전쟁의 소문들(마 24:6-8)

최근 오워 박사 라는 분이 한국에 와서 회개하지 않으면

전쟁애 난다고 예언을 하여 많은 사람들을 당황하게 하고 있습니다.

어느 분은 전쟁을 예언 한것이 아니라 회개를 촉구한 것이라고 해명하고 있습니다.

http://kr.blog.yahoo.com/cowds2/folder/254.html

 

우리가 알아야 하는 것은 모든 전쟁에는 하나님의 섭리가 있다는 것입니다.

세계 일 이차 대전은 이 세상에 존재 하지 않던 이스라엘 나라를 다시 회복시키고 나타나게 하시는 하나님의 섭리였습니다.

하나님은 이 세상을 진동하게 하셔서 예언 하신 대로 무화과 나무가 싹이 나게 하신것이며 이스라엘을 회복 시키신 것입니다.

여러가지 종말의 징조가 나타나고 있지만 지금이 종말시대라는 가장확실한 증거는 바로 이스라엘의 독립입니다. 

 

육이오 전쟁이 일어난 영적인 이유가 무엇일까요?

신사 참배, 공산주의, 신앙 적 안일함과 교회의 분열 등등 여러가지로 생각해 볼수 있습니다.

분명한것은 남한과 북한을 보면서 하나님 없는 북한이 얼마나 비참한가 하는 것이며

교회를 세우며 선교운동과 신앙의 부흥을 가져온 남한이 얼마나 축복을 받은 것인가를 보아야 합니다.

 

그러므로 구약의 이스라엘을 본받지 말고 깨어 더욱 겸손히 주님을 섬겨야 합니다.

감사를 되 찾고 율법주의, 기복 신앙, 인본주의, 혼합주의, 분열, 사치 등등

하나님 앞에 합당지 못한 교회의 현실을 회개하여야 한다는 것입니다.

 

구약 이스라엘의 역사를 통하여 분명히 하나님은 보여 주셨습니다.

하나님을 잘 섬기래는 부강하였지만

교만하여져서 하나님을 떠날때는 이방나라들을 몽둥이 삼아 징계를 행하신것입니다. 

아무튼 우리가 먼저 민족과 교회를 위하여 회개하며 기도해야 할줄로 믿습니다.

 

요즘 중동정세가 불안 합니다.

마침 이락크 전쟁이 끝나가고 미군이 철수를 하면서 이제 미국이 다른 곳을 향하여 눈을 돌릴 가능성과 맞물려 있습니다.

부시 정부때에 CIA 국장이었던 Hayden은 

이란을 공격하는 것은 불가피해 보인다고 증언하였습니다.

 

이란에게 가해진 경제적 제제 조치도 별 소용이 없고 정치적인 해 법도 막다른 골목에 왔기 때문에

이란을 공격하는 것이 불가피 하게 되었다는 것입니다.

미국과 서방은 핵무기를 가진 이란은 용납할수 없다는 것입니다.

이란은 터키, 시리아와 손을 잡고 팔레슽인 무장 단체 하마스에게 미사일을 공급하고

군대를 소집하고 훈련을 시켜 정규 군대로 양성하는 일을 하고 있습니다.

모든 이란의 행동의 목적은 하나 입니다.

이스라엘을 지구상에서 없애버리는 것입니다.

 

얼마전에 이스라엘의 군사용 헬리콥터가 추락하여 군인 7명이 죽은 사건이 있었는데

그것은 바로 산악지대에 있는 이란의 핵 시설을 공격하기 위한 특수 훈련이었다고 합니다.

 

미 육군 참모총장인 마이크 뮬렌은 미국이 이란을 공격하기 위한 계획을 가지고 있음을 시인 하였습니다.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20100801/pl_afp/usirannuclearpoliticsunrestmullen

바로 2010년 8월 1일날자의 뉴스입니다.

 

이란은 이미 핵무기를 만들 기술적 문제를 극복하였고 핵무기 개발을 멈추지 않고 계속 추진하고 있다는 것이 유엔과 서방세계의 인식입니다.

작년9월에 보고된 유엔의 비밀 보고서는 이런 사실을 확인 시켜 주고 있습니다.

 

최근의 여론 조사는 미국인들은 대다수가 이란 공격을 지지하고 있습니다.

http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/07/16/pollswide-support-for-an-attack-on-iran/

 

우리가 중동 전쟁에 신경을 쓰고 있는 것은 바로 에스겔 38장 39장에 있는 예언 때문입니다.

그것은 이슬람과 러시아가 한편이 되어 이스라엘을 공격하게 되는 전쟁입니다.

미국과 이스라엘의 이란공격으로 인하여 그 얘언된 전쟁이 일어날 가능성이 있기 때문입니다.

러시아는 계속하여 유엔의 이란 제재가 효력을 발휘 할수 없도록 경제 지원등을 아끼지 않고 있습니다.

이 전쟁은 세계 제 3차 대전으로 핵전쟁이 될 가능성이 있습니다.

그리고 세계 삼분의 일이 파괴되는 계시록 8장의 첫번째 부터 네번째

나팔 재앙이 될수가 있습니다.

핵전쟁은 온 세상을 공포와 혼란의 도가니로 몰아 넣을 것입니다.

통신이 미비되고 시체가 여기저기 널려있고 각종 폭동과 약탈 온역이 횡행할것입니다.

이런 위기의 때에 우리 성도들의 달려갈곳은 바로 우리의 피난처 되시는 주님 이십니다.(욜3:16)

 

이런 급박한 시대에 깨어 기도하며

주님을 더욱 사랑하고

이웃을 일깨우며 전도와 선교에 힘을 써야 하겠습니다.

강한 순교자의 믿음으로 진리의 말씀으로 무장하여야 하겠습니다.

 

주님 사랑합니다.

주님 나의 모든것 드립니다.

마라나타!

 

Ahmadinejad: US and Israel plot wars within three months
DEBKAfile Special Report July 27, 2010, 2:23 PM (GMT+02:00)

Tags:  Ahmadinejad   Obama   Two wars 

Muscle-flexing by accusing America

debkafile's Iranian sources quote President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying: "We have precise information that the Americans have devised a plot, according to which they seek to launch a psychological war on Iran. They plan to attack at least two countries in the region within the next three months," he said, without specifying which countries were the subjects of the alleged conspiracy, only hinting that America's senior military ally in the region, Israel, was directly involved.
Ahmadinejad spoke Monday night, July 26, in an interview restricted to the controlled Iranian media which make a point of stressing the late hour.

He said the plot had two objectives: "First of all, they (the Americans) want to hamper Iran's progress and development since they are opposed to our growth," he said and secondly, "They want to save the Zionist regime, because it has reached a dead end and the Zionists believe they can be saved through a military confrontation."
debkafile's Iranian sources note that Ahmadinejad deliberately avoided referring to his country's areas of "growth" which he charges the US of opposing, because it is non-existent. The economy is in rapid decline as every ordinary Iranian knows to his detriment, while UN, US and European sanctions have slowed drastically the only fields showing progress, oil and gas field and industrial development, leaving only the nuclear program and preparation of the military for war.

Our Iranian and intelligence sources attribute the Iranian president's reference to "precise information" to the intelligence which has also reached Saudi and Gulf governments of a decision reached in the White House to follow up sanctions - if Russia, China and Turkey help Tehran bypass them - by intensifying the squeeze on Iran with military steps. The first would be orders to the US Navy to search Iranian ships suspected of carrying cargoes prohibited by UN, US or European sanctions on routes through the Red Sea, the Gulf of Aden, the Persian Gulf or the Arabian Sea.
Ahmadinejad's reference to two wars was his rejoinder to this intelligence and a signal to Washington that US searches of Iranian vessels would not go by without response. Two potential arenas are American forces in the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Sea or even Iraq, or a Hizballah attack on Israel.

The Iranian president ended the interview with a warning to US President Barack Obama not to follow in the footsteps of George W. Bush by sending US troops to fight new Middle East wars.
He also had a piece of advice for Moscow: Not to play into Washington's hands and thereby hurt Russian interests. This was part of the sharp exchange passing back and forth between Ahmadinejad and Russian President Dmitry Medvedev in the last 48 hours.
Monday, July 27, the Russian Foreign Ministry stated that Iranian criticism of the Russian President was unacceptable and fruitless, irresponsible rhetoric." 

Ex-CIA chief Hayden: Military action against Iran "seems inexorable"
DEBKAfile Special Report July 25, 2010, 10:41 PM (GMT+02:00)

 

Former CIA Director Michael Hayden

Ex-CIA Director Michael Hayden said Sunday, July 25, that during his tenure (under President George W. Bush), a strike was "way down the list" of options. But now it "seems inexorable" because no matter what the US does diplomatically, Tehran keeps pushing ahead with its suspected nuclear program.
Talking to CNN's State of the Union, Gen. Hayden predicted Iran would build its program to the point where it's just below having an actual weapon. In his view, "That would be as destabilizing to the region as the real thing."
debkafile's sources take this as affirmation that neither Saudi Arabia, the Persian Gulf states nor Israel will be willing to live on constant edge with an Iran which can build nuclear bombs or warheads whenever it likes. They note that Hayden has added his voice to a growing number of leading American figures and publications which have indicated in the past fortnight that the military option against Iran has climbed the top of President Barack Obama's list of priorities.
According to our Washington sources, the US president switched course after hearing Saudi King Abdullah assert explicitly: "We cannot live with a nuclear Iran."
Abdullah added he no longer believes diplomacy or sanctions will have any effect and made it clear that if the Americans continued to back away from direct action to terminate Iran's advance on a nuclear bomb, the Saudi and its allies would go their own way on the nuclear issue.
Today, therefore, the White House is no longer willing to countenance Iran's nuclear development advancing up to the threshold of a weapons capacity and stopping there.  And since Tehran will never cede its prerogative to determine every stage of its nuclear program without outside interference, the only option remaining to the United States is military.
(This radical change in the Obama administration's outlook was examined in depth in the latest DEBKA-Net-Weekly issue 454 published July 23.)
debkafile's Washington sources add that the White House was finally brought to the point of seriously considering military action against Iran, as Gen. Hayden noted - not as a result of Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's efforts at persuasion - which failed, but because of the Saudi ruler's ultimatum. 
The Middle East can therefore expect far-reaching military shifts and redeployments in the coming weeks -but Israel is not likely to gain any kudos for this new development because it has lost considerable traction under the incumbent government.

 

 An Attack on Iran: Back on the Table

            Buzz up!7 votes Share

retweet

EmailPrint..By JOE KLEIN Joe Klein – Thu Jul 15, 3:30 am ET

 

In late 2006, George W. Bush met with the Joint Chiefs of Staff at the Pentagon and asked if military action against Iran's nuclear program was feasible. The unanimous answer was no. Air strikes could take out some of Iran's nuclear facilities, but there was no way to eliminate all of them. Some of the nuclear labs were located in heavily populated areas; others were deep underground. And Iran's ability to strike back by unconventional means, especially through its Hizballah terrorist network, was formidable. The military option was never officially taken off the table. At least, that's what U.S. officials always said. But the emphasis was on the implausibility of a military strike. "Another war in the Middle East is the last thing we need," Secretary of Defense Robert Gates wrote in 2008. It would be "disastrous on a number of levels." (See pictures of President Bush in the Middle East.)

 

Gates is sounding more belligerent these days. "I don't think we're prepared to even talk about containing a nuclear Iran," he told Fox News on June 20. "We do not accept the idea of Iran having nuclear weapons." In fact, Gates was reflecting a new reality in the military and intelligence communities. Diplomacy and economic pressure remain the preferred means to force Iran to negotiate a nuclear deal, but there isn't much hope that's going to happen. "Will [sanctions] deter them from their ambitions with regards to nuclear capability?" CIA Director Leon Panetta told ABC News on June 27. "Probably not." So the military option is very much back on the table.

 

What has changed? "I started to rethink this last November," a recently retired U.S. official with extensive knowledge of the issue told me. "We offered the Iranians a really generous deal, which their negotiators accepted," he went on, referring to the offer to exchange Iran's 1.2 tons of low-enriched uranium (3.5% pure) for higher-enriched (20%) uranium for medical research and use. "When the leadership shot that down, I began to think, Well, we made the good-faith effort to engage. What do we do now?" (See pictures of terror in Tehran.)

 

Other intelligence sources say that the U.S. Army's Central Command, which is in charge of organizing military operations in the Middle East, has made some real progress in planning targeted air strikes - aided, in large part, by the vastly improved human-intelligence operations in the region. "There really wasn't a military option a year ago," an Israeli military source told me. "But they've gotten serious about the planning, and the option is real now." Israel has been brought into the planning process, I'm told, because U.S. officials are frightened by the possibility that the right-wing Netanyahu government might go rogue and try to whack the Iranians on its own. (Comment on this story.)

 

One other factor has brought the military option to a low boil: Iran's Sunni neighbors really want the U.S. to do it. When United Arab Emirates Ambassador Yousef al-Otaiba said on July 6 that he favored a military strike against Iran despite the economic and military consequences to his country, he was reflecting an increasingly adamant attitude in the region. Senior American officials who travel to the Gulf frequently say the Saudis, in particular, raise the issue with surprising ardor. Everyone from the Turks to the Egyptians to the Jordanians are threatening to go nuclear if Iran does. That is seen as a real problem in the most volatile region in the world: What happens, for example, if Saudi Arabia gets a bomb, and the deathless monarchy there is overthrown by Islamist radicals?

 

For the moment, the White House remains as skeptical as ever about a military strike. Most senior military leaders also believe Gates got it right the first time - even a targeted attack on Iran would be "disastrous on a number of levels." It would unify the Iranian people against the latest in a long series of foreign interventions. It would also unify much of the world - including countries like Russia and China that we've worked hard to cultivate - against a recowboyfied U.S. There would certainly be an Iranian reaction - in Iraq, in Afghanistan, by Lebanese Hizballah against Israel and by the Hizballah network against the U.S. and Saudi homelands. A catastrophic regional war is not impossible. (See who's who in Barack Obama's White House.)

 

Of course, it is also possible that this low-key saber-rattling is simply a message the U.S. is trying to send the Iranians: it's time to deal. There have been rumblings from Tehran about resuming negotiations, although the regime has very little credibility right now. The assumption - shared even by some of Iran's former friends, like the Russians - is that any Iranian offer to talk is really an offer to stall. A specific, plausible Iranian concession may be needed to get the process back on track. But it is also possible that the saber-rattling is not a bluff, that the U.S. really won't tolerate a nuclear Iran and is prepared to do something awful to stop it.

 

Kurt Nimmo
Infowars
September 17, 2009

The Associated Press reports today that “experts” at the United Nation’s International Atomic Energy Agency now “are in agreement that Tehran has the ability to make a nuclear bomb and is on the way to developing a missile system able to carry an atomic warhead, according to a secret report.”

	Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, IAEA, Mohamed ElBaradei.

The document says Iran has “sufficient information” to build a bomb and says Iran is likely to “overcome problems” on developing a delivery system, according to the AP.

In February, the IAEA reported that Iran had not converted the low-grade uranium that it has produced into weapon-grade uranium. “The Austrian Press Agency quoted an IAEA expert as saying that the uranium substances that Iran has produced at its Natanz enrichment facility have been carefully recorded and remote cameras have been installed to supervise part of the stockpile,” The Hindu reported on February 22.

Iran has denied accusations by the United States and its allies that it has been engaged in a clandestine nuclear weapons program.

In August, Iran indicated it would continue to co-operate with the United Nations nuclear agency, a foreign ministry spokesman told the BBC. Hassan Qashqavi said that UN inspectors were allowed access to Iran’s nearly complete nuclear reactor at Arak. “All our nuclear activities have been within the framework of the agency and the NPT (nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty)… ElBaradei has always confirmed Iran’s co-operation with the agency,” Qashqavi told reporters.

Earlier this month, IAEA chief Mohamed ElBaradei condemned allegations that the agency is withholding information on Iran’s nuclear program. In “a thinly-veiled reference to recent Israeli criticism. ElBaradei was reacting to increasing Israeli pressure on the Vienna-based agency that coincides with the nearing of a September deadline set by the United States to pressure Iran into nuclear talks,” Earth Times reported on September 7. In his latest report on Iran, ElBaradei said the country had been more cooperative in letting his agency monitor the uranium enrichment plant in Natanz and a heavy water reactor under construction.

IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei condemns “politically motivated” accusations against the agency.

Israel accuses ElBaradei and the IAEA of “dereliction of duty” and claims he deliberately withheld incriminating information on Iran’s nuclear plans in a report published in late August.

The IAEA document in question was apparently released by the agency today.

In response, Iran attempted to enlist the support of developing countries at the IAEA for a proposed ban of attacks on its nuclear sites. “Tehran wanted the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to pass a resolution prohibiting armed attacks or threats of armed attacks on nuclear facilities in operation or under construction. But the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM), comprised of developing countries, refused to support this proposal, leaving open the question about the support Iran could get at the general meeting,” the AFP reports today.

 

On September 16, Newsweek reported that the U.S. intelligence community believes Iran has not restarted its nuclear-weapons development program. “This latest U.S. intelligence-community assessment is potentially controversial for several reasons, not the least of which is that it is at odds with more alarming assessments propounded by key U.S. allies, most notably Israel. Officials of Israel’s conservative-led government have been delivering increasingly dire assessments of Iran’s nuclear progress and have leaked shrill threats about a possible Israeli military attack on Iranian nuclear facilities,” Mark Hosenball writes.

Israel has insisted for years that Iran is developing nuclear weapons and has threatened to attack the Islamic republic. “Israel is drawing up plans to attack Iran’s nuclear facilities and is prepared to launch a strike without backing from the US,” The Times online reported in December, 2008. Ehud Olmert, then Israeli prime minister, reportedly asked the US for a green light to attack Iranian facilities as recently as May, 2008.

On September 16, the globalist Bipartisan Policy Center released a report calling for “crippling sanctions” on Iran and said if sanctions fail “the White House will have to begin serious consideration of the option of a U.S.-led military strike against Iranian nuclear facilities.”

In April of this year, Israel indicated its military is preparing to launch a massive aerial assault on Iran’s nuclear facilities within days of being given the go-ahead. “Israel wants to know that if its forces were given the green light they could strike at Iran in a matter of days, even hours. They are making preparations on every level for this eventuality. The message to Iran is that the threat is not just words,” a defense official told The Times online.

Russian PM Vladimir Putin has warned Israel and the United States against attacking Iran. Putin said any attack on Iran would be “very dangerous, unacceptable” and would lead to “an explosion of terrorism,” the BBC reported on September 11. “I doubt very much that such strikes would achieve their stated goal,” he added.

Earlier this week, former UN ambassador and leading neocon John R. Bolton said sanctions against Iran will fail. He said that “whatever momentum there was for additional sanctions on Iran … has now disappeared,” Bolton said during a panel discussion Tuesday at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C.

In August, Bolton said a military strike against Iran will be the only way to prevent Iran from attacking Israel. He also predicted Israel would attack Iran before the end of the year (see the following Russia Today video).

Leading neocon John Bolton makes the case for a mass murder campagin aimed at Iran.

In 2007, Bolton said “that he saw no alternative to a pre-emptive strike on suspected nuclear facilities in the country,” according to the Jerusalem Post. In addition, he called for the assassination of Iran’s president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Increasingly, it appears Israel, the United States, or both countries will attack Iran. It is significant that the IAEA has now changed course and believes Iran is working on a nuclear weapon and a delivery system. Such developments make an attack more likely and probably before the end of the year as Bolton has predicted.