Signs of the Times

The United States today is involved in a war in the country of Vietnam which is located 8000 miles from home In this war the U S has committed an important part of its navy, consisting of air craft carriers with auxiliary supporting ships In addition the air force is engaged in the conflict with hundreds of bomber and Fighter planes together with army troops of many thousands Also U S bases are being built along the east coast of Vietnam which can be supplied from the sea The question is raised by many, why is the U S there how did they get involved and what will be the ultimate outcome? The answers to these questions must be considered not only as natural or historical events but also from the prophetical viewpoint.

Based strictly on historical events the position of the U S is in support of promises made by past Presidents Eisen hower and Kennedy and President John son Since the first commitment made in 1954 in support of the new government of South Vietnam support has been enlarged and strengthened When events leading up to these commitments are studied we find some very interesting and unusual circumstances.

Prior to World War II, Vietnam was one of three countries which constituted French Indo China During the war it was occupied by Japan and used as a base for their invasion of Malaya After the war Vietnam was set up as one of Southeast Asia s new nations It was established within the French Union with complete independence held out as a promise A number of native groups combined and formed a Communistic coalition France opposed the Communistic forces with an expeditionary corps during the period of 1945 1954 France incurred heavy losses and was finally defeated at Dienbienphu in May 1954.

A a cease fire accord signed at Geneva in July 1954 Vietnam was divided at the 17th parallel into North and South Vietnam Both states were to have full independence and France pulled out entirely Under the agreement the Communists gained control of the northern territory In the southern portion, Ngo Dinh Diem, a catholic and anti Communist, was named premier and later elected presi­dent.

Since South Vietnam was established conditions there have been unstable and insecure. There are two chief reasons for this. First, almost immediately after sign­ing, the Communists from the north started violating the Geneva agreement. Infiltration soon developed and by 1957 subversion and armed activity by the Communists in the south increased rapid­ly. By 1961 it was clear that the south was faced with a full-fledged insurrec­tion. Secondly, internal political disturb­ances rocked the nation. Diem ruled the country with a strong hand, but as a Cath­olic met strong political opposition from the Buddhists. Riots developed led by Buddhists and suppressed by police action.

On November 1, 1963, after demonstra­tions and a military revolt, Diem and his brother were both assassinated. Since that time there have been nineteen changes or attempted changes in the South Vietnam­ese government. In this endless struggle for power among the different factions many of the able civic and military lead­ers have been removed and replaced.

The U. S. first became involved when their advisers took over the training of the South Vietnamese army. As conditions became worse, the U. S. sent in troops in accelerated action and now finds itself involved in a full scale war. They are committed by resolution of President Johnson, approved almost unanimously by Congress, “to take all necessary meas­ures to repel any armed attack against the forces of U. S. and to prevent further aggression.”

As the leaders of the U. S. Govern­ment look to the future, three different views as to what should be done are being presented to the President: (1) ac­celerated military action with a drive for total victory, (2) make whatever concessions are necessary and get out quickly rather than risk a long jungle war, (3) bring about a negotiated settlement. As to negotiations, the U. S. asks only that the Communists leave South Vietnam, so that an independent nation can be estab­lished. The Communists however will not enter into negotiations until all U. S. troops are withdrawn from the mainland of Asia. So far there is an impasse.

Here we have a brief outline of the past, present and future conditions con­cerning the war in Vietnam from the natural standpoint. Our interest now is in any prophetic implications.

There are no direct references in pro­phecy to this present conflict. These na­tions were not in existence at the time of the prophetic writings, and in relation to world shaking events which are prophe­sied, the present matter is insignificant. It is however, a recognizable part of con­ditions preceding the return of Christ which were spoken of by Him as, “dis­tress of nations with perplexity; the sea and the waves roaring.” More specifically it appears to be the result of the activities of Revelation 16:13, “the unclean spirits . . . which go forth unto the kings of the earth and the whole world to gather them together to the battle of the great day of God Almighty.”

These spirits have been going forth for some time and will continue to do so un­til the return of Christ. They have taken various forms such as political intrigue, racial hatreds and national friction. Since the end of World War II the principle causes of troubles between nations are ideologies, consisting of Communism on the one hand and some type of the so-called free governments on the other. When we consider that the war which will he in progress at the return of Christ will be between nations supporting the differ­ent ideologies, it is apparent that these ideas will continue to exist throughout the world until the end.

The war in Vietnam is not for territory, it is not in the interest of the native peo­ple, but it is a showdown as to which type of government will rule, Communis­tic or independent. This has world wide implications. The Communists are work­ing on the theory that the U. S. will eventually clear out and leave Vietnam to them. America feels that withdrawal might lead to Communistic takeover in other weak countries.

There is no prophetic prediction as to the outcome, whether or not it will ex­plode into a major conflict. But whether it is Vietnam or some other location the friction between the two opposite groups of nations will continue until that day when Christ returns to overthrow all forms of government and set up a king­dom that shall abide forever. “The King­doms of this World are become the Kingdoms of our Lord and of His Christ; and He shall reign for ever and ever.” (Revelations 11:15).

All the rivers run into the sea, yet the sea is not full, unto the place from whence the rivers come thither they return again This brief scriptural state men found in Ecclesiastes 1:7 gives a very concise explanation of God s means of watering the earth.

Scientists agree that there is only one source of water the ocean Water moves from ocean to land and back again in a continuous process known as the hydro-logic cycle It is a rather simple process The sun distills pure water from the ocean It rises into the air as vapor A large amount of it falls back on the ocean as rain. The balance falls on land as rain or snow which eventually returns to the ocean through streams and rivers Some of that which falls on land returns quickly while other particles will seep under ground and be delayed in its return Still other rainfall may become part of a glacier or iceberg and not return for many years Yet in time all water completes the cycle.

The varied geographic and climatic areas result in an uneven distribution of water throughout the world While some parts of the globe have an ample supply of water when and where it is needed, ill parts of the world are not so fortunate and for centuries men have been trying to find ways of supplying more water to the deficient areas History re counts many cases where water short populations have made war on those that owned water.

Israel has been Dry

Ar outstanding example of an arid land that requires water in addition to its natural rainfall is the land of Israel For centuries while the land lay barren with very little agriculture water supply was no problem The return to the land of millions of Israelites has placed an extensive demand on water for domestic, industrial and irrigation uses Without additional water from sources outside their own boundary the nation of Israel cannot exist and support its present population. The surrounding nations are aware of this situation and will do all in their means to hamper the well being, prosperity and growth of Israel.

With all the attention and publicity directed to the more sensational interna­tional conflicts, such as Viet Nam and the Dominican Republic, struggle for water rights between Israel and her Arab neighbors goes on almost unnoticed. At the moment the source of this friction lies in announced Arab plans to build a series of dams and canals which are to be aimed at diverting the headwaters of the River Jordan. This will appreciably re­duce the flow of water into the Sea of Galilee (now known as Lake Kinneret) which serves as Israel’s chief reservoir. Water drawn from this lake is used to irrigate the otherwise dry Negev Desert. This desert comprises almost 5,000 square miles of area or about 60% of Israel’s 8,000 square mile territory.

Useless Waste

The Arabs are going to such extremes in their diversion plans that they propose some dams and canals that would simply dump water uselessly into the Mediterranean Sea. If all the current Arab diversion schemes are carried out as planned, Israel contends their water supply would be re­duced by 50%. With such a reduction in water, Israel would not be able to irri­gate its present producing land, much less hope for any increase in productive areas. If the Arab states show further indications of going through with their projects, it is believed by many observers that Israel will move with military re­sistance. The question is when.

At the time the program was an­nounced, President Gamal Abdel Nasser of the United Arab Republic referred to the water diversion as an alternative to open armed conflict with Israel. This viewpoint gained the solid support of the entire Arab League. Nasser is aware that solidarity of support does not necessarily mean solidarity in case of military threat. The diversion plans are very extensive and there are some doubts that all the parti­cipating Arab nations would go through with the costly and complex projects. The success of the venture is dependent upon absolute unity in purpose with financial participation by all nations.

A look at the Arab world today shows nothing but trouble. Until these troubles are solved there can be no unity. Egypt which is militarily the strongest Arab nation and in many circumstances the source of greatest concern to Israel, is preoccupied with an inconclusive war with Yemen Some 50,000 of their troops are in Yemen, several hundred miles from the Israeli frontier, in support of the re­public regime in a civil war with royalist tribesmen Efforts to negotiate a peaceful solution with Saudi Arabia, which is back­ing the royalists, have failed A similar situation exists in Iraq. They have large armies massed on their north where it is expected they will soon open another campaign against the Kurdish rebels.

Syria a hot Spot

A different situation exists in Syria It is along the Syrian border that Israel has encountered the most direct Arab hostility during recent months If a blow-up is to come it is expected to be in this area The reason for this is principally geographical The Sea of Galilee and the pumping station that carries the water toward the Negev are closer to Syria than to any other Arab state Also the Syrian diver­sion projects are very close to the Israeli border In case of war both of these projects would be prime targets for the enemy Syria has long been the least stable of the Arab lands They have been plagued with continuing domestic prob­lems and there is fear among many of their leaders of attempted domination by Nasser They lack political harmony with other Arab nations and are not certain of their support

No Arab Unity

In two summit conferences of Arab leaders held last year, it appeared that unity of these nations was to be accom­plished The rallying point of the Arabs was their determination to foil the ambi­tions of Israel, specifically Israel’s plan to use Jordan River water to irrigate the desert areas. The hopes of unity soon be­gan to disintegrate It started when three North African Arab states, Tunisia, Mor­roco and Libya, refused to go along with the majority The point of disagreement was he proposal by Nasser to break dip­lomatic relations with West Germany be­cause Germany intends to recognize Israel.

All of these troubles, disturbances and lack of unity among the Arabs should allow the Israelites to breathe easier for the present But this is not to be. They must not relax but ever be prepared and ready to meet any effort of their enemies.

The sure word of God reveals that they will be harassed and threatened by their neighbors, but they will not be driven from their land no matter how strong the enemy forces. Many of the prophets have foretold the return of the Jews to Israel, with descrip­tions of living conditions there which we see today These same prophets have given assurance that the Israelites will dwell in the land until the return of Christ Most notable of these prophecies is found in Ezekiel 38 which gives the following description of the people and land when Gog of the north countries comes against Israel.

In the latter years thou shalt come into the land that is brought back from the sword, and is gathered out of many people, against the mountains of Israel, which have been always waste but it is brought forth out of the nations, and they shall dwell safely all of them.”

History has never indicated a time comparable to our day, with such world wide effort and activity directed toward the accomplishment of peace and safety International organizations, national groups and individual leaders of nations are attempting to work out a solution The participants in all these groups, whether large or small, are representatives of the people of their nation They are the voice of the people crying for peace and safety Yet there is no peace and we know there will be none until the return to the earth of the Prince of Peace.

Three Main Categories

The present day peace effort can be placed in three main categories First is the United Nations Organization, which represents nearly all the nations in the world and which was created for the purpose of keeping peace Second is the United States Peace Corps which is hoping to bring about better education and understanding among nations and thereby more peaceful attitudes toward each other Third are the various attempts be­tween influential leaders of various na­tions to negotiate a peaceful settlement in the present conflict in Viet Nam.

All these organizations and their pur­poses are commendable There are men among them who are sincere and dedicated to the cause of peace They work untiringly toward this goal but their efforts are blocked or hindered by racial prejudices, national biases and differen­ces in ideologies of government, particu­larly between the Communist bloc of na­tions on one side and the so called free nations on the other This is the chief cause of the inefficacy of the United Na­tions Organization.

Purpose of the U. N.

The purpose of the U N when it was organized in 1945 was to “maintain international peace and security, to develop friendly relations among nations based on respect for the principle of equal rights and to take other appropri­ate measures to strengthen universal peace “

The original organization consisted of 51 nations with a security council of 11 nations This council, made up of five permanent members and six rotating members, was empowered to take action against aggression when necessary to maintain peace. Any one of the five permanent members could halt this action by veto power. The frequent use of this veto power by Russia abrogated the auth­ority of the Security Council. In 1950 the General Assembly resolved to take over the peace keeping duties in case of veto action in the Security Council.

There have been significant changes in the General Assembly which commen­ced with the major nations having con­trol. The number has grown from 51 to 114 nations with most of the additions being the smaller nations of Asia and Africa. These smaller Asia-Africa nations represent 59% of the assembly and with one vote each can control the policy of the group. Furthermore, they are sympa­thetic to the Communist bloc and do not support peace keeping activities against Communist aggression.

Peace keeping activities have become very expensive and some nations have refused to pay their share of the costs. The Charter provides that any nation two years behind in its assessments must pay up or lose its assembly vote. Russia and eleven other nations who refused to pay threatened to walk out if their votes were taken away. In order to avoid dis­aster the U. N. has been operating on a no vote basis during the current session.

Recently a history making assembly was convened in New York City. A three day seminar on the theme “Peace on Earth” was attended by 2000 delegates from 20 nations including Communistic, neutral and free world. The delegates included statesmen, politicians, national leaders and theologians from many de­nominations. The United States was represented by the Vice President, Chief Justice of the Supreme Court and four Senators.

The aim of the seminar was to explore requirements of durable world peace through such matters as disarmament, nuclear weapons, co-existence, racial equality and human rights. As all the presentations were by talks or panel discussions, no policy was adopted or decisions reached.

With all the talk of peace and safety there is no peace. Instead there are many situations in the world that could erupt into war. The most prominent of these at the present time is the conflict in Viet Nam which will be a real test of war or peace. In addition to national disputes are the numerous local disturb­ances that threaten the safety of the people. Race riots, attacks on American properties in other countries and violence in all our cities grow in intensity. These are he conditions to be found in the world at the return of Christ and de­scribed by Him as “the sea and the waves roaring.”

Although the peace efforts have been ineffective, they are the voices of the people crying for peace and safety. The signs are very clear as to the time, “for when they shall say peace and safety; sudden destruction shall come upon them.”

President Johnson’s “Great Society”

On January 4, the president of the United States delivered his state-of-the­-union message to a joint session of the House and Senate, in which he outlined his plans to bring to fruition the “Great Society” for America. Mr. Johnson’s re­marks covered a wide field of subjects and ranged from a recognition of the “troubled and perilous world” in which we exist to a hopeful optimism in attain­ing his planned “Utopia.” Though the first aim of America’s efforts “remains the safety, and well-being of our own country,” the president noted that in this age of diminishing boundaries “the state of the union depends, in large measure, upon the state of the world.” The Chief Executive set forth the United States as the motivating force to raise the living standards of all nations. The birth of this nation in the 18th century after obtain­ing freedom from arbitrary power was only the earnest of a greater destiny she is yet to fulfill. “Our own freedom and growth have never been the final goal of the American dream,” continued the president. “We were meant to be an oasis of liberty and abundance in a worldwide desert of disappointed dreams. Our na­tion was created to help strike away the chains of ignorance and misery and ty­ranny wherever they keep man less than God means him to be.”

The threats that face America in a dwindling world are many and varied. President Johnson recognized the war in South Vietnam is the major trouble spot as far as the United States was concerned. However, his key decision to veto pro­posals to carry the war to the north con­vinced officials that the danger of escala­tion and the possible involvement of Communist China was averted. As the Tidings goes to press it has been an­nounced that the Vietnamese military leaders have agreed to restore power to the civilian government. Regardless of what resulted from the change of gov­ernment, it would seem from the remarks of the President that the United States is committed to remain there. After stat­ing the question as to why America is there at all, Mr. Johnson explained: “We are there first, because a friendly nation has asked us for help against the Communist aggression. Ten years ago our President pledged our help. Three Presi­dents have supported that pledge, and we will not break it now. Second, our own security is tied to the peace of Asia. Twice in one generation we have had to fight against aggression in the Far East. To ignore aggression now would only in­crease the danger of a much larger war.”

A President’s Hardest Task

The bulk of the address was devoted to the President’s favorite subject, “the great society.” The task confronting the present administration, as Mr. Johnson saw it, was three-fold: “First, to keep our economy growing,—to open for all Americans the opportunity that is now enjoyed by most Americans. And to im­prove the quality of life for all.” A step-up in the war on poverty was one of the first items on the new agenda, and cer­tainly in the mind of the President, the most important. He disclosed plans for improving the national life through ex­pansion of government aid to education, getting congress to approve a strong Medicare program—perhaps the opening of regional medical centers to diagnose and treat major illnesses, and even en­hancing the beauty of America through extensive landscaping and park preserva­tion. To the writer, the most interesting theme of the President’s message was the role that the government would be re­quired to play in bringing the great so­ciety to reality. “For government to serve these goals it must be modern in struc­ture, efficient in action, and ready for any emergency” . . . The greatest burden is not running the huge operations of Government—or meeting daily troubles, large and small—or even working with the Congress. A President’s hardest task is not to Do what is right, but to Know what is right. Yet the President brings no special gift of prophecy, or foresight.” There was a constant reference to God during the address, which seems to in­dicate Mr. Johnson is aware of the power that the Deity wields in the governments of this age. It was on this note that he concluded his state-of-the-union message: “This, then, is the state of the union: free and restless, growing and full of hope. So it was in the beginning. So it shall always be, while God is willing, and we are strong enough to keep the faith.”

Not of Man—Nor of the will of Man

The frequent usage of expressions that are common to Christadelphian life suggests a godly influence to which Mr. Johnson was surely subjected in his boy­hood days. Even his colorful description of Texas prosperity employed Biblical terms: “And tonight that country is abundant—abundant with fruit and cat­tle and goats and sheep.” (see Num. 13:20, Deut. 7:13, Gen. 13:2; Job 1:3, etc.) Though the chief executive con­fessed that no President has the special gift of prophecy or foresight, his outline of the new government betrays his own familiarity with the inspired prophetic Word. The qualifications of an effective government, as outlined by the President, are unattainable as far as man is con­cerned. For a political system to be “modern in structure, efficient in action, and ready for any emergency,” and pos­sessing the intellectual genius to “know what is right,” it must originate from a higher power than that of man. Lyndon Johnson’s family background of God-fearing people would provide him with the necessary ingredients to form such an idealistic form of government—but at the same time prove to him that such a complexity is quite beyond the capabili­ties of human genius to achieve.

The Holy Scriptures reveal in fluent language the One world-wide govern­ment that will succeed in bringing about not only a great society, but a safe and lasting one as well. At the head of this system of peace will be one selected and approved by Almighty God; one who needs not to depend on human ingenu­ity for the proper administration of his office Isaiah describes this noble being for us and displays the source of his power and wisdom: “And the spirit of the Lord shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowl­edge and of the fear of the LORD; and shall make him of quick understanding in the fear of the LORD: and he shall not judge after the sight of his eyes, neither reprove with equity for the meek of the earth . . . And righteousness shall be the girdle of his loins, and faithfulness the girdle of his reins.” (Isa. 11:2-5) Here described for us is a ruler who not only knows what to do, but carries that knowledge into action as he dis­charges the duties of a king.

President Johnson, in outlining the government of the “great society,” stated that it would be one that is always ready for any emergency and efficient in utiliz­ing its power effectively against all ag­gression. The annals of history bear testi­mony to man’s failure to produce such an administrative state. The inherent wicked­ness of human nature and its natural propensity to lawlessness prevents the formation of such a body politic. The Kingdom of God, under the leadership of the Lord Jesus Christ will be of such power and authority that its laws shall command respect from all corners of the globe. Any rebellion against its preroga­tives; any violation against its statutes will be met with swift remedial action. Again, we go to the prophet, Isaiah, as he foretells the far reaching influence of God’s rule on earth; “And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.” (2:4) Zechariah informs us that “the LORD shall be king over all the earth: in that day shall there be one LORD, and his name one.” (14:9)

The work of bringing all mankind to­gether under a common government must wait until the appearance of the “Prince of peace.” Into his hands alone has God delegated the power and authority that will ultimately be recognized and respect­ed by all the earth’s inhabitants as they learn of the ways of God, and walk therein. To Mr. Johnson’s state-of-the-­union message, we would reply: Your blueprint for a greater society is a noble effort to restore man to his proper place under the sun. However, Mr. President, you are not altogether ignorant of the purpose of God in relation to the destinies of men and nations. You are like- wise aware of the messages of the prophets as they describe the evil and danger-our condition that would characterize man’ most noble efforts to establish peace on the earth. These conditions were not to improve—but contrary-wise—they were to worsen, until only the personal pres­ence of the Son of God would avert the actual extinction of civilization. As student of the Word we must view your plan in the light of history and the pro­phetic declarations concerning the pres­ent. Only Jesus fits the qualifications, you yourself outlined—and only He can truly elevate the human race to the glory of God.

The Fifth Nuclear Power

At precisely 3 p m on October 16th, Red China joined the Nuclear club by set­ting off her first big atomic blast It had taken China some 14 years at a cost in excess of $200 million to set off the explosion—a crude nuclear device with approximately the same force as that which the United States had dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki in 1943 Though small in comparison with the weapons now developed by both Russia and the United States, the shock wave of the explosion was felt in all regions of the world Long anticipated by experts in the United States, President Johnson was quick to assess the test of little military importance” Red China’s boss, Mao Tse-tung was of a different opinion, however, and immediately announced to the world, The mastering of the nuclear weapon by China is a great encourage­ment to the revolutionary peoples of the world” As the “fifth atomic power” Peking Radio called for a world-wide summit meet to “discuss the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of nuclear weapons.”

What is the true significance of the break through by the most populous Communist Nation in the world? Occurring less than twenty four hours after the sudden retirement ‘ of Russia’s Nikita Khrushchev, does it mean that the Sino Russia rift will be healed? Will the United States now be required to step up operations in Southeast Asia rather than face a complete pull-out? These and many other questions come to mind as the real significance of the break-through penetrates our thinking.

President Johnson has assured the peoples of the free world that China’s eventual conquering of the nuclear bomb has been “taken into account in planning our own defense program and nuclear capability” It has been pointed out that China has very likely used up all essential material for an explosion in this one test blast The maximum amount that China can be expected to afford in the develop­ment of their nuclear arsenal is $500 million per year At this rate it is esti­mated that it will take between five and ten years to actually produce 30 bombs compact enough to be transported by either a long-range bomber or missile— neither of which China now has Without outside aid, the Red giant will not be able to produce these delivery devices under a cost of $10 billion to $20 billion and before 15 to 20 years By that time, it is pointed out, the United States will be that much further ahead Today, the U S A has an arsenal of some 50,000 bombs and warheads, with sufficient air and missile power to deliver them anywhere on earth Truly, an awesome and terrifying picture is disclosed to us in these latter days For many years, experts have known and warned that nuclear weapons would some day be at the dis­posal of most of the nations of the earth The technical know how is no longer a factor to be considered The only ele­ment that will hold Red China back is the lack of available funds The fearful thing about the bomb becoming the pro­perty of so many nations is the statistical certainty that someday, someone who is unstable will set off an explosion that will plunge the world into nuclear war.

Power Shift in the Kremlin

With the dismissal of the former Soviet chairman some experts look for a possible mending of the Sino Soviet split The new leaders in the Kremlin may try to work out some kind of indus­trial and economic aid to China, thus freeing her for a more concerted effort to close the wide nuclear gap Krushchev, while in power, did everything he could to prevent Red China from becoming a nuclear power Soviet technicians were pulled out of China in an effort to forestall what is now history There was con­stant serious border dispute trouble be­tween the two Red giants in the Man­churia and Sinkian Province Some have supposed that Khrushchev s removal was because of his failure to keep the Com­munist block intact That his replace­ments may very likely attempt to get China and Russia together again, seems to be the opinion of most of the Euro­pean nations In Rome, Italy s Communist party (the largest in Europe) observed that most of the castigations flung at Khrushchev by Mao Tse tung were at him personally—not at Russia With Khrushchev out of the way the possibility of China and Russia getting together was considerably increased Russia certainly does not relish a cold war on two fronts —China on the east and U S on the west

Regardless of the fact whether Russia will or will not patch up things with China, it does not alter the fact that the world now is faced with the inescapable fact that in the foreseeable future, Com­munist China will be a nuclear power A resolution is being introduced to seat Peking in the United Nations—the pro­posal to be made at the forthcoming General Assembly session Many, who formerly objected to China’s admittance now favour it, feeling that her member­ship in the community of nations might alter Peking s belligerent policies It would appear to the writer to be ludi­crous to attempt to seriously control the growth of nuclear weaponry, and leas e Red China out of the discussion.

A Testing Period

Two top aides of Khrushchev have re­placed the Premier in Russia’s new era Leonid Ilych Brezhnev was named head of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, while Alexer Nikolayevich Kosy­gin assumed the role of Premier Nikita Khrushchev chose to fill both positions during his decade as head of the Soviet Union—now it is divided. The White house was assured that the new govern­ment team will continue Russia’s policy of peaceful coexistence with the west. Little stock is taken in the claim however, due to internal struggles now going on in the Kremlin. Historically, whenever there has been a change in the Soviet government, there has always been a testing period in which those in power had their strength tried by those aspiring to power. This was the case when Stalin came to power after the death of Lenin. Before Stalin could feel secure in his new position as premier of the Soviet Union, he had all those who worked with him under Lenin liquidated. At his death, a similar purge was made, includ­ing the putting to death of Stalin’s police chief, Levreti Beria. Khrushchev did not emerge as full party boss and Premier until the late date of 1958, after taking the job away from his “front man” Niko­lai A Bulganin. Experts feel the same pattern is likely to be followed now in the dismissal of Khrushchev, as various aspirants jockey for political positions. The real leaders of Russia may not be known for several months.

A Complexity of Problems

Here, in the United States, problems just as momentous are taking shape. Lyn­don B. Johnson has been elected by an overwhelming majority (capturing 486 of the 538 electoral votes and more than 61% of the popular vote) to the office of president for the next four years. Hav­ing committed himself to “peace,” the president is still faced with the reality of a very big war now being fought in South Vietnam. How to bring the war to a swift end without entering a full-fledged war against the North Com­munists is a problem being pressed har­der and harder as American casualties grow in Southeast Asia.

The President also faces differences with France’s De Gaulle. The French President insists that France is going to have their own nuclear independency on an equality with Great Britain and America. Pursuing this course, De Gaulle has refused to have anything to do with the U.S. effort to create a multi-lateral nuclear force of surface vessels, armed with Polaris missiles and manned by mixed crews. France is also continuing her policy of providing long term loans to the Russians (as is Britain) in spite of U.S. protests. Efforts to curb this con­tinued violation of agreements has so far proved in vain, and it is expected that, in an endeavour to keep France in NATO, concessions will have to be made.

It is difficult to analyze the trend of world affairs in the light of Divine pro­phecy, when events move so swiftly. We often made the mistake of too quickly coming to a conclusion regarding world politics, only to discover a few weeks, or even days later that our reasoning was faulty. The question looms before us as to just why was Khrushchev removed by God? (The internal forces that actual­ly brought about his fall are of no consequences—it is God that sets up and removes.) In the development of circumstances that will herald the advent of His Son, did God deem a change in Russian policy necessary? Perhaps the shift in power will ultimately mend the split in the Communist block. Why was Johnson, who has vowed that he is com­mitted to peace elected, instead of Barry Goldwater, whom many felt would have proved far less tolerable of aggressive acts against the United States?

Whatever the answers to these ques­tions may be, we are confident that the political developments all over the world are directing the nations to the great day of God Almighty.

Pressure and tension are mounting in an ever-increasing tempo as the times of the Gentiles run their course. The house­hold of faith lives in a unique and un­precedented age, when the warnings of Christ and the apostles concerning events of the last days are coming to pass quicker than the eye can discern. Soon, the reality of Christ’s presence will be upon us, and all the calamities happening about us will seem like a bad dream.

The first appearance of Jesus some two thousand years ago is an undeniable historical fact the next appearance an absolute certainty and necessity for the survival of the human race.

“Except Those Days Should Be Shortened, There Should No Flesh Be Saved—But For The Elect’s Sake Those Days Shall Be Shortened.” (Matt. 24:22)