufactured by Sumitomo Chemical of Japan,” according to Wikipedia.

I'm no scientist, but it seems like if you replace a chemical that harms the nervous system with one that affects eggs, fetal skeletons, and birth rates, and you begin to see birth defects...

Now, here’s part of the story that wasn’t generally reported:

“After experts scrutinized 732 of the cases [in Brazil] they found that more than half either weren’t microcephaly, or weren’t related to Zika. Just 270 were confirmed as microcephaly that appears to be linked to Zika or other infectious diseases…The condition can also be caused by genetic factors or drug or alcohol abuse during pregnancy,” according to the Washington Post. 

To read another of my columns about mankind ruining the earth, click here.

 Bill K. Underwood is the author of several novels and one non-fiction self-help book, all available at Amazon.com. You can help support this site by purchasing a book.

Why Real Christians Don’t Vote

I walked past a neighbor’s house that was festooned with half a dozen “Vote for…” signs, all bearing names of people I’d never heard of. He was on his porch, so I asked him: “Do you know all these people?”

“Personally? No.”

“Then why are you advertising their campaigns?”

“I’m Republican. So are they,” was his answer.

Sure didn’t seem like a good enough reason to me, but thankfully I managed to bite my tongue.

As I’ve mentioned in previous columns, I don’t vote. I'm not registered to vote. I made a conscious choice long ago to never vote. I work hard to have no opinion as to who should win or lose.

A person may abstain from voting this time around simply because they don’t like either of the candidates. But that doesn’t mean they have rejected the system of a government run by individuals who won election.

You may be promoting a candidate; or you may be less than thrilled with any of the candidates but believe in the process, so you vote for the 'lesser of two evils'. In either case, until you separate yourself from the system, you are the system.

A renowned scholar of the 19^th century, Herbert Spencer, noted that whether a person votes for the winning candidate, votes for a losing candidate, or abstains from voting, he will be “deemed to have consented to the rule” of the winning candidate because of his tacit approval of the system.

Even if you don’t vote? Yes. Why? 

In parliamentary procedure, which also applies in the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate - really most groups or classes that make decisions by voting - a member may be required to abstain from a vote in the case of a real or perceived conflict of interest, or may choose to abstain for ethical reasons. (In reality, most politicians have proven that they have no ethics. They are most likely to abstain from voting on a thorny issue for fear their constituents back home might hate them for voting for or against it.)

But: abstaining from voting doesn’t mean they are no longer a representative or a senator. Their simple presence provides a quorum; it makes it possible for the vote to go forward.

But you’re not a senator or a representative. Does the “quorum” rule apply to you? Yes, it does.

For example, let’s say you were a registered voter in 1968. You could have voted for Richard Nixon, voted for Hubert Humphrey, or voted for George Wallace. You could have tried to vote but found the lines too long at the polls; you could have been too sick to get to the polls; or you could have chosen to abstain from voting that year because you didn’t like any of the choices. Still: if you were part of the political system you were at least partially responsible for the 543,000 U.S. soldiers Nixon ordered to Vietnam in 1969, 11,780 of whom never returned. “But I wouldn’t have voted for that!” Doesn’t matter. You were part of the system. It's called Community Responsibility which I addressed in another column.

But, we've all been told that voting is a civic duty. Does voting really go against Christian principles?

When Pontius Pilate asked Jesus about his kingship Jesus replied, “My Kingdom is no part of this world. If my Kingdom were part of this world, my attendants would have fought that I should not be handed over to the Jews.” (John 18:36)

Being a Christian, then, means being “no part.” I am not for Trump; I am not for Kamala; I am not leaning toward one or the other.

But Bill, I can hear someone saying, until the kingdom is established, don't you want to have some say in these political decisions that might affect you?

No. None of those political decisions will have any effect on the kingdom I support. Here’s what I care about: The Bible told us what to look for in these last days: Major wars, check; Earthquakes in one place after another, check; Food shortage, starvation and inflation, check; pandemics and plagues, check; rapidly increasing lawlessness and loss of love of neighbor, check; ruining planet Earth, check. (Matthew 24, Luke 21, Revelation 6 & 11) Those prophecies have all been fulfilled. 

And they were fulfilled regardless of who was in office.

The next big thing I’m watching for will be a major outcry of “Peace and Security!” followed almost immediately by a governmental attack on religion.  Will that happen if Trump is president? Yes. Will it happen if someone else is? Yes. The simple fact is, it will happen regardless of who is in office.  

My stand is quite adamantly that this system does not work, cannot be made to work, and is no substitute for Christ’s kingdom. It isn’t a ‘back-up plan’, it isn’t some sort of God-approved band-aid to fill in until the kingdom is established.

Daniel 2:44 says very clearly that in our time God’s kingdom ‘will crush all these kingdoms.’ It does not say that somehow these governments are going to help establish the kingdom. "Crush." Picture the kingdom as a locomotive. In comparison, the world's governments are an ant standing on the tracks, trying to demand the train go around.

I don’t want to show even grudging acceptance of any of these man-made kingdoms that God is about to crush. I want to be as far away from all these kingdoms as I can get. 

Feel free to leave a polite comment. To read another of my columns on a similar subject, click here.

 

Bill K. Underwood is the author of several books, all available at Amazon.com. You can help support this site by purchasing one of his books.