The Great Deception

The West betrays the world’s only Jewish state

2 state solution Well, it finally came. Recognition of a Palestinian state by Britain and other leading Western nations. A complete betrayal of the Jewish people (see Zech 14:1-2; 12:3)

Historic ‘Palestine’

To suggest this was about working towards a future peace for Israel and ‘Palestine’ is disingenuous to say the least. As was the statement by the Palestinian spokesman wheeled into the BBC studios that the British people were finally recognising that the land in question had belonged to the Palestinians all along.

In truth, at the time of the Balfour Declaration in 1917, the Holy Land was known across the world (even on our Bible maps) as Palestine, but for very different historical reasons.

After destroying Jerusalem and sending the Jewish people into a long exile, the Romans re-named the region Philistia (from which Palestine was derived) as a final insult to the departing Jews. Though now extinct, the Philistines had originally occupied the coastal strip of Gaza from which they constantly raided and warred against the Israelites.

Israel’s borders

Balfour’s promise of a restored Jewish home was subsequently enshrined in international law following the San Remo agreement of 1920, with the borders stretching far wider than today – ‘from the river to the sea’ and beyond, in fact. Why don’t our ministers just check the Foreign Office archives?

The ‘stroke of a pen’ reduced Jewish territory by more than half, yet the Zionists kept their cool.

But to appease Arab objections, a ‘two-state solution’ was achieved in 1922 when Winston Churchill (then Colonial Secretary) handed all the territory beyond the Jordan to the Arabs. The ‘stroke of a pen’ reduced Jewish territory by more than half, yet the Zionists kept their cool. Peace at virtually any price.

Then in 1947, when the United Nations came up with their ‘Partition Plan’ (another two-state solution), Israel nevertheless accepted their (now still further reduced) slice of territory while the Arabs rejected theirs outright!

The plain truth was obvious. The Arab leaders didn’t want any Jews living among them. The so-called Palestinian territories of today (Gaza, Judea and Samaria – the latter two also known as the West Bank) have simply evolved as a temporary arrangement to keep the peace, but never naturally belonged to the Palestinians.

Judea and Samaria are the very heart of Israel, land of the Bible which gave birth to our Saviour. So what makes Sir Keir Starmer think a two-state solution will now work? The Iranian-backed terrorists who have created this monster (of a seemingly intractable situation) are dedicated to ridding the region of the Jewish people – period. This is no secret. They keep mouthing these diabolical threats. And they must be defeated.

The Iranian-backed terrorists who have created this monster (of a seemingly intractable situation) are dedicated to ridding the region of the Jewish people – period.

Lies and propaganda

As Rabbi Jonathan Cahn has put it so well, we are witnessing a ‘dark resurrection’ of the antisemitic Philistine spirit forever hissing and striking out at the re-born state of Israel. A picture based on Revelation 12:4 where the evil Dragon “stood in front of the woman who was about to give birth, so that it might devour her child the moment he was born”.

Having failed to murder the Messiah, he is now relentlessly pursuing the nation that gave him to the world. And October 7^th, 2023 was the tipping point, tipping even long-term Western allies against God’s ancient people.

They quickly forgot the brutal slaughter of Jews and objected to them defending their own people, believing instead the torrent of lies and propaganda spewing out of the mouth of the satanic ‘dragon’ who has captured the hearts of the godless men now ruling the West.

And so, the people who gave us the Judeo-Christian model of Western civilization are now being betrayed by an unholy alliance of weak politicians who have believed the devil’s big lie about Palestinian statehood. And it’s happened because they have turned their backs on the roots of the Christian faith that made our nations great in the first place. God help us!

Judgement

Just read the verse immediately following the Dragon passage quoted above: “She [the woman, Israel] gave birth to a son, a male child, who will rule all the nations with an iron sceptre” (referencing a similar thought in Psalm 2:9).

A modern version of the Philistines is still chasing God’s people with murderous intent, and we shouldn’t be cheering them on.

Judgment is at the door. For when God restores the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, he will gather all nations and put them on trial “for what they did to my inheritance, my people Israel, because they scattered my people among the nations and divided up my land.” (Joel 3:2)

It seemed appropriate that, on the day Sir Keir recognised Palestine, our Scripture Union Bible reading plan directed us to Psalm 56, described as a psalm of David “when the Philistines had seized him in Gath”.

A modern version of the Philistines is still chasing God’s people with murderous intent, and we shouldn’t be cheering them on. Isn’t it time for our nations to choose whom we will serve – the God of David or the demons of Goliath?

Charles Gardner, 23/09/2025

Feedback:

	Paul Attard	26/09/2025 13:45
Here in the Basque country, protests are always in favour of "Palestine". They just don't know the history. And Pedro Sanchez, President of Spain, has joined the fashionable bandwagon club of recognising a Palestinian state. But I guess that when the chips are down is when God has His say. Thank you Charles for that message.
	Roy Thurley	26/09/2025 17:23
I think my friend Charles is being a little unkind to Winston Churchill's action at the Cairo Conference of 1921. There had already been a lot of Arab disturbances in Palestine and he was determined to do something about it. Article 25 of the Mandate for Palestine gave the Mandatory Power permission to postpone or withhold most of the terms of the Mandate in the area of land east of the Jordan river, if it did not consider them to be applicable. At the Cairo Conference it was agreed to implement this provision and 'draw the line' between the two parts of Palestine down the Jordan Valley, through the Dead Sea and down to the Gulf of Aqaba. Churchill could see from the Arab uprisings that had already taken place in Jerusalem and other parts of Western Palestine that the Arabs were likely to infiltrate from Eastern Palestine to cause trouble in the future. A border along the Jordan Valley would be far more easy to defend than an arbitrary 'line in the sand' somewhere west of the Hejaz Railway line, despite the agreement reached by Emir Feisal and Chaim Weizmann. The latter had not been invited to the conference and was in the USA when it was taking place. When he heard what had been decided he was livid, as he saw Churchill's action as cutting off part of the Promised Land from Jewish settlement. But was he right? If we go back to the Biblical account, it is very clear that the Promised Land is seen by God as being only the territory to the west of the River Jordan; that Joshua was going to lead the Jewish people across that river in order to enter the Promised Land; and that Moses was not going to enter the Promised Land. If the territory east of the Jordan was part of the Promised Land then Moses would already be in it! Although the area east of the Jordan is not part of the Promised Land, it is, if you will, part of the Permitted Land. The area on both sides of the River Jordan is part of the allotment promised to Abraham and his descendants after him. Two-and-a-half tribes settled on the east side of the River Jordan when the remainder crossed over. So Britain exercised Article 25 of the Mandate in a memorandum to the League of Nations on 16th September 1922, which the League subsequently approved. This brought into being a new entity, called Trans-Jordan, also to be administered by Britain under their Mandate. It is interesting to note that the League of Nations referred to this territory as "The Trans-Jordan Province of Palestine" until the last meeting of the League on 18th April 1946. Incidentally, there is a clause in Article 25 which was consistently ignored by the British during the Mandate period. The clause states that “no action shall be taken which is inconsistent with the provisions of Articles 15,16 and 18.” Article 15 begins “The Mandatory shall see that complete freedom of conscience and the free exercise of all forms of worship, subject only to the maintenance of public order and morals, are ensured to all. No discrimination of any kind shall be made between the inhabitants of Palestine on the ground of race, religion or language. No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of religious belief.” Yet the Jews were banned from owning any land or settling in the province of Trans-Jordan. This contravened Article 15 and was approved by the British administration. I have raised this issue with international lawyers, who agree that Britain was in breach of the Mandate on this. It does not seem that the Mandates Commission picked up on the breach, either.
	Edward Barnes	26/09/2025 21:23
So can I please ask the question as to what should happen to the Palestinian people? When political Zionism was first mooted (towards the end of the nineteenth century) and found support from sections of Christianity, the land then called Palestine was part of the Ottoman Empire. It was something of a backwater, sparsely settled, but not without its inhabitants. The majority called themselves "Palestinians", having lived in the land for generations; they lived alongside Jews (and other ethnic groups), mostly peaceably, but who were at time treated as second-class citizens. Following Balfour and San Remo, the British Mandate supposedly supported Jewish repatriation, but in practice blocked large-scale migration of Jews to the land. All the while, numbers immigrated from surrounding lands such that they would always maintain a "Palestinian" (Arab) majority in the land. So, the history since the declaration of the State of Israel notwithstanding, we arrive at the present day where a Palestinian majority appears controlled by a Jewish minority. (I can see parallels with apartheid South Africa, with which I know many here may take offense). Were there to be a single state, fully democratic, power would pass immediately to those claiming to represent the Palestinian Arab majority. What to become of these Palestinian peoples (whether their links to the land is measured in centuries, or for some, less than one hundred years)? They aren't particularly liked among their Arab brethren (most notably Black September was perpetrated by a hireling against Palestinian refugees in Jordan). Are these not also people for whom Christ died?
	hannah w	30/09/2025 20:04
To Edward Barnes -- It's a common mistake to confuse Arab Israelis with Arab residents under the Palestinian Authority/Hamas. Here are the facts. When Israel declared its independence in 1948, the Jews pleaded with the Arabs in its territory (only Jews in Palestine were called "Palestinians" back then) to remain and become citizens of the new state. The surrounding Arab nations urged them all to leave, promising that they could return after the five invading armies had driven the Jews "into the sea". Around 160,000 Arabs stayed put, while another 700,000 left. Now, 75 years later, the descendants of those 160,000 are Arab Israelis. They number 2.1 million and enjoy the same rights as the Jewish citizens. Arabs are over 20% of Israel's population. They serve in the Israeli parliament and the Supreme Court, as well as many vital professions like medicine. Most do not call themselves "Palestinians", and some also serve in the IDF. There is no apartheid in Israel, a fact confirmed by South African visitors who lived through real apartheid. Compare that with the areas given to the Palestinians under Oslo -- all Jews are forbidden to visit or even drive through there, let alone live there. And incidentally, the PA and Hamas are keeping their own people in TWELVE refugee camps on Palestinian land! This is a weird kind of internal apartheid, and the UN apparently approves of it because UNRWA is managing the camps. The ancient heartland of Israel (Judea-Samaria) is currently disputed territory, but the "Palestine liberation" movement started in 1964, while Jordan was occupying that area and ruling over 1.3 million Palestinians. It could have easily become a Palestinian state back in 1949, but that was never even suggested until 1967 (when Israel took it away from Jordan in another war). You need to ask why, and what land therefore the Palestinians wanted to "liberate" in 1964. As for a "Palestinian majority controlled by a Jewish minority", to my knowledge there is no such thing. The Palestinians in Judea-Samaria are controlled completely by Arabs under Mahmoud Abbas, who has banned all Jews. The IDF goes into PA areas only to arrest people who have committed crimes in Israeli territory... because the PA won't arrest them. Instead Abbas pays them a reward, based on how many Jews they have killed. I hope some of this helps set the record straight. What is to become of them? "Are these not also people for whom Christ died?" Certainly they are. But they are trapped in Islam, which decrees death for anyone who becomes a Christian. Pray for their spiritual liberation, and for brave Arabic-speaking missionaries to rise up.
	Edward Barnes	04/10/2025 18:41
Thank you for your response, Hannah. I'm not disputing the rights of Jewish people to occupy the land promised to Abraham - but really interested to hear what the author of this piece would propose as a way forward in regard of others there - where they may live and under what system of Government. Whether there are parallels with apartheid is a matter of opinion. I know that many disagree (including some who lived under both systems), but my observations do betray similarities, not least in the propaganda directed towards sympathisers in western nations. Cars carry different number-plates, which restrict free movement between zones and residential rights and curfews are imposed according to "citizenship". Yes, there is democracy among all people-groups within the State of Israel, but were the wider area (West Bank and Gaza included) be considered as a single entity, would a roughly equal populace or Jewish minority still allow full democracy? Mercifully, and despite persecution, we are seeing many coming to Christ across the Middle and Near-East. We pray and hope for the same among all the peoples of the land.

The Great Deception

Israel’s borders

Lies and propaganda

Judgement

Welcome to our Website

Contact Us