Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said the United States won't financially support a Hamas-led Palestinian government and will ask other nations to cut off aid as well.

"The United States is not prepared to fund an organization that advocates the destruction of Israel, that advocates violence," Rice said en route to London, where today she will review the Palestinian elections with representatives of the United Nations, the European Union and Russia. The group, known as the Quartet, has been working on peace negotiations.

The United States is trying to build a consensus within the Quartet and among other nations for withholding aid as a way to isolate the incoming government until Hamas renounces its call for Israel's destruction. Hamas, which the United States and EU regard as a terrorist organization, trounced the ruling Fatah party in the Palestinian parliamentary elections on Wednesday.

Hamas' response to that? Haaretz is reporting that Hamas has asked the international community, just hours before officials of the international Quartet of the UN, EU, U.S. and Russia were to meet to discuss the consequences of the Hamas election victory, not to cut aid to the Palestinian Authority, pledging that the funding would be used for social relief and not for violence. Clearly, Hamas realizes it needs the international cash flow to continue, but the question in my mind is this: Assuming the international community buys that a Hamas-led Palestinian government, which has never waivered in its desire to see Israel destroyed, would change its ways somewhat, would the international community write it a blank check or hold it somewhat accountable for its actions? If the answer is the latter, it is logical to assume the international community likewise wouldn't necessarily trust the Palestinian government to abide by any peace coevenant it would make with Israel, creating the possibility any such covenant would be confirmed in some manner, perhaps by peacekeepers, as has been done around the globe for decades now.

Some contend that a Palestinian government led by Hamas will never agree to a peace covenant of any kind with Israel. In spite of this, WorldNetDaily is reporting that "Hamas will soon make public a "peace initiative" in which it will offer to trade strategic land with Israel, cease attempts to capture parts of Jerusalem, and sign a 10-year renewable cease-fire with the Jewish state", according to a top Hamas leader.

Further demonstrating that those who haven't given Middle East peace a chance in the aftermath of last Wednesday's Palestinian elections may be wrong in their thinking, a Haaretz article states Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar told CNN on this date "a long-term truce (hudna) with Israel is possible if Israel retreats to its pre-1967 borders and releases Palestinian prisoners." Pay particular attention to the words I've highlighted in the excerpt below, which were found within the article:

Zahar laid out a series of conditions that he said could lead to years of co-existence alongside Israel. He said that if Israel "is ready to give us the national demand to withdraw from the occupied area [in] '67; to release our detainees; to stop their aggression; to make geographic link between Gaza Strip and West Bank, at that time, with assurance from other sides, we are going to accept to establish our independent state at that time, and give us one or two, 10, 15 years time in order to see what is the real intention of Israel after that."

Daniel 9:26-27: And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The people who come to destroy Jerusalem and the sanctuary in AD 70 was the Romans. The prince (or leader) that shall come, the Antichrist, will be of Roman descent. He will confirm (or make strong) a covenant of peace in the Middle East between Israel and her enemies seven precise years in length. When the Antichrist confirms peace in the Middle East or at some point immediately prior to that, the Rapture of the Church will take place.

Ask most Christians today what is going on around them pointing toward the soon-coming return of Jesus Christ and they have few ideas, in spite of the fact the battle for possession of Jerusalem is absolutely key to that taking place! Why do they not know this? It's no longer taught in many churches. Too controversial it seems, in spite of the fact it's right there in the Word!

Zechariah 12:2-3: Behold, I will make Jerusalem a cup of trembling unto all the people round about, when they shall be in the siege both against Judah [and] against Jerusalem. And in that day will I make Jerusalem a burdensome stone for all people: all that burden themselves with it shall be cut in pieces, though all the people of the earth be gathered together against it.

Points to consider:

• Jerusalem is today the burdensome stone of the world as prophesied.
• We're told an Antichrist of Roman descent will arise to confirm peace "with many" between Israel and her enemies.
• Today, on 1-30-06, the international Quartet of the UN, US, EU and Russia will meet to discuss their continuing efforts to confirm peace in the Middle East. Could the Quartet be the "many" of which the prophet Daniel wrote?
• Hamas is saying it is willing to enter a long-term covenant with Israel "with assurance from other sides" in the peace process. Could that statement indicate confirmation of peace is a necessary component of any such deal being made between the two arch enemies, at least where the Palestinians are concerned, or is it merely more empty talk on the part of Israel's enemies?

While it is too early to foretell what is going to take place from this point forward, clearly there is a chance that international pressure, in the form of threatening the elimination of foreign aid to the Palestinians, may be enough to nudge the Palestinians into peace negotiations.

If a man (ANY MAN) could somehow bring peace to the troubled Middle East, he would become the darling of the liberal media overnight. This, Scripture implies strongly, is eventually going to occur at the advent of the Antichrist. Why? Because the international community is convinced that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the pressure cooker causing all the tensions between Eastern and Western ideologies, particularly the scourge of terrorism.

While I certainly may be wrong, I think there is cause to believe the hope of Middle East peace may be about to be rediscovered. If so, the return of Jesus Christ may well be right around the prophetic corner.

Jesus said, as recorded in Mark 13:33-37: Take ye heed, watch and pray: for ye know not when the time is. For the Son of man is as a man taking a far journey, who left his house, and gave authority to his servants, and to every man his work, and commanded the porter to watch. Watch ye therefore: for ye know not when the master of the house cometh, at even, or at midnight, or at the cockcrowing, or in the morning: Lest coming suddenly he find you sleeping. And what I say unto you I say unto all, Watch.

WATCH!