Warning: Auto-converted page: 1-column
The Jewish roots of Christianity

Home » November 1998

Volume 20, Number 11

ZOLA LEVITT

Though this article ran before the Conference at Wye, it contains valuable insights. This particular editor and his magazine are invariably fair and accurate about the situation in Israel.

Shift the burden to Arafat
He harbors terrorists and seeks Israel's destruction. Why trust him?

by Mortimer B. Zuckerman, Editor in Chief,
U.S. News and World Report, October 26, 1998

How would we react if a country with which we were negotiating a peace treaty sheltered terrorists who killed 15,000 Americans and wounded 45,000? With anger and resolution to make no further concessions and to strike back.

That is exactly the situation the Israelis find themselves in as President Clinton meets Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Chairman Yasser Arafat at the Wye Plantation in Maryland. Since the Oslo “peace process” began five years ago, more than 280 Israelis have been murdered (the equivalent in a population their size of 15,000 Americans) in over 1,000 terrorist attacks—a worse death toll than in the 15 years before a peace agreement was adopted in Oslo, Norway, in 1993, between then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and Arafat. The measure of Arafat’s contempt for the “peace” deal he signed is manifest.

At the Wye Plantation, much of the focus of the participants is now on the kind of territorial concessions Israel will make to the Palestinians.

A reasonable person would think that the more convincing the Palestinians are in assuring Israel that they will crack down on Palestinian killers, the more likely it is that Israel will cede some land. But no. Palestinian terrorists continue to act with impunity. Last week, a young Israeli was murdered outside Jerusalem. In the preceding few weeks, a young woman was murdered in the Jordan Valley, two other Jewish settlers were shot to death on the West Bank, and a grenade attack was launched in Hebron, wounding 13 Israelis. Each time, the terrorists escaped into the safe haven controlled by Arafat’s Palestinian Authority (PA).

Carnage in the name of Allah

These “small” attacks do not make front-page news in the West. It is barely reported that the PA has made no consistent effort to dismantle the infrastructure of terrorism. Instead, there is plenty of evidence PA leaders have nurtured it. But the Israelis know. The “small” attacks dominate the political atmosphere, and the media, within Israel. Death and funerals are a weekly obscenity there, and the pain of the losses is compounded by the juxtaposition of widespread and well-documented Arab jubilation at carnage carried out in the name of Allah. Furthermore, a recent poll shows a majority of Palestinians support the violence.

And what does Arafat do? He helps the forces of death.

Despite his agreements at Oslo, he has 50 percent more policemen under arms than he should, yet he does not use them against the killers. He uses them against Palestinians suspected of cooperating with Israel. And he has freed virtually all of those who at one time or another were arrested for terrorist attacks. He has even recruited 150 of the released terrorists into his police force, including 33 who are directly implicated in attacks on Israel.

The Israelis ask: If this is Arafat’s idea of “peace,” what will it be like if he is now given the vast bulk of the West Bank? The Israelis do not oppose legitimate Arab nationalism. Even the right wing of Israel has gone through the process of abandoning the idea of Greater Israel. But everyone opposes Arab violence, Arab hatred, Arab anti-Zionism, and Arab anti-Semitism. All Israelis despise Arab hypocrisy.

When the Western media are roused by a large-scale suicide bombing, Arafat responds with peaceful noises, but they are a sham. When the world is not paying attention, he constantly talks of jihad. His exhortations to the struggle against Israel can only inspire hatred among his people. They are true believers ready to take Arafat at his word and bring terror into the everyday life of Israelis. How else are Palestinians and Israelis to interpret the official PA television programs, akin to Sesame Street, which feature a summer camp that trains children in the use of automatic weapons, as they chant the glories of dying as suicidal warriors? How else are they to interpret Arafat’s references to Oslo as an “inferior peace?” That has a clear meaning in the Arab lexicon. To wit: Historically, Arab leaders have made such agreements during periods when they feel their situation is weak, knowing full well that they will make war when they are strong.

To Israelis, the most glaring example of Arafat’s true intentions is that he has not changed the language in the Palestinian Covenant, which calls for Israel’s destruction, even though he has specifically promised to change the covenant four times in the past five years. The covenant contains at least 14 passages calling for Israel’s demise, and similar language is written into the constitution of Arafat’s own Fatah movement.

No wonder the Israelis, faced with this deceit and destruction, are reluctant to cede territory when to do so will restrict their ability to interdict terrorism. They are particularly hesitant to make concessions during the interim phases of the Oslo peace process that do not carry with them an enforceable commitment to a full peace. Clearly, it is only in the context of a final settlement that Israel can gain recognized border lines and a full peace. That is why more attention should be given to the American proposal that will magnify the security threat to Israel by giving Arafat 14.2 percent of the land of the West Bank from which Israeli security forces would be hereafter totally excluded. The Clinton administration’s posture in these talks is curious. With all the evidence before it, the administration has been strangely accommodating to Arafat’s resistance to meet his security obligations. Clinton’s team seems to have adopted the belief that if the Israelis will yield, the Palestinians will accept living in peace with an autonomous Jewish state. This seems like wishful thinking to the Israelis. It brings to mind one memorable proverb:

“You cannot turn a tiger into a vegetarian by serving him more meat.”

The Israelis sensibly want to retain a buffer zone between Palestinian and Israeli communities, lands virtually uninhabited but crucial to a defensible Israel.

An uncertain ally

The sense that America’s friendship toward Israel has gone wobbly aggravates Israel’s anxieties. America knows what Arafat has said about an “inferior” peace, but nonetheless proposed an Israeli withdrawal from 13.1 percent of its land. This directly violates written U.S. commitments to Israel. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright says, “We have come up with ideas which are fair and balanced and do not threaten Israel’s security.” But this gives the U.S. interpretation of Israel’s security needs precedence over Israel’s. Albright has said suppression of terrorism by the PA is the “sine qua non” of further progress. But does she mean it? To date, America has barely given more than lip service to the PA’s failure to fulfill its Oslo obligations. The United States has not even insisted that Arafat hand over the eight Palestinian Arab terrorists who have been identified as taking part in the murder of 11 Americans since Oslo was signed. The U.S. focus on “new agreements” gives the PA encouragement to believe that it doesn’t have to comply with the old agreements. By contrast, the Israelis are asked to redefine Oslo and go beyond it! The best evidence of this tilt is that the U.S. administration defines Israeli reasonable-ness in terms of giving up an amount of land that Arafat “can accept.” This is what U.S. officials mean when they say the withdrawal must be “credible.” But that definition never appeared in Oslo, and the credibility at issue is that of America, which gave a commitment to Israel that it now seems to be abandoning.

The purpose of the Maryland gathering is to reach an interim agreement so that the parties can enter into talks on the final status of major issues like Israel’s security, the location of borders, and the fate of Jerusalem. But the perceived American tilt against Israel, and especially against Netanyahu, makes the Israelis rightly concerned about U.S. support on the final status talks. On the big issues, there has long been a difference between the State Department and Israel.

So beneath the happy pictures of the leaders there is a brewing crisis of confidence between Israel and America, a crisis derived in large measure from the conviction in the Clinton administration that it is Netanyahu’s “intransigence” that has led to the impasse in the Oslo process and the collapse in the Arab alliance against Iraq.

The Americans can legitimately doubt Netanyahu’s political skills to maneuver his way through the tough negotiations and reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians. But any doubts about Netanyahu’s commitment to such a peace agreement is wrongheaded. As one Israeli has pointed out, Netanyahu’s acceptance of the transfer of 13 percent of Israeli land to the Palestinians has proved he is not a hard-liner but a hard bargainer.

The critical issue is whether the Arabs can be relied on to live up to their security obligations. This is the time when the United States, as well as the Western media, must recognize that the burden has shifted to the Palestinians to demonstrate their willingness to control terrorists before Israel is forced into a position of further withdrawals. Otherwise, the Palestinians will feel no need to either meet their security obligations or make the compromises necessary to bring about a final status agreement. The true test of this administration’s skills is whether it helps craft an agreement that protects Israel and makes progress toward a final peace settlement.

Unfortunately, the Peace Conference seems to have failed Zuckerman’s true test. I do not believe such an agreement or such progress was made, at least not “toward a final peace settlement.” Please see Why Wye article. — Zola


A Note From Zola

Dear Friends:

We have a number of exciting issues concerning the ministry this month and some interesting travels coming up.

Returning to the textbook situation, we are redirecting our attention from Criswell College to Dallas Baptist University where A Survey of the New Testament is also in use. (This textbook is detailed in our past letters—it teaches Replacement Theology and “Gentilizes” the Gospel). Dallas Baptist University utilizes the “head in the sand” philosophy; that if they ignore letters and don’t return calls, then we can’t see them or know what they are doing. One of our viewers who used to be a staff member at DBU, contacted them recently and learned they were going to hold a curriculum committee meeting and they were well aware of the complaints about the Gundry book. They did hold that meeting and decided to continue using the book! In that case they have been fully informed and I hope you will continue your letter writing campaign to them at this address:

Dr. Gary Cook
President, Dallas Baptist University,
3000 Mountain Creek Parkway,
Dallas, TX 75211-9299

As to the other colleges using this book nationally, we have published their names but I am doing pretty much what I have asked you to do — trying to get this textbook out of the colleges of my denomination in my city.

I am nominally a Baptist since Dr. Criswell himself called my home on the occasion of my being appointed to teach at Dallas Baptist University in the early ‘80s. Dr. Criswell declared that everyone on the faculty belong to a Baptist Church and inquired as to my denomination. I told him I didn’t really have one and didn’t think they were very important, but he prevailed. The following Sunday morning I came down the aisle in response to his invitation at the end of the service. As I walked I realized there were people getting up on both sides of the church and falling in behind me in the center aisle. I didn’t realize who these people were until I got all the way up front, but when I glanced side to side I saw that these several dozen people were the Jewish believers. Assuming I had a problem, they came forward in solidarity to stand with me and in that manner I discovered that the First Baptist Church of Dallas had quite a few “undercover” Messianic Jews in the congregation. As I have traveled, I’ve discovered this to be true in almost any church.

That experience buttressed my theory that there are just as many Jews saved as there are Gentiles, per capita. Since about 2 percent of Americans are Jews, give or take, then I would expect to see two people out of every 100 in the Christian churches to be Jewish if they are believing at the same rate as Gentiles. And as a matter of fact, I found that to be true. While small communities with very small Jewish populations may not have any Jews in the Church, that situation averages out in big city churches where more than two people in 100 are Jewish (about 40 people walked forward with me in the audience of about 1,200 in First Baptist Church, for example). The Messianic congregations in Israel, of course, are 95 percent Jewish and make up for a lot of purely Gentile congregations in America. This would mean that far from turning away from Israel, as the Replacement Theologians think, God is bringing them to salvation at the same rate as Gentiles, and that doesn’t surprise me in the least.

In any case I became a Baptist by request of that famous and wonderful preacher, and I began to notice problems relating to anti-Semitism in my own denomination and in my own city. And at this point the Gundry textbook that is being used to systematically teach Replacement Theology, and any number of wrong doctrines, to class after class of students who will one day lead churches and work in them, is my main concern. I hope you will continue to help and we may well see this textbook discontinued at DBU as well as at Criswell College.

Before leaving this subject I will say that my years in First Baptist Church were wonderful in terms of learning about Israel and prophecy. Dr. Criswell is a great lover of that land as the Bible commands. The college named for him, Criswell College of Dallas, has unfortunately sunk to the level of the Gundry book, and professors like Dr. Paul Wolfe of that institution have actually publicly announced their conviction that God is finished with Israel.

Incidentally, the course I was commissioned to teach at DBU was called “Christ in the Old Testament” and emphasized the importance of the Messiah to Israel in olden times and, of course, in modern times. His Second Coming foretold elegantly in the Old Testament books was a major subject that we took up and, of course, He will return to Israel and establish His Kingdom there sitting on the throne of David. All of this teaching is now contradicted by some kind of Progressive Dispensationalism, Amillennialism and the like which is presently the run of the theology at DBU.

A fascinating teaching came to me during a prophecy conference last month. Pastor Ed Hindson observed that since even the devil doesn’t know when the Rapture will occur, he grooms someone in every generation as a potential Antichrist making him ready, standing in the wings so to speak, and awaiting his entrance. And so the guesses at Saddam Hussein, Mikkhail Gorbechev, various Popes, Hitler, Napoleon, etc., etc., were not bad guesses at all. Had the Lord suddenly brought the Rapture of the Church, the enemy would just as suddenly have imbued his evil representative on earth with supernatural powers and the Tribulation would have gotten underway.

As to potential Antichrists in our time, The New York Times ran the following terribly unfair and offensive statement on October 12.

“This President’s commitment to foreign policy has always been secondary. Mr. Clinton has rarely shown much boldness or even the willingness to punish those like Mr. Milosevic, Saddam Hussein of Iraq, or even Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel who taunt and defy him. That is especially true with Israel, because White House punishment of Israel threatens core Democratic Party constituencies.”

This amazing misconstruction teaches two things: (1) the very adequate Antichrists we have around with us today, and (2) the terribly obnoxious reference to Prime Minister Netanyahu of Israel in company with bloodthirsty dictators. It’s almost a waste of time to point out to the Times that Netanyahu does not murder his own people or other people or try to expand his nation or ethnically cleanse others out of it, but save your breath. I’ve talked to them about these things for years. I can’t tell if it’s a matter of prophecy or just shame that our “newspaper of record” writes this way.

The world in general more likely supports potential Antichrist figures than democratic leaders. Red China, Iran, and lesser rogue powers certainly do that and France is the most perfect example of a free market democracy which goes to bed with dictatorships every day of the week to profit monetarily. On the subject of France, the anti-Semitic government official, Le Pen, was recently fined more than $300,000 for his discrimination against the Jews. One has to have very little love for Jewish people to be fined for anti-Semitism in France! (As a letter writer once said in Time Magazine, “If countries were people, France would be a whore.”)

A new and better Gerald Schroeder tape is now available. We taped him with our professional TV cameras rather than a hand held home model on our September tour as he addressed our pilgrims. As Albert Einstein once put it, “Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind.” Dr. Schroeder covered much the same material that is on our TV programs, but in much greater detail in nearly 80 uninterrupted minutes.

If you want to hear Schroeder yourself, he has kindly consented to address each of our tour groups. You can sample his extended explanations and ask questions on our Deluxe Tour leaving the U.S. December 12 and returning December 22, or our Grand Tour December 12 to 27, after celebrating Christmas in the Holy Land. It also features trips to the resort city of Eilat on the Red Sea and to the breathtaking Petra. If you would like to join us, please call Loretta Browning at (214) 696-9760. [Or click here for an on-line request.]

For a truly different travel experience our Caribbean Cruise is scheduled for February 5–8, 1999. This is your opportunity to participate in an intensive study of the Bible. I will be speaking and conducting Bible studies each day in the relaxing atmosphere of a luxury cruise vessel while sailing through the fabulous Bahamas, stopping at Nassau and Cococay. We will have praise and worship sessions every morning with Bible studies in the evening. Afternoons are free for optional island trips for sightseeing, shopping, water sports, working on a winter tan, or simply relaxing aboard Royal Caribbean’s magnificent superliner, the Sovereign of the Seas. Caribbean cruises fill up early, so please contact us now if you want to go. For a brochure, please call 1-800-WONDERS or (214) 696-9760. [Or click here for an on-line request.]

We are currently working on our God and Science series which will feature interviews filmed in Israel with a number of scientists, believers and otherwise, addressing your interest in scientific things in Scripture.

Remember to pray for the peace of Jerusalem!

Your messenger,
[Zola]

Editorial

The Slickster’s Deal for his Israeli Friends

Article from The Washington Times,
October 27, 1998 by Wesley Pruden, Editor in Chief

Benjamin Netanyahu performed a valuable service for the presidents and prime ministers of the world who hanker to do business with Washington.

He measured the depth and breadth of Bill Clinton’s cynicism and found that it has no bottom. This will enable other presidents and prime ministers to calculate how hard they can squeeze the president of the United States.

Mr. Netanyahu was working with a little cynicism of his own, of course, throwing in the proposition of freedom for Jonathan Pollard, the American spy for Israel who has no known connection to the Palestinians or the so-called peace process….

Mr. Netanyahu reckoned, correctly, that Bill Clinton would have no trouble releasing a spy, or anyone else whose freedom might be worth a short-term political gain. Mr. Clinton needs something, anything, to shore up his diminishing stature as a leader.

Before we judge Mr. Netanyahu harshly, we should take note that Bill Clinton was no less dismissive of Israel’s interests, pressuring an ally to take a sucker’s deal in the hopes that it might help him with his party in the congressional elections coming up in 10 days’ time. The Israelis gave up another 13 percent of the West Bank, 750 convicted Palestinian terrorists accomplished in the dark arts of killing Jews, the right to build an airport in Gaza that will make it easier to import terrorists and the grim tools of their trade, and the formation of a joint Palestinian-Israeli committee to discuss further Israeli troop withdrawals. In return, the Palestinians will take back their written vow to destroy Israel (they don’t have to actually have a change of heart, only to agree not to write home about it), and please—no laughing here—the Palestinians promise to “step up” their efforts to combat terrorism and trafficking in weapons.

Mr. Netanyahu and his colleagues are not stupid; they know this is a sucker deal, and they know it will fall apart soon enough. The gritty reality of the Middle East is enough to make a Christian of almost anybody; there are no eager interns and Hollywood dinner parties waiting for Mr. Netanyahu in Jerusalem. The prime minister figured that since he had to take some kind of deal to make Mr. Clinton look like a world leader he might as well try to get something, and that something was Jonathan Pollard.

Bill Clinton, who can’t be expected to give any more of a damn about Israel’s interests than he does of his own country’s institutions, was more desperate than he appeared to be in the melodramatic final hours at Wye Plantation.

At one point, when Bibi Netanyahu couldn’t take any more of the diplomatic protocol of treating Yasser Arafat as if he were worthy of a man’s respect, President Clinton slammed his hand down on the table and shouted, “This is despicable!” (Look who’s calling someone else’s behavior despicable.)

Mr. Netanyahu gets one more thing: smiley faces from people who were calling him a mean-spirited jerk only yesterday. The New York Times, which always imagines that the way to peace is for the good guys to give the bad guys what they want so they won’t have to take it, waxes rhapsodic about Bibi’s eloquent “body language” and how nice it is that he seems at ease at last with Yasser Arafat.

“If all the pieces of the peace puzzle can be held in place in the months ahead,” The New York Times concludes, “everything will be as wonderful as Dr. Pangloss promised us it would be.” (And if Billy Graham holds a revival meeting in Beirut and the devil gets saved, won’t that be fine?)

The peace process is not about peace, as everyone knows but has agreed not to say, but about process. This is the war the Palestinians are winning. The Israelis, who understand that the first war they lose will be the last war they’ll get a chance to fight, are weary of the garrison state, and Israel is counting on the wrong friends in America. It’s all very depressing. If anyone sees any hope for peace in Bill Clinton’s blue print for Israel’s surrender, he’s a fool, or worse.

The following article, which ran in an October issue of the Dallas Morning News, reveals how principles of theology concern denominations, in this case, Southern Baptists. It seems that a perfectly Scriptural amendment has caused some friction among Baptist teachers and that “not everybody interprets Scripture the same way.” Faculty members have the responsibility to resign if they do not agree with a denomination’s Articles of Faith. Apply this logic to the Criswell College situation and we wonder why some of that institution’s teachers don’t resign. In our last issue we published president Richard C. Well’s statement, “It is unquestionably true that Gundry’s eschatology differs from that which is stated in the Articles of Faith of The Criswell College.”

Editorial

Faculty Forced to Re-sign Baptist Document
Amendment on roles of husband, wife prompts FW seminary to take action

by Berta Delgado (staff writer of The Dallas Morning News)

Faculty members at Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary in Fort Worth are being forced to re-sign the core document of the Southern Baptist Convention because of an amendment on family life that continues to cause controversy.

Unaltered since 1963, the Baptist Faith and Message—a confession of faith that many Southern Baptists consider a summary of basic beliefs—was changed during the denomination’s June meeting in Salt Lake City. The amendment calls on each husband to “provide for, to protect, and to lead the family” and each wife to “submit graciously to the servant leadership of her husband even as the church willingly submits to the headship of Christ.” It defines marriage as a heterosexual union.

“Employment at the seminary has for decades been based on a faculty member’s signing the Baptist Faith and Message and teaching with and not contrary to that statement of faith,” seminary president Ken Hemphill said in a prepared statement.

“As a matter of conviction and conscience, as an SBC institution, we gladly teach according and not contrary to the Baptist Faith and Message.”

Faculty members called by The Dallas Morning News did not return calls or declined to comment. David Porter, the seminary’s public relations director, said that because of the wording of seminary bylaws, legal counsel decided that faculty should sign the amended statement. Trustees recently voted to amend the charter and bylaws so that the statement doesn’t have to be re-signed every time it is amended.

Mr. Porter said it’s faculty members’ responsibility to resign if they cannot subscribe to the seminary’s articles of faith.

No deadline has been set. Mr. Porter said two or three of the approximately 90 faculty members have expressed reservations about signing the amended statement of faith.

A statement written by the chairman and vice chairman of the faculty council said that they endorse the call for godly families but realize that the Baptist statement is not infallible. Their statement, released by the school, stated that “faculty and administration are prayerfully considering this new article and informally discussing its meaning, how to teach it and how publicly to affirm its substance in the full text of Scripture.”

Dr. Jeff B. Pool, a former seminary professor who is now a lecturer in theology at Brite Divinity School at Texas Christian University, said some of his former colleagues are concerned about signing the statement. “This goes exactly against the claim that the confession of faith makes for itself,” he said. According to Dr. Pool, the preamble clearly says that “confessions are only guides in interpretation, having no authority over the conscience” and that they are “not to be used to hamper freedom of thought or investigation in other realms of life.”

Dr. Pool said that not everybody interprets Scripture the same way, including Ephesians 5, where the submission issue is mentioned.

Mr. Porter said school officials regard the family amendment as an important statement.

“The fact the amendment was endorsed by more than 100 evangelical leaders across the country affirms that Southern Baptists did the right thing in June,” he said.

Letters to Zola

(Note: If those writing to this ministry tell us that they do not want their letters published, we will abide by their wishes.)

Re: A Survey of the New Testament, by Robert H. Gundry

Through your television program, I learned that subject text is being used at Dallas Baptist University. That University is scheduled to inherit my estate.

I notified the Development Department of DBU that my estate will not come to DBU if subject text is retained, especially as required reading.

Parents trust professors to present truthful material to the young minds of their children and grandchildren they send there, often at considerable financial sacrifice. The professors who are responsible for this text’s being in the lineup should have had at least a first clue by the picture of the Turk on a donkey. The other more subtle parts of the book that bruise my sensibilities should not be subtle in the minds of these professors who have served in their capacities for decades.

If this were a text in some other discipline, the impact would soon be felt in application; however, religion is the backbone of DBU and the department of highest need for discernment. It is not enough to say that everyone can have his own opinion. The text is blatantly in error throughout.

It saddens my heart that Gundry would write such a text, that the professionals at DBU whom parents trust to teach and guide have betrayed that trust — and evidently unwittingly for some reason (I can only guess) — and that it falls to us who care for the institution and the faculty who have sacrificed over the years to bring DBU where it is today, to bring pressure at the risk of antagonizing those we care for. Is this not true throughout the Word for those who will not participate in or condone the watering down of the Word that seems to be vogue today?

In the Love of Christ, J.A., Bella Vista, AR




One of our viewers wrote Scott Bolinder, Vice President of Zondervan Publishing House, who put out the Gundry textbook:

Mr. Bolinder:

In the September 1998 Levitt Letter published by Zola Levitt, there appeared a copy of a letter from you to Zola. As I read this letter, I noted that you strongly defend the book and Dr. Gundry. However, I must ask if you have carefully looked at the material quoted from the book itself? I will not go as far as to suggest anti-Semitic views, but rather a case of assumption on the part of Dr. Gundry. He makes many statements that are not supported by Biblical facts or history.

In the same issue of the Levitt Letter there is an exchange of viewpoints between Dr. Gundry and Dr. Thomas McCall. As I read Dr. Gundry’s remarks, I am more convinced that Zola Levitt and Dr. McCall were accurate in their statements concerning Dr. Gundry’s teaching. If this textbook is used to teach and indoctrinate Pastors, Evangelists, and Teachers, then the truth of the Scripture has been greatly distorted. I thank God that Zola Levitt and Dr. McCall have taken time to call attention to this textbook that should be removed from all classrooms.

You suggested that Zola publicly apologize to Dr. Gundry and to Zondervan Publishing. Does Zola Levitt owe an apology — no, he does not!

Cordially, W. R. W.




Dear Zola:

Last week I took my children to a restaurant. My six-year-old son asked if he could say grace. As we bowed our heads he said, “God is good. God is great. Thank you for the food, and I would even thank you more if mom gets us ice cream for dessert. And Liberty and Justice for all! Amen!”

Along with laughter from the other customers nearby I heard a woman remark, “That’s what’s wrong with this country. Kids today don’t even know how to pray. Asking God for ice cream! Why, I never!”

Hearing this, my son burst into tears and asked me, “Did I do it wrong? Is God mad at me?” As I held him and assured him that he had done a terrific job and God was certainly not mad at him, an elderly gentlemen approached the table. He winked at my son and said, “I happen to know that God thought that was a great prayer.” “Really?” my son asked. “Cross my heart!” Then in a theatrical whisper the gentleman added (indicating the woman whose remark had started this whole thing), “Too bad she never asks God for ice cream. A little ice cream is good for the soul sometimes.”

Naturally, I bought my kids ice cream at the end of the meal. My son stared at his for a moment and then did something I will remember the rest of my life. He picked up his sundae and without a word walked over and placed it in front of the woman. With a big smile he told her, “Here, this is for you. Ice cream is good for the soul sometimes, and my soul is already good!”

From, G.G.




Dear Zola:

In reference to the program entitled In the Beginning & The Days of Creation, I am writing to encourage you and Dr. Schroeder to continue to do what God has called you to do, using your gifts and talents to help/bless people. This program was thought provoking in that it at least sheds some light on a subject that has been somewhat confusing to say the least. There will always be people who will twist what you say no matter how you say it. Dr. Schroeder’s theory may not be 100% correct, but it appears that God has placed him on the right path. Science and religion have been divided for far too long, which perhaps has been, and usually is, a part of Satan’s strategy in creating confusion, etc. Marrying the two in this program has been revealing.

Thank you.
Sincerely, V.H.O., Las Vegas, NV




Dear Zola and Staff:

I have been reading your newsletter lately about the Replacement Theology in our seminaries. I, like you, am appalled at the lack of diligence to guard the truth. It appears to me that real God-given truth is becoming a scarce commodity in our teaching institutions. If we graduate leaders of the church with such notions, then I feel that God will have no other choice than to cause a real grass roots upheaval. We non-seminary trained Bible theologians can easily see through this deception.

However, this fact doesn’t change anything. Gentiles are not God’s chosen people. They never were, and they never will be. God chose Abraham. We as Gentiles must be secure in our position in Christ, and be happy as our Jewish brothers and sisters find the fulfillment of their heritage. We Gentiles are adopted, but no less heirs. Zola, keep up the pressure. There has always been something special about Jews who love Jesus. I stand with you, and pray that all believers study the Bible instead of just accepting what the preachers have to say on any matter. May Truth prevail!

In His Service, B.M.




Dear Zola:

Here’s a joke possibly suitable for a Levitt Letter: Who was the world’s first, greatest, and wisest financier? Noah, because he floated stock while the rest of the world was in liquidation!




Dear Zola:

The tapes I have ordered are a gift for my husband. He is a physicist. He has always known what Mr. Schroeder said on your program and in his book, The Science of God is true, but never knew how to express these truths. Thank you for this wonderful program!

My son is in graduate school at Cornell in physics. He says this is the best book ever on physics!

Sincerely, S.J., Pickering, OH




Dear Zola:

How dare you to speak the truth! Don’t you know what kind of trouble you can get into? Don’t you know that you are causing trouble? That’s why I love you!
Smile!

Love, your friend (and one who prays for you), C.M.




Dear Zola:

I am so happy to finally get around to writing to you. I look forward to your program each week and quite often tape it and watch again just to make sure I didn’t miss anything! I am so glad to see you renouncing certain books being used in the seminaries. Too many of these so-called halls of higher learning, are producing Christians who have no clue that Christ was actually a Jew! Christians, who have no love for their brothers and sisters in Christ (if they are of a denomination other than their own), much less a desire to see Israel restored to her original nobility!

I commend you and your ministry!!! The Lord is alive and quite well!!! I thank you for giving me an opportunity to be a part of what God is doing through you. I do realize that there are not many of you that work at the program, so you do probably get quite swamped! I know I’m pretty far away, but if you can think of anything I can do to help the ministry (besides prayers and funds), I would love to volunteer my services.

In Christ’s Love, C.S., Denver City, TX




Dear Zola:

I have just received August’s Levitt Letter and I notice that you begin by apologizing. Brother, stay strong, you don’t need to apologize for speaking the truth in love.

The fact is that many people who claim Christ cannot accept that He is (and I emphasize is) a Jew.

Just recently I spoke to a “Christian” woman who was obviously challenged in her theology when I stated that Jesus is a Jew. I kindly offered her Biblical proof of this, which she rejected or rationalized.

This anti-Semitic attitude is just the kind of thing that Jesus prayed about in John 17. That we may, as the Church, be one, both Gentile and Jew.

To all our brothers and sisters who can’t believe in a Jewish Jesus (although to believe in a Gentile Jesus is to believe a new Gospel), I quote Scripture, I John 4:8, “He that loveth not knoweth not God; for God is love.”

I can only hope that God will prompt people who harbor any prejudice in their hearts to repent and grow in their spirits, and I can’t think of a better time to repent of anti-Semitism than during “shuvah” (repentance as on the Day of Atonement). Right, Zola?

In His Love, James Cooper

P.S. Please feel free to print this letter in whole or part as you see fit, and if you could, please print my whole name so all will know where I stand.




To Zola Levitt & Staff:

Just a quick note to let you know that your unique kind and form of evangelism is and has added a much needed if not belated element to the authenticity of the Christian Scriptures or message.

Unlike better known evangelists such as Billy Graham, etc., etc., you have addressed many issues which need to be explained in order to have a more consensual type believer. Your program brings to public attention the artifacts now being unearthed in the Middle East with emphasis on Israel, The Dead Sea Scrolls as such relate to current transcripted books, Scriptural prophecy as such relates to the secular politics in the Middle East area with emphasis on Israel, etc., etc., combined with your musical ear, you offer a type of evangelism which would give you a round of bravo applause from St. Paul himself, I am sure. This combination makes you unique.

I am winding up a computer program effort with a Lutheran Synod which unlike too many Moslems does not have to stumble over the Koran to get to the Hebrew Scriptures but who have lost their ability to evangelize outside of the bedroom. Hope to support your efforts more in the near future, then.

Cordially, W.E.S.

Why Wye?
Something ventured — nothing gained

by Zola Levitt

One of those peculiar things that happens in the newsletter business took place between our past issue and this one. It seemed that in September we were late getting to the Levitt Letter because I was in Israel for 17 days, and just couldn’t meet the deadline. One of the things I covered in that letter was the September visit of Dennis Ross to the Holy Land for one of those posturing negotiating sessions. Ross, our government’s chief negotiator on the Middle East, is thought of by both sides in Israel as favoring the other. In reality he is a typical American government official—an empty suit. He has accomplished exactly nothing in the “peace” negotiations, and thank God for that! As I’ve often said, when they really complete this peace agreement, it will lead us to all-out war.

But by the time that newsletter had gone to the printer and was subsequently mailed to you, a much more important peace conference was being held in Washington. President Clinton, making another one of his attempts to appear very presidential indeed in the midst of all his troubles, summoned Arafat and Netanyahu to the Wye Plantation near Camp David (causing New York Times columnist, William Sapphire, to ask, “Why Wye?”).

There are a few new frills this time, but basically the conference was held to buttress Clinton’s reputation and polish the American image with the Arabs. The standard Israel bashing (you can count on our reporters to blame the victims) was undertaken by our media, but if you looked at the Israeli newspapers you would think they were covering a different conference entirely. Summit meetings with dictatorships are basically a waste of time. An Israeli analyst pointed out that everything at that conference was established 19 months ago in the agreement at Hebron; it’s just that none of it has been implemented as yet.

Naturally the conference was concluded by a self-congratulatory signing of some irrelevant document and umpteen tributes to the patience and brilliance of President Clinton. I’m not sure what Clinton gives away to have these fellow national leaders take part in such a charade. The principle new wrinkles are about the CIA—the folks who were in charge of preventing terrorism in this country like that at the World Trade Center and Oklahoma City—being in charge of rooting out Palestinian terrorism. The whole conference was hardly worth comment and yet the New York Times gave it nearly its entire front page and CNN talked of almost nothing else for days. This exaggeration of importance can only be a sign of prophecy marching on. Israel must take its place at the head of the nations and it’s almost puzzling how such a small country would achieve such worldwide interest. Have you heard anything about Bemin lately? It’s the same size as Israel. But leave it to the media and they’ll promote Israel to its position of global importance. For worldly reasons unknown, Israel is a dramatic topic and as a sad and wise philosopher advised in the movie Men with Guns, “Newspapers are businesses and the common people love drama.”

I realized that since our October letter was so late that remarks I made about the Dennis Ross visit to Jerusalem would instead be applied to the summit conference in the U.S., and then I saw that what I had said was totally applicable anyway, to either of these conferences. I could make a blanket statement about all Arab-Israeli peace negotiations since Madrid in 1991, and it would go something like this: “Nothing was accomplished. The press said ‘tremendous issues were raised and agreed upon and in the end we still have unrest and problems in Israel.’” It really doesn’t matter who talks to whom in this age of false peace in which we live. Suffice it to say that if you like the peace in Ireland, Bosnia, or South Africa, you’ll love these “answers” to the Israeli situation!

Regardless of what the media trumpets, the conference in Washington got snagged on the same hook that has defeated these peace talks all along, and that is Arab terrorism. The problem is the Israelis are expected to do three things they just cannot do: (1) to give up more land, (2) to divide Jerusalem with the Arabs, and (3) to sit along the coastline and be targets for some new Palestinian nation until they are wiped out. Conversely, the Arabs are expected to do three things they cannot seem to do: (1) stop murdering people, (2) stop murdering people, and (3) stop murdering people.

The deal seems to come down to blackmail—the old protection game. Back in the early days of the Mafia, big tough “wise guys” would break a few windows along a business block, and then they would enter one of the stores and “sell” the owner insurance against his windows (or his legs) being broken some day. If he bought the insurance his windows remained intact and he still walked without crutches, but if he didn’t pay off—God help him! Now in Israel, things work just the same. The Palestinians blow up some innocent civilians—God knows who; they may include their own people—and the Israelis are supposed to purchase insurance against further disasters by giving up their land.

The Israeli position behind the scenes is, I think, to string along these peace talks because the whole world wants it that way (reason: practically the whole world seems to dislike the Jews and doesn’t favor them living in peace and comfort). The whole world also wants to please the Arabs to get cheap oil prices, hence their love for Iraq and Saddam Hussein.

In the meantime, the Israelis have to hold on to all the land they have and maintain a tremendous army just to survive. Peace treaties aside, giving land to the Arabs in Israel is absolute suicide and there’s no two ways about it. The more given, the sooner the death notice.

Implementation is certainly the keyword. Nothing done at these conferences means a thing until it’s accomplished on the ground by everyday people. For example, the Palestinians didn’t wait until everyone was unpacked from the Washington trip to attempt an attack on a school bus full of children. This was spoiled by a true hero, an Israeli soldier who placed his jeep in the path of the oncoming vehicle and absorbed the entire bomb blast, going to the next life in the process. When considering peace deals with Arabs, it is well to remember that there are terrorists everywhere in this world, but it would be very hard to recruit any of them to bomb a school bus.

And with the bombing November 6, I hope we can bury this “peace process” for once and for all. Peace cannot be accomplished when one party simply wants to kill the other.

Newspapers may run splendid pictures of what are known as the national leaders and they all look wonderful, smiling and congratulating each other. But headlines like “Clinton Achieves Peace” should not lead us astray. The Jerusalem Post, North American edition, thoughtfully headlined its October 24 issue as follows:

“Wye Plantation and the Appearance of Progress”

Colleges Using Gundry Text

We have been asked about our telephone survey of evangelical colleges using the Gundry textbook. Below are those which are presently using the book. Keep in mind, we called only about 20% of the colleges and we established the Gundry book is not all that popular, thank heaven! You will find other such colleges mentioned in the letters to the editor we publish.

Ashbury College
Biola University
California Baptist College
Eastern College
Evangel College
Hannibal-La Grange College
Huntington College
Judson College
Le Tourneau University
Liberty University
Malone College
New Orleans Theological
Reformed Presbyterian
Theological Seminary
Seattle Pacific University
Southwest Bat University
Taylor University
Trinity International University
Trinity Western University
Westmont College

Zola’s Travel and Speaking Itinerary

Zola is available to speak in the Dallas/Fort Worth metroplex. This would be much easier on him than “going to and fro in the earth and from walking up and down in it” (Job 1:7). The Lord observed, “no prophet is accepted in his own country” (Luke 4:24), but he didn’t mention a teacher’s own city! Zola is available for Passover demonstrations as well as talks on prophecy, etc., at your DFW area church. Please call Leanna at (214) 696-8844.

November 22
King of Glory Lutheran Church — ELCA
Rev. Jon R. Lee, Senior Pastor
Dennis Guill, Director of Education
Dallas, Texas
972-661-9435
November 17
Christ Episcopal CHurch
Attn: Joann Eck
4550 Legacy Drive
Plano, Texas
972-618-0222
December 12 – 22 / 27
Hanukkah/Christmas Tour
Israel - Petra/Eilat
February 5 – 8
Caribbean Reunion Cruise
Nassau — Cococay — Miami
April 14/18-28
Spring Tour
Greek Island Cruise

Share This Page