Respond to the following - depending on your answers, I will know if you are my colleague:
□ I used a manual typewriter
□ I used a public telephone booth
□ I used a slate in kindergarten
□ I used reel to reel audio recordings
□ I used black and white television
If you never used any of the above items, you are younger than I am. What a difference a few decades make. Today I don’t know if I can function without an iPhone or my laptop. Even words like tablets and default have new meanings.
My world has changed and I must be prepared to change with it. If I don’t, very soon I may not be able to communicate with my grandchildren. One grandson was not even four, when he explained some function on the television to my wife.
With that backdrop we say, Welcome to 2016 – a year when many jobs will disappear and be replaced by smart machines. Although wanting greater independence, many younger people will continue to depend on older folks to make ends meet.
A freshly released Pew Research Center study indicates that a larger-than-expected percentage of young people are still living with their parents rather than moving out and perhaps buying a place of their own.
Some of these young people have been referred to as the grab-and-go generation, with 29% saying that they often purchase food and drink while on the run, compared with 19% of consumers overall. Research is confirming that gas stations/ convenience stores are becoming the preferred choice for fast foods among post-millennialists.
But to whom are we referring when we talk about post-millennialists? We are talking about young people born since the late nineties – they are dubbed Generation Z, home-landers and at times, simply posts. Many posts know nothing about 9/11.
Today’s 'posts' want to be defined by being connected, both from a technological standpoint and a social standpoint. They don't think money matters much and they're not interested in taking on debt. According to one sociologist, “posts are not colossally ambitious, perhaps as a coping mechanism, but they're optimistic in the face of economic challenges.”
As they grow up and begin living on their own, posts likely will adopt a near-migrant lifestyle, zeroing in on warm cities that offer an abundance of inexpensive housing and fledgling indie (independent) scenes. They'll move constantly in an attempt to find better work, better balance and that ever-elusive happiness.
I chuckle at times when I see how my students think – at times I am looking for a notepad (note book) on which to write. While I am looking, they are recording the same information digitally, using their smart phones. They transfer notes to their smart phones. They shop using their smart phones. At church, they read their Bibles on their smart phones.
Did you know that in order to understand future trends, one can even pursue as course in Professional Foresight? This is a transdisciplinary educational program of study that seeks to improve one's ability to create, anticipate, and manage change in a variety of domains, on a variety of scales, and using a variety of specialties. Creating, anticipating, and managing change in our increasingly fast-paced and globalized technological world is an ongoing challenge, and building a global culture of foresight proficiency provides great social value.
For many of us who will not be pursuing courses in Professional Foresight, there is no need to feel useless as we look at 2016 and the years ahead. Whereas many of the courses equip students to analyze, providing solutions is another matter. Considering that habits are better caught than taught, I believe someone needs to model value-based solutions to tomorrow’s generation.
Many of us who raised children without the frequent support of grandparents, must now make ourselves available to our children and grandchildren. We need to pass on our understanding of commitment and stability, crucial in any family. Even though we faced major challenges, we understood the value of commitment in times of crisis. We resolved our differences privately, face to face, not publicly via Facebook.
We made time to eat together. At those meal tables we learned graces; we learned to appreciate community; we respected authority and valued faith. In addition, we learned to be content with what was served. This is why I intend to invite some young families to maintain this family board room - a place where nourishment and nurturing flourish – that’s my New Year resolution.
Sunday, December 27, 2015
Tuesday, December 22, 2015
The Origins of Christmas
Jesus never celebrated Christmas – neither did any of His disciples. Actually, for more than 300 years after the birth of Jesus, no one celebrated Christmas. The few birthday ceremonies we have recorded in the Bible were celebrated in non-Jewish communities.
Celebrating birthdays was never a Jewish practice. Because of the influence of Judaism on early Christianity, that non-interest became evident. The church even announced that it was sinful to contemplate observing Christ’s birthday “as though He were a King Pharaoh.”
The idea of celebrating the birth of Jesus on December 25 was first suggested sometime in the year 300. Other dates like January 6, March 25 and May 20 were suggested. May 20 became a favored date since Luke stated in his report – the shepherds who received the announcement of Christ’s birth “were watching their flock by night” (Luke 2:8). It is believed that shepherds guarded their flock day and night only at lambing time, in the spring.
The early church fathers debated their options and chose December 25 because this date may have had a connection with the pagan celebration of the Dies Solis Invicti (Day of the Invincible Sun). Some believe that the choice of December 25 provided Christians with an alternative festival in place of the one held in honor of the sun-god, who was often identified with Mithras. So, it was not until December 25, 336 AD/CE, Christians officially celebrated the first Christmas.
Some historians contend that in the early 300’s, the cult of Mithraism was a serious threat to Christianity. For a period of time Mithraism was even proclaimed to be the official state religion by Emperor Aurelian (274). It was not until the reign of Emperor Constantine, Christianity began to receive favor from the state.
In 337, Constantine gave December 25 his blessing to observe the birth of Jesus. A few years later, Pope Julius I officially declared that the birth of Jesus would be celebrated on December 25. With time the observance of Christmas eclipsed the pagan festival of honoring the birthday of Mithras.
Initially, the celebration of Christ’s birth was a sacred event. In Christ’s honor, there was Christ’s mass – from which we get the term Christmas - the suffix 'mas' evolves from the Old English word maesse meaning festival, feast day or mass.
By the year AD 360 the church was intentionally celebrating the birth, life, death and resurrection of Christ. By AD 386, Chrysostom, the great church leader, emphasized, “...without the birth of Christ there is no Baptism, no Passion, no Resurrection, no Ascension and no Pouring out of the Holy Spirit ...’”
As the centuries unfolded, the tradition grew to include Epiphany, January 6, when the visit of the Wise men is celebrated. It is on this day that the Eastern Orthodox Church celebrates Christmas.
At this point in its evolving history, Christmas has adopted many traditions, many of these traditions from non-Christian sources. One tradition that has captured the season is the role of Santa Claus. The term is from the Dutch name 'Sinterklaas' – Saint Nicholas in English.
Saint Nicholas was born on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey sometime about 270 CE. He was the son of wealthy Christian parents who died when he was young - he was raised by an uncle, also called Nicholas, a Catholic Bishop of ancient Lycia.
Saint Nicholas eventually became a priest during a dangerous time of persecution for Christians - he later became the Bishop of Myra. He was famous for his generous gifts to the poor and was also associated with kindness towards children. The images of Saint Nicholas usually show an old man with long, grey hair and a beard. In Roman Catholic tradition, the Feast Day of Saint Nicholas is December 6th – the day of his death.
In the 16th Century in Europe, the stories and traditions about St. Nicholas had become very unpopular. But someone had to deliver gifts to children at Christmas, so in the United Kingdom, he became 'Father Christmas', a character from old children's stories. In France, he was then known as 'Père Nöel'; in Germany, the 'Christ Kind'.
Early in American history, the German image of ‘Christ Kind’ became known as 'Kris Kringle'. Later, Dutch settlers in America took the old stories of St. Nicholas with them and Kris Kringle became 'Sinterklaas' or as we now say 'Santa Claus'!
In the mix of traditions, it is easy to lose sight of the biblical story of the birth of Jesus Christ. In response, some Christians withdraw from the season. Others become so absorbed with the traditional trimmings, they lose sight of the main story.
For me, I re-read the biblical story of Christ’s birth and use the season as an opportunity to recall the uniqueness of His birth, and not merely the traditions that surround the birth.
Unlike some theories of unusual births, the birth of Jesus was predicted hundreds of years earlier. In addition, His miraculous birth was consistent with His mission – His birth was no ancient legend. So, like the wise men, “come let us adore Him.”
Celebrating birthdays was never a Jewish practice. Because of the influence of Judaism on early Christianity, that non-interest became evident. The church even announced that it was sinful to contemplate observing Christ’s birthday “as though He were a King Pharaoh.”
The idea of celebrating the birth of Jesus on December 25 was first suggested sometime in the year 300. Other dates like January 6, March 25 and May 20 were suggested. May 20 became a favored date since Luke stated in his report – the shepherds who received the announcement of Christ’s birth “were watching their flock by night” (Luke 2:8). It is believed that shepherds guarded their flock day and night only at lambing time, in the spring.
The early church fathers debated their options and chose December 25 because this date may have had a connection with the pagan celebration of the Dies Solis Invicti (Day of the Invincible Sun). Some believe that the choice of December 25 provided Christians with an alternative festival in place of the one held in honor of the sun-god, who was often identified with Mithras. So, it was not until December 25, 336 AD/CE, Christians officially celebrated the first Christmas.
Some historians contend that in the early 300’s, the cult of Mithraism was a serious threat to Christianity. For a period of time Mithraism was even proclaimed to be the official state religion by Emperor Aurelian (274). It was not until the reign of Emperor Constantine, Christianity began to receive favor from the state.
In 337, Constantine gave December 25 his blessing to observe the birth of Jesus. A few years later, Pope Julius I officially declared that the birth of Jesus would be celebrated on December 25. With time the observance of Christmas eclipsed the pagan festival of honoring the birthday of Mithras.
Initially, the celebration of Christ’s birth was a sacred event. In Christ’s honor, there was Christ’s mass – from which we get the term Christmas - the suffix 'mas' evolves from the Old English word maesse meaning festival, feast day or mass.
By the year AD 360 the church was intentionally celebrating the birth, life, death and resurrection of Christ. By AD 386, Chrysostom, the great church leader, emphasized, “...without the birth of Christ there is no Baptism, no Passion, no Resurrection, no Ascension and no Pouring out of the Holy Spirit ...’”
As the centuries unfolded, the tradition grew to include Epiphany, January 6, when the visit of the Wise men is celebrated. It is on this day that the Eastern Orthodox Church celebrates Christmas.
At this point in its evolving history, Christmas has adopted many traditions, many of these traditions from non-Christian sources. One tradition that has captured the season is the role of Santa Claus. The term is from the Dutch name 'Sinterklaas' – Saint Nicholas in English.
Saint Nicholas was born on the Mediterranean coast of Turkey sometime about 270 CE. He was the son of wealthy Christian parents who died when he was young - he was raised by an uncle, also called Nicholas, a Catholic Bishop of ancient Lycia.
Saint Nicholas eventually became a priest during a dangerous time of persecution for Christians - he later became the Bishop of Myra. He was famous for his generous gifts to the poor and was also associated with kindness towards children. The images of Saint Nicholas usually show an old man with long, grey hair and a beard. In Roman Catholic tradition, the Feast Day of Saint Nicholas is December 6th – the day of his death.
In the 16th Century in Europe, the stories and traditions about St. Nicholas had become very unpopular. But someone had to deliver gifts to children at Christmas, so in the United Kingdom, he became 'Father Christmas', a character from old children's stories. In France, he was then known as 'Père Nöel'; in Germany, the 'Christ Kind'.
Early in American history, the German image of ‘Christ Kind’ became known as 'Kris Kringle'. Later, Dutch settlers in America took the old stories of St. Nicholas with them and Kris Kringle became 'Sinterklaas' or as we now say 'Santa Claus'!
In the mix of traditions, it is easy to lose sight of the biblical story of the birth of Jesus Christ. In response, some Christians withdraw from the season. Others become so absorbed with the traditional trimmings, they lose sight of the main story.
For me, I re-read the biblical story of Christ’s birth and use the season as an opportunity to recall the uniqueness of His birth, and not merely the traditions that surround the birth.
Unlike some theories of unusual births, the birth of Jesus was predicted hundreds of years earlier. In addition, His miraculous birth was consistent with His mission – His birth was no ancient legend. So, like the wise men, “come let us adore Him.”
Wednesday, November 25, 2015
Say Thank You AND LIVE BETTER!
Currently, there is a movement within Psychology to study not only what ails the human mind, but what makes us happy, healthy, and content in our lives. Positive Psychology is the scientific study of what goes right in our life, from birth to death and all the stops in between.
In promoting the course, one university stated that the course will focus on the psychological aspects of a fulfilling and flourishing life. Topics include happiness, self-esteem, empathy, friendship, goal setting, love, achievement, creativity, mindfulness, spirituality, humor and gratitude.
Gratitude is a basic human emotion. It is expressed in some way by all ancient and modern cultures. According to Dr. Robert Emmons, a leading gratitude researcher and author of the book, Thanks! How Practicing Gratitude Can Make You Happier, the idea of receiving a gift is central to the concept of gratitude.
While merely appreciating something for its positive qualities does have a positive impact on our lives and emotions, gratitude takes the next step beyond. Gratitude happens when we go beyond just appreciating something to acknowledging that we have received something that we did nothing to earn or deserve. On some level, the warm emotional rush we feel when we really feel gratitude is very much like the glow we feel from realizing we are unconditionally loved.
New research shows that practicing gratitude may be the fastest single pathway to happiness, health, long life, and prosperity. In a remarkable study performed by Dr. Emmons, people who kept a gratitude journal for just three weeks measured 25% higher on a life satisfaction scale. They exercised more, drank alcohol less, and their families and friends noticed that they were nicer to be around. And the effects lasted for several months beyond the initial three week study.
Other studies on gratitude are confirming these results. People who take the time to notice and appreciate the good things that come their way through grace, or luck, or the goodness of others are happier and more peaceful. They do better on cognitive tests and tests of problem solving skills. They practice healthier habits, have better relationships, are more optimistic and live longer.
The power of gratitude is illustrated in the New Testament story of the ten lepers, recorded in Luke’s gospel. Of the ten lepers that were healed, one returned to say thanks. There are at least three lessons we can learn from that thankful leper:
1. Giving thanks is an intentional act of looking back. Giving thanks requires reflection. Furthermore, it assumes appreciation for the thing received. As an intentional act, giving thanks demands that we rearrange our priorities and make space for this expression of appreciation.
2. Giving thanks is an expression of thoughtfulness. Giving thanks provides opportunities to affirm others. It esteems and validates others. The person giving thanks chooses to shine the floodlight on the giver and the gift received.
3. Giving thanks is a display of humility. In giving thanks, one is acknowledging that a desire has been met. In expressing thanks, one is becoming vulnerable, in that one is affirming that there was a need and that need was met. Actually, giving thanks undermines pride and focuses on others. In essence, giving thanks tenderizes one’s attitudes.
Behavioral scientists are now confirming that people with a greater level of gratitude tend to have stronger relationships in that they appreciate their loved ones more. Studies confirm that thankful people are happier, display improved mental alertness, sleep better and tend to be healthier. Thankful people are also better equipped to offer emotional support to others.
Research is also confirming that thankful people take better care of themselves and engage in more protective health behaviors. They tend to be more optimistic, a characteristic that researchers say boosts the immune system. Did you know that optimistic patients are better prepared to undergo surgery and experience better health outcomes?
In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul contended that thankfulness is a product of the Holy Spirit. (Ephesians 5:18-21). Paul argued that when Christians are “filled/controlled with the Spirit”, they acquire appreciative dispositions.
That sounds like a good recipe for healthy habits. Habits like beginning a gratitude journal, or even hosting a gratitude summit. My friends Donovan and Faith Thomas dared to move in this direction in Jamaica. The results through Choose Life Ministries are phenomenal.
Happy Thanksgiving!
In promoting the course, one university stated that the course will focus on the psychological aspects of a fulfilling and flourishing life. Topics include happiness, self-esteem, empathy, friendship, goal setting, love, achievement, creativity, mindfulness, spirituality, humor and gratitude.
Gratitude is a basic human emotion. It is expressed in some way by all ancient and modern cultures. According to Dr. Robert Emmons, a leading gratitude researcher and author of the book, Thanks! How Practicing Gratitude Can Make You Happier, the idea of receiving a gift is central to the concept of gratitude.
While merely appreciating something for its positive qualities does have a positive impact on our lives and emotions, gratitude takes the next step beyond. Gratitude happens when we go beyond just appreciating something to acknowledging that we have received something that we did nothing to earn or deserve. On some level, the warm emotional rush we feel when we really feel gratitude is very much like the glow we feel from realizing we are unconditionally loved.
New research shows that practicing gratitude may be the fastest single pathway to happiness, health, long life, and prosperity. In a remarkable study performed by Dr. Emmons, people who kept a gratitude journal for just three weeks measured 25% higher on a life satisfaction scale. They exercised more, drank alcohol less, and their families and friends noticed that they were nicer to be around. And the effects lasted for several months beyond the initial three week study.
Other studies on gratitude are confirming these results. People who take the time to notice and appreciate the good things that come their way through grace, or luck, or the goodness of others are happier and more peaceful. They do better on cognitive tests and tests of problem solving skills. They practice healthier habits, have better relationships, are more optimistic and live longer.
The power of gratitude is illustrated in the New Testament story of the ten lepers, recorded in Luke’s gospel. Of the ten lepers that were healed, one returned to say thanks. There are at least three lessons we can learn from that thankful leper:
1. Giving thanks is an intentional act of looking back. Giving thanks requires reflection. Furthermore, it assumes appreciation for the thing received. As an intentional act, giving thanks demands that we rearrange our priorities and make space for this expression of appreciation.
2. Giving thanks is an expression of thoughtfulness. Giving thanks provides opportunities to affirm others. It esteems and validates others. The person giving thanks chooses to shine the floodlight on the giver and the gift received.
3. Giving thanks is a display of humility. In giving thanks, one is acknowledging that a desire has been met. In expressing thanks, one is becoming vulnerable, in that one is affirming that there was a need and that need was met. Actually, giving thanks undermines pride and focuses on others. In essence, giving thanks tenderizes one’s attitudes.
Behavioral scientists are now confirming that people with a greater level of gratitude tend to have stronger relationships in that they appreciate their loved ones more. Studies confirm that thankful people are happier, display improved mental alertness, sleep better and tend to be healthier. Thankful people are also better equipped to offer emotional support to others.
Research is also confirming that thankful people take better care of themselves and engage in more protective health behaviors. They tend to be more optimistic, a characteristic that researchers say boosts the immune system. Did you know that optimistic patients are better prepared to undergo surgery and experience better health outcomes?
In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul contended that thankfulness is a product of the Holy Spirit. (Ephesians 5:18-21). Paul argued that when Christians are “filled/controlled with the Spirit”, they acquire appreciative dispositions.
That sounds like a good recipe for healthy habits. Habits like beginning a gratitude journal, or even hosting a gratitude summit. My friends Donovan and Faith Thomas dared to move in this direction in Jamaica. The results through Choose Life Ministries are phenomenal.
Happy Thanksgiving!
Wednesday, November 18, 2015
What is ISIS?
After last week’s gruesome killings in France, some have concluded that the group which claimed responsibility is a group of psychopaths. In the past year, President Obama even referred to this group, as “not Islamic” and as al-Qaeda’s “jayvee team”. My research leads me to believe otherwise.
The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is a religious group with a well-reasoned beliefs. As mentioned in an earlier commentary, ISIS is committed to a seventh century legal environment (caliphate) and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse.
Agreed, ISIS has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers comes from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.
Graeme Wood, in a lengthy exposé of ISIS in The Atlantic, contends, “virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, ‘the Prophetic methodology,’ which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail.”
ISIS is identified with the jihadist wing of a branch of Sunni Islam called Salafism, after the Arabic al salaf al salih, the “pious forefathers.” These forefathers are the Prophet himself and his earliest adherents, whom Salafis honor and emulate as the models for all behavior, including warfare and family life.
Princeton University scholar Bernard Haykel, is a leading expert on Islamic theology in ISIS. According to Haykel, “the ranks of ISIS are deeply infused with religious vigor. Qur’anic quotations are ubiquitous.” He regards the claim that the Islamic State (ISIS) has distorted the texts of Islam as “preposterous, sustainable only through willful ignorance.”
In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts like, slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings.
Like today’s ISIS followers, early Muslims were surrounded by non-Muslims. For this reason, ISIS believes it is perfectly in order to follow the practices of early Islam. According to Professor Haykel, “Islamic State fighters are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day” (The Atlantic, March 2015).
The Qur’an specifies crucifixion as one of the only punishments permitted for enemies of Islam. The tax on Christians finds clear endorsement in the Surah Al-Tawba, the Qur’an’s ninth chapter, which instructs Muslims to fight Christians and Jews “until they pay the jizya (tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” The prophet Muhammad imposed and practiced these rules.
Leaders of ISIS see emulating Muhammad as a strict duty, and have revived traditions that have been dormant for hundreds of years. What’s striking is not just the literalism, but also the seriousness with which ISIS reads these texts. Haykel contends, “there is an assiduous, obsessive seriousness that Muslims don’t normally have.”
ISIS believes its behavior is consistent with the turmoil expected in the last days. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both branches are committed to hasten the coming of this Prophet.
ISIS members devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way, or representing evil.
Within recent years, thousands of foreign Muslims are thought to have immigrated to Syria, to join ISIS. Many want to become members of the new caliphate (Islamic State). The last caliphate was the Ottoman Empire, which reached its peak in the 16th century and then experienced a long decline, until the founder of the Republic of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, demolished it in 1924.
This new caliphate must be preceded by global turmoil. Such turmoil is what we saw in France last week, in Kenya a few months ago and continues to be promised in many major cities of the world.
ISIS has attached great importance to the Syrian city of Dabiq. There was much celebration when Dabiq was conquered. It is here, the Prophet reportedly said, that the armies of Rome will set up their camp. The armies of Islam will meet them, and Dabiq will be Rome’s Waterloo.
Following this battle in Dabiq, some believe an anti-Messiah, known in Muslim apocalyptic literature as Dajjal, will come from a region in eastern Iran and kill a vast number of the caliphate’s fighters. Just as Dajjal prepares to finish them off, Jesus—the second-most-revered prophet in Islam—will return to earth, kill Dajjal, and lead the Muslims to victory.
The Islamic State, also known as the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham (ISIS) is a religious group with a well-reasoned beliefs. As mentioned in an earlier commentary, ISIS is committed to a seventh century legal environment (caliphate) and ultimately to bringing about the apocalypse.
Agreed, ISIS has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers comes from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.
Graeme Wood, in a lengthy exposé of ISIS in The Atlantic, contends, “virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, ‘the Prophetic methodology,’ which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail.”
ISIS is identified with the jihadist wing of a branch of Sunni Islam called Salafism, after the Arabic al salaf al salih, the “pious forefathers.” These forefathers are the Prophet himself and his earliest adherents, whom Salafis honor and emulate as the models for all behavior, including warfare and family life.
Princeton University scholar Bernard Haykel, is a leading expert on Islamic theology in ISIS. According to Haykel, “the ranks of ISIS are deeply infused with religious vigor. Qur’anic quotations are ubiquitous.” He regards the claim that the Islamic State (ISIS) has distorted the texts of Islam as “preposterous, sustainable only through willful ignorance.”
In Haykel’s estimation, the fighters of the Islamic State are authentic throwbacks to early Islam and are faithfully reproducing its norms of war. This behavior includes a number of practices that modern Muslims tend to prefer not to acknowledge as integral to their sacred texts like, slavery, crucifixion, and beheadings.
Like today’s ISIS followers, early Muslims were surrounded by non-Muslims. For this reason, ISIS believes it is perfectly in order to follow the practices of early Islam. According to Professor Haykel, “Islamic State fighters are smack in the middle of the medieval tradition and are bringing it wholesale into the present day” (The Atlantic, March 2015).
The Qur’an specifies crucifixion as one of the only punishments permitted for enemies of Islam. The tax on Christians finds clear endorsement in the Surah Al-Tawba, the Qur’an’s ninth chapter, which instructs Muslims to fight Christians and Jews “until they pay the jizya (tax) with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.” The prophet Muhammad imposed and practiced these rules.
Leaders of ISIS see emulating Muhammad as a strict duty, and have revived traditions that have been dormant for hundreds of years. What’s striking is not just the literalism, but also the seriousness with which ISIS reads these texts. Haykel contends, “there is an assiduous, obsessive seriousness that Muslims don’t normally have.”
ISIS believes its behavior is consistent with the turmoil expected in the last days. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both branches are committed to hasten the coming of this Prophet.
ISIS members devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way, or representing evil.
Within recent years, thousands of foreign Muslims are thought to have immigrated to Syria, to join ISIS. Many want to become members of the new caliphate (Islamic State). The last caliphate was the Ottoman Empire, which reached its peak in the 16th century and then experienced a long decline, until the founder of the Republic of Turkey, Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, demolished it in 1924.
This new caliphate must be preceded by global turmoil. Such turmoil is what we saw in France last week, in Kenya a few months ago and continues to be promised in many major cities of the world.
ISIS has attached great importance to the Syrian city of Dabiq. There was much celebration when Dabiq was conquered. It is here, the Prophet reportedly said, that the armies of Rome will set up their camp. The armies of Islam will meet them, and Dabiq will be Rome’s Waterloo.
Following this battle in Dabiq, some believe an anti-Messiah, known in Muslim apocalyptic literature as Dajjal, will come from a region in eastern Iran and kill a vast number of the caliphate’s fighters. Just as Dajjal prepares to finish them off, Jesus—the second-most-revered prophet in Islam—will return to earth, kill Dajjal, and lead the Muslims to victory.
Monday, November 2, 2015
EVERY Black Life Matters
The fact that black leaders have served as President, Attorneys General, Secretaries of State and other cabinet positions does not make a difference – there are voices in America that contend, the lives of some black people do not matter. The issue concerns an ethnic group – black skinned people. People in this category are often of African descent.
As a member of this ethnic group, I am very concerned about specific behaviors in our society that suggest, black-skinned people do not matter. In response to that attitude, I contend, “Every Black Life Matters.” Here are some situations that help to shape my concerns.
ABORTION
In the United States, more black babies are killed by abortion than any other ethnic group. Black children are aborted at nearly four times the rate as white children. A black abortion rate that for years has vastly surpassed that of every other racial group. Thirty out of every 1,000 black women obtained an abortion in 2011. That rate is nearly triple that of white women and double that of Hispanic women. Put succinctly, while about 13 percent of Americans are black, more than one-third of all abortions are administered to black women. (source)
FAMILY LIFE
In black communities, more babies are born out of wedlock than any other ethnic group - preliminary data indicate that 40.7 percent of all 2012 births were out-of-wedlock, which is appalling, and there are vast differences among racial and ethnic groups. Among non-Hispanic blacks, the figure is highest, at 72.2 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, it’s 66.9 percent; 53.5 percent for Hispanics; 29.4 percent for non-Hispanic whites; and a mere 17.1 percent for Asians/Pacific Islanders. (source)
CRIME
Black people in the United States are more likely to be victims of violent confrontations with police officers than whites because blacks commit more violent crimes than whites per capita.
Despite making up just 13% of the population, blacks commit around half of homicides in the United States. DOJ statistics show that between 1980 and 2008, blacks committed 52% of homicides, compared to 45% of homicides committed by whites. More up to date FBI statistics tell a similar story. In 2013, black criminals carried out 38% of murders, compared to 31.1% for whites, again despite the fact that there are five times more white people in the U.S.
UNEMPLOYMENT
The unemployment rates among blacks are higher than any other ethnic group in America. In February, the unemployment rate for African-Americans was 10.4 percent, while the comparable rates for whites, Hispanics and Asians were 4.7 percent, 6.6 percent and 4.0 percent, in that order, according to data recently released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
MARRIAGE
The black divorcee rate has increased nearly five-fold over the last thirty years, and is double the rate of the general population. The result, according to The Decline in Marriage Among African Americans, is a greater share of family responsibilities being borne by women, an increased vulnerability to poverty and violence, and an erosion of community ties.
Were it not so painful, I could go on to provide statistics on incarceration, education and drugs. Honestly, we need a campaign where politicians, educators, religious leaders and everyone committed to human development would engage in civil conversation. We need a non-partisan approach to bring about healing within black communities.
I beg to disagree with those who argue that because of slavery the situation is hopeless. As a nation, and since slavery, America has benefited greatly from the contributions of blacks. There are many blacks who have invented a multitude of items or made discoveries in the course of their lives. These have ranged from practical everyday devices to applications and scientific discoveries in diverse fields, including physics, biology, mathematics, plus the medical, nuclear and space sciences.
I sincerely believe a big part of the solution is in the family. Stable families provide the foundation for stable communities. It is in the family we learn to respect authority structures. It is in the family we learn the value of faith and appreciate social graces.
Social experiments have invited parents to explore career opportunities, thus limiting the time parents spend nurturing their children. Electronic devices and social services cannot and should not be expected to replace parents.
Let us stop the posturing and get to the heart of the matter. Let us begin to educate and reward healthy families. We cannot continue to empower single mothers and allow irresponsible fathers to abscond. If every black life matters, we must be intentional and address the family, the nursery for stable communities.
As a member of this ethnic group, I am very concerned about specific behaviors in our society that suggest, black-skinned people do not matter. In response to that attitude, I contend, “Every Black Life Matters.” Here are some situations that help to shape my concerns.
ABORTION
In the United States, more black babies are killed by abortion than any other ethnic group. Black children are aborted at nearly four times the rate as white children. A black abortion rate that for years has vastly surpassed that of every other racial group. Thirty out of every 1,000 black women obtained an abortion in 2011. That rate is nearly triple that of white women and double that of Hispanic women. Put succinctly, while about 13 percent of Americans are black, more than one-third of all abortions are administered to black women. (source)
FAMILY LIFE
In black communities, more babies are born out of wedlock than any other ethnic group - preliminary data indicate that 40.7 percent of all 2012 births were out-of-wedlock, which is appalling, and there are vast differences among racial and ethnic groups. Among non-Hispanic blacks, the figure is highest, at 72.2 percent; for American Indians/Alaska Natives, it’s 66.9 percent; 53.5 percent for Hispanics; 29.4 percent for non-Hispanic whites; and a mere 17.1 percent for Asians/Pacific Islanders. (source)
CRIME
Black people in the United States are more likely to be victims of violent confrontations with police officers than whites because blacks commit more violent crimes than whites per capita.
Despite making up just 13% of the population, blacks commit around half of homicides in the United States. DOJ statistics show that between 1980 and 2008, blacks committed 52% of homicides, compared to 45% of homicides committed by whites. More up to date FBI statistics tell a similar story. In 2013, black criminals carried out 38% of murders, compared to 31.1% for whites, again despite the fact that there are five times more white people in the U.S.
UNEMPLOYMENT
The unemployment rates among blacks are higher than any other ethnic group in America. In February, the unemployment rate for African-Americans was 10.4 percent, while the comparable rates for whites, Hispanics and Asians were 4.7 percent, 6.6 percent and 4.0 percent, in that order, according to data recently released by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
MARRIAGE
The black divorcee rate has increased nearly five-fold over the last thirty years, and is double the rate of the general population. The result, according to The Decline in Marriage Among African Americans, is a greater share of family responsibilities being borne by women, an increased vulnerability to poverty and violence, and an erosion of community ties.
Were it not so painful, I could go on to provide statistics on incarceration, education and drugs. Honestly, we need a campaign where politicians, educators, religious leaders and everyone committed to human development would engage in civil conversation. We need a non-partisan approach to bring about healing within black communities.
I beg to disagree with those who argue that because of slavery the situation is hopeless. As a nation, and since slavery, America has benefited greatly from the contributions of blacks. There are many blacks who have invented a multitude of items or made discoveries in the course of their lives. These have ranged from practical everyday devices to applications and scientific discoveries in diverse fields, including physics, biology, mathematics, plus the medical, nuclear and space sciences.
I sincerely believe a big part of the solution is in the family. Stable families provide the foundation for stable communities. It is in the family we learn to respect authority structures. It is in the family we learn the value of faith and appreciate social graces.
Social experiments have invited parents to explore career opportunities, thus limiting the time parents spend nurturing their children. Electronic devices and social services cannot and should not be expected to replace parents.
Let us stop the posturing and get to the heart of the matter. Let us begin to educate and reward healthy families. We cannot continue to empower single mothers and allow irresponsible fathers to abscond. If every black life matters, we must be intentional and address the family, the nursery for stable communities.
Sunday, October 25, 2015
Who Owns The Western Wall?
Every year, millions of visitors to Jerusalem, visit the Western Wall. A few years ago, my ENT specialist was among those visitors. Like thousands of Jews, he took his son there to mark his Bar Mitzvah. Soldiers serving in the Israel Defense Forces swear loyalty to their nation and homeland at the Western Wall Plaza.
People from all over the world pay their respects to the Jewish people’s magnificent history by visiting this special site. The ancient, 2,000-year-old stones of the Western Wall have witnessed the Jewish people’s birth, exile, and redemption. This is where the Jewish nation’s past mingles with its hopes for the future.
How then could Muslims claim that the Western Wall is a part of the Al Aqsa Mosque compound in the Old City? The claim was made a few days ago before UNESCO, the United Nations’ Paris-based agency that tries to protect cultural treasures around the world.
In 2010, the British Advertising Standard Agency ruled that an Israeli tourism advertisement containing a picture of the Western Wall with the Dome of the Rock in the background was misleading. The agency felt that the ad implied that the area in which the Wall was located belonged to Israel – for the agency that was false advertising.
To whom does the Wall really belong – to the Jews or to the Muslims? What is the Western Wall anyway?
In the year 37 BCE, Herod was appointed king in Jerusalem by the Romans – shortly after he initiated a huge renovation project for the Temple. He hired many workers who toiled to make the Temple more magnificent. He widened the area of the Temple Mount and built four support walls around it. The Western Wall is the western support wall built during this widening of the Temple Mount Plaza.
Just a few days ago I shared with a group of students what Israeli archaeologists found in 2007. They discovered the source of the huge stones King Herod used to reconstruct the Second Temple in Jerusalem. The stones were found at a quarry, along with coins and pottery, dating back to King Herod. Geological and other tests clearly link the present Western Wall to the quarry.
The Second Temple (which King Herod built) was destroyed in the year 70 CE. Despite the destruction that took place, all four Temple Mount support walls remained standing. Throughout the generations since the Temple’s destruction, the Western Wall was the remnant closest to the site of the Temple’s Holy of Holies that was accessible to Jews. Therefore, it became a place of prayer and yearning for Jews around the world.
In the year 135 CE, the Romans crushed a Jewish uprising and seized total control of Jerusalem - the Jews lost official links to the region. The Romans renamed the region Palestine.
The name Palestine was taken from Israel's most hated historical enemy, the Philistines, and was given to the area by the Romans as a means of humiliating the Jews to show them the land no longer belonged to them. With a destroyed Temple and no official homeland, the Jews found much solace in the Western Wall, the only remnant of the destroyed Temple.
Many of those emotions were shattered when the Muslims invaded the Holy Lands in 638. By 691, at the order of Ymayyad Caliph, Abd al-Malik, the Dome of the Rock was completed on the site where the Jewish Temple was destroyed. As is evident today, the Western Wall was retained as the foundation.
The Muslim presence remained unchallenged until the Crusades in the eleventh century. The Western Wall never seemed important to Muslims because they were in control and the Jews were not strong enough to challenge them. However, the Jewish interest in the Wall never died.
That ongoing interest was evident again in 1929 when violence erupted because a divider was placed at the Wall. In 1948, in keeping with a UN decision, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, including the Western Wall, fell to Jordanian hands. Jewish homes were destroyed and among those killed was the Western Wall’s first rabbi who refused to leave the Wall or his home - he was killed in the bombings.
The Old City of Jerusalem, and the Western Wall within it, were not in Jewish hands from the War of Independence in 1948 until the Six Day War in 1967. During those 19 years of Jordanian rule, Jews were not able to reach the Wall and prayed in front of its ancient stones.
People from all over the world pay their respects to the Jewish people’s magnificent history by visiting this special site. The ancient, 2,000-year-old stones of the Western Wall have witnessed the Jewish people’s birth, exile, and redemption. This is where the Jewish nation’s past mingles with its hopes for the future.
How then could Muslims claim that the Western Wall is a part of the Al Aqsa Mosque compound in the Old City? The claim was made a few days ago before UNESCO, the United Nations’ Paris-based agency that tries to protect cultural treasures around the world.
In 2010, the British Advertising Standard Agency ruled that an Israeli tourism advertisement containing a picture of the Western Wall with the Dome of the Rock in the background was misleading. The agency felt that the ad implied that the area in which the Wall was located belonged to Israel – for the agency that was false advertising.
To whom does the Wall really belong – to the Jews or to the Muslims? What is the Western Wall anyway?
In the year 37 BCE, Herod was appointed king in Jerusalem by the Romans – shortly after he initiated a huge renovation project for the Temple. He hired many workers who toiled to make the Temple more magnificent. He widened the area of the Temple Mount and built four support walls around it. The Western Wall is the western support wall built during this widening of the Temple Mount Plaza.
Just a few days ago I shared with a group of students what Israeli archaeologists found in 2007. They discovered the source of the huge stones King Herod used to reconstruct the Second Temple in Jerusalem. The stones were found at a quarry, along with coins and pottery, dating back to King Herod. Geological and other tests clearly link the present Western Wall to the quarry.
The Second Temple (which King Herod built) was destroyed in the year 70 CE. Despite the destruction that took place, all four Temple Mount support walls remained standing. Throughout the generations since the Temple’s destruction, the Western Wall was the remnant closest to the site of the Temple’s Holy of Holies that was accessible to Jews. Therefore, it became a place of prayer and yearning for Jews around the world.
In the year 135 CE, the Romans crushed a Jewish uprising and seized total control of Jerusalem - the Jews lost official links to the region. The Romans renamed the region Palestine.
The name Palestine was taken from Israel's most hated historical enemy, the Philistines, and was given to the area by the Romans as a means of humiliating the Jews to show them the land no longer belonged to them. With a destroyed Temple and no official homeland, the Jews found much solace in the Western Wall, the only remnant of the destroyed Temple.
Many of those emotions were shattered when the Muslims invaded the Holy Lands in 638. By 691, at the order of Ymayyad Caliph, Abd al-Malik, the Dome of the Rock was completed on the site where the Jewish Temple was destroyed. As is evident today, the Western Wall was retained as the foundation.
The Muslim presence remained unchallenged until the Crusades in the eleventh century. The Western Wall never seemed important to Muslims because they were in control and the Jews were not strong enough to challenge them. However, the Jewish interest in the Wall never died.
That ongoing interest was evident again in 1929 when violence erupted because a divider was placed at the Wall. In 1948, in keeping with a UN decision, the Jewish Quarter of the Old City, including the Western Wall, fell to Jordanian hands. Jewish homes were destroyed and among those killed was the Western Wall’s first rabbi who refused to leave the Wall or his home - he was killed in the bombings.
The Old City of Jerusalem, and the Western Wall within it, were not in Jewish hands from the War of Independence in 1948 until the Six Day War in 1967. During those 19 years of Jordanian rule, Jews were not able to reach the Wall and prayed in front of its ancient stones.
During the more than one thousand years Jerusalem was under
Muslim rule, the Wall was often used as a garbage dump, so as to humiliate the
Jews who visited it. However, following the Six Day War of 1967, The Western
Wall and Temple Mount were liberated, the city of Jerusalem was reunified, and
the Jewish people were again able to come to the Western Wall to pray.
The recent attempt at the UN for Muslims to regain control
of the Western Wall, would most likely deprive Jews of their most holy site and
return the area to a garbage dump.
Furthermore, to justify the return of Islamic control of the
Wall would be to legitimize the Muslim invasion of Jerusalem in the seventh
century. Such justification would also ratify the UN’s insensitivity to
Israel’s religious heritage. In 1948, when establishing boundaries for the new
nation, the UN was wrong to divide Israel’s 3,000 year-old claim to the city of
Jerusalem.
In terms of modern history, Israel’s return to her ancestral
home is phenomenal. Unlike under the reign of Joshua in the Old Testament, she
cannot kill those who shared the land with her, before independence. The nation
must pursue peaceful co-existence. That requires a respectful use of sacred
sites, including the Western Wall.
Sunday, October 18, 2015
Goodnight Friend
When teenage children feel as comfortable as their parents, with their parents’ friends, something special is happening. We found that to be true after meeting Jack and Karen Mitchell almost 25 years ago.
The relationship between our families was so special that we had hoped some lifelong relationship could develop among the children.
Our friend Jack died a few days ago. Last year he was diagnosed with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Recent research suggests the disease is possibly caused by sawdust, allergies, acid reflux, all of which Jack had or was exposed to. The disease causes the lung tissue to scar, thus not allowing oxygen to get through to the cells.
We met Jack in Illinois, shortly after coming to America to pursue advanced studies in 1991. Our paths crossed frequently as I shared the pulpit at the church he pastored in Wheaton. Those engagements often included family meals and opportunities to meet other foreign students studying in the area.
After relocating, 400 miles seemed near as we travelled to surprise Jack for his fiftieth birthday. He and Karen even travelled further in order to visit us in Florida. The internet kept us together as the Mitchells moved to Budapest and later Kenya. A few months ago we travelled almost 3,000 miles to visit Jack for the last time.
It was during that visit in California we reminisced on family times, his missionary assignments in the Caribbean, Europe and Africa. We laughed, sang and remembered the Lord Jesus in the ordinance of communion.
I will miss Jack. He was an encourager and very dear friend. At times, he would be the only person to comment on my weekly commentaries. He was an astute thinker and student of the Scriptures. I will miss his insightful comments. Sometimes I wondered why he thought it necessary to get my permission to share my commentaries with his students in Kenya – he was so authentic. He just never wasted an opportunity to bless someone else.
Upon learning of his death, I am discovering that many others around the world share my sentiments.
Like Mausau Elijah, who in 2011 was leading a fellowship group in Jack’s house at Scott Christian University, Kenya. His opening remarks to the group were, "where will you be five years from now"? Among the many answers, Mausau remembers, “Jack, my mentor, friend, teacher, the disciple of righteousness said, 'I will be in heaven.’”
Jack was right, within five years he is no longer with us. What is obvious from the many tributes paid to Jack, is a sense of loss. Loss for Karen, his wife of more than 47 years. Loss for his four adult children and fourteen grandchildren. Loss for thousands of students, parishioners and friends. Much grief and great loss, but not hopelessness.
When confronted with the loss of loved ones in their church, the Thessalonians got word to the apostle Paul about their emotional and spiritual ambivalence. In his reply, he acknowledged the emotional impact of grief. However, he made a distinction between the grief one experiences when a Christian dies, as opposed to when a non-Christian dies.
Hear Paul’s actual words, “Brothers, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who fall asleep, or grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope” (1 Thessalonians 4:13). The implication is clear – Christians who die have hope. We understand that inscriptions on tombs and references in literature show that first-century non-Christians viewed death with horror. Death was the end of everything.
Paul contends, Christians should view death differently. For the Christian it is a confidence in crisis. That confidence is not in the loss of the loved one, but the outcome that results from that loss. But how is a confident outcome possible if someone is dead? Isn’t death a cessation of life?
Actually, in this context, Paul preferred the term “fall asleep” instead of death. The term “fall asleep” conveys the idea of temporariness, as opposed to permanent absence. In the following verse Paul goes on to provide a basis for his “fall asleep” idea.
He argues, “... Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him” (v.14). Paul resorts to history, not philosophy to substantiate his point. As far as he was concerned, the death and resurrection of Jesus were historical realities. Similarly, Christians who die, will rise again, just as Jesus died and rose again.
In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul reinforces this point: “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost...” (1 Corinthians 15:16-20). In other words, the Christian’s hope is not in a mere idea, but in a Person – Jesus Christ.
It is for this reason, I found it more appropriate to entitle this commentary “Goodnight Friend” – a Good Morning is anticipated when the Mitchell family and Jack will meet again.
 |
| The Mitchell and Corbin families in Wheaton, Illinois. |
 |
| Jack & Karen with our daughter, Candace at a Fountainside church picnic in Florida. |
Our friend Jack died a few days ago. Last year he was diagnosed with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. Recent research suggests the disease is possibly caused by sawdust, allergies, acid reflux, all of which Jack had or was exposed to. The disease causes the lung tissue to scar, thus not allowing oxygen to get through to the cells.
We met Jack in Illinois, shortly after coming to America to pursue advanced studies in 1991. Our paths crossed frequently as I shared the pulpit at the church he pastored in Wheaton. Those engagements often included family meals and opportunities to meet other foreign students studying in the area.
After relocating, 400 miles seemed near as we travelled to surprise Jack for his fiftieth birthday. He and Karen even travelled further in order to visit us in Florida. The internet kept us together as the Mitchells moved to Budapest and later Kenya. A few months ago we travelled almost 3,000 miles to visit Jack for the last time.
It was during that visit in California we reminisced on family times, his missionary assignments in the Caribbean, Europe and Africa. We laughed, sang and remembered the Lord Jesus in the ordinance of communion.
I will miss Jack. He was an encourager and very dear friend. At times, he would be the only person to comment on my weekly commentaries. He was an astute thinker and student of the Scriptures. I will miss his insightful comments. Sometimes I wondered why he thought it necessary to get my permission to share my commentaries with his students in Kenya – he was so authentic. He just never wasted an opportunity to bless someone else.
Upon learning of his death, I am discovering that many others around the world share my sentiments.
Like Mausau Elijah, who in 2011 was leading a fellowship group in Jack’s house at Scott Christian University, Kenya. His opening remarks to the group were, "where will you be five years from now"? Among the many answers, Mausau remembers, “Jack, my mentor, friend, teacher, the disciple of righteousness said, 'I will be in heaven.’”
Jack was right, within five years he is no longer with us. What is obvious from the many tributes paid to Jack, is a sense of loss. Loss for Karen, his wife of more than 47 years. Loss for his four adult children and fourteen grandchildren. Loss for thousands of students, parishioners and friends. Much grief and great loss, but not hopelessness.
When confronted with the loss of loved ones in their church, the Thessalonians got word to the apostle Paul about their emotional and spiritual ambivalence. In his reply, he acknowledged the emotional impact of grief. However, he made a distinction between the grief one experiences when a Christian dies, as opposed to when a non-Christian dies.
Hear Paul’s actual words, “Brothers, we do not want you to be uninformed about those who fall asleep, or grieve like the rest of men, who have no hope” (1 Thessalonians 4:13). The implication is clear – Christians who die have hope. We understand that inscriptions on tombs and references in literature show that first-century non-Christians viewed death with horror. Death was the end of everything.
Paul contends, Christians should view death differently. For the Christian it is a confidence in crisis. That confidence is not in the loss of the loved one, but the outcome that results from that loss. But how is a confident outcome possible if someone is dead? Isn’t death a cessation of life?
Actually, in this context, Paul preferred the term “fall asleep” instead of death. The term “fall asleep” conveys the idea of temporariness, as opposed to permanent absence. In the following verse Paul goes on to provide a basis for his “fall asleep” idea.
He argues, “... Jesus died and rose again and so we believe that God will bring with Jesus those who have fallen asleep in Him” (v.14). Paul resorts to history, not philosophy to substantiate his point. As far as he was concerned, the death and resurrection of Jesus were historical realities. Similarly, Christians who die, will rise again, just as Jesus died and rose again.
In his letter to the Corinthians, Paul reinforces this point: “And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost...” (1 Corinthians 15:16-20). In other words, the Christian’s hope is not in a mere idea, but in a Person – Jesus Christ.
It is for this reason, I found it more appropriate to entitle this commentary “Goodnight Friend” – a Good Morning is anticipated when the Mitchell family and Jack will meet again.
Tuesday, September 8, 2015
Christian Jailed in US
I like Kim Davis. Last week a federal judge ordered Davis to jail following her refusal to comply with a court order to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples. The county clerk has sought a religious liberty exemption, stating that it would violate her Christian beliefs to affix her name to a license for same-sex couples.
Davis’s lawyer, Roger Gannam with the Liberty Counsel, said following Judge David Bunning’s decision to imprison his client: “Today, for the first time in history, an American citizen has been incarcerated for having the belief of conscience that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and she’s been ordered to stay there until she’s willing to change her mind, until she’s willing to change her conscience about what that belief is. This is unprecedented in American law.”
According to Kim Davis, “I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage. To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. I’m just a vessel God has chosen for this time and this place.” She added: “I’m no different than any other Christian. It was my appointed time to stand, and their time will come.”
Judge David Bunning, who ruled against Davis, argued his case compellingly. He said: "Our form of government will not survive unless we, as a society, agree to respect the US Supreme Court's decisions regardless of our personal opinions. Davis is certainly free to disagree with the court's opinion, as many Americans likely do, but that does not excuse her from complying with it. To hold otherwise would set a dangerous precedent."
In addition, Judge Bunning contends, "Davis repeatedly states that the act of issuing these licenses requires her to 'authorize' same-sex marriage. The form does not require the county clerk to condone or endorse same-sex marriage on religious or moral grounds. It simply asks the clerk to certify that the information provided is accurate and that the couple is qualified to marry under Kentucky law. Davis' religious convictions have no bearing on this purely legal inquiry. It is not a sign of moral or religious approval."
In other words, Davis was not asked to solemnize something with which she disagreed – she was not employed as a Minister of Religion. What if her job required her to certify legal entities like gambling establishments or night clubs? Would certifying such activities violate her Christian beliefs or conscience?
However, according to Davis, “God’s moral law conflicts with my job duties.” The clerk currently has a case in federal court seeking a religious liberty exemption, allowing her not to have to affix her name to same-sex marriage licenses.
The First Amendment to our US Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” In America, the citizen has the freedom of religion; the state should not institute an atmosphere of freedom from religion.
For me, some questions must be answered, was Kim Davis imprisoned for the exercise of her religious views? Did the government create an atmosphere that would limit or prohibit Davis from practicing her religion?
The Religious Freedom Restoration ACT (RFRA), passed by Congress in 1993, establishes the principle that when someone complains that a federal law burdens his religious conscience, the government has an obligation to demonstrate that it has a compelling interest in applying the law.
Could “a compelling interest” be determined in Davis’ case? For Davis, this is a matter of religious liberty which is protected under the First Amendment. America’s history is filled with accommodations for people's religious freedom and conscience.
For example, the Supreme Court's much-debated Hobby Lobby ruling exempts private businesses from issuing health insurance that offers contraception services to employees if that violates the religious conscience of their owners.
Was Davis offered exemptions that accommodated her First Amendment rights? According to Ryan Anderson, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, “Kentucky accommodates conscientious objectors for other types of licensing.” Why weren’t these “other types of licensing” extended to Davis?
Mat Staver, Head of the Liberty Counsel said “Davis has a very strong conscience and she’s just asking for a simple remedy, and that is, remove her name from the certificate and all will be well. That simple remedy has simply been ignored by the court and by the governor and that’s what should have been done.
Furthermore, I think it’s reprehensible that she’s in jail for this when a simple fix could have been easily handled.”
Kentucky Govenor Steve Beshear could issue an executive order and correct the problem, but he would not. Also, the legislature could pass a law removing clerks' names from the licenses, but it won't be in session until January. In the meantime, Kim Davis is languishing in jail.
This case reminds me of a few lines in Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail: “I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him [or her] is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.”
Like Esther, Kim Davis believes she was elected as Clerk of Court “for such a time as this.” Esther requested of the Jews that they should fast while she prepared herself to stand before the king. In like fashion, we need to stand with Kim Davis. Rightly or wrongly, she is taking a stand for everyone who cherishes religious liberty against judicial tyranny.
Davis’s lawyer, Roger Gannam with the Liberty Counsel, said following Judge David Bunning’s decision to imprison his client: “Today, for the first time in history, an American citizen has been incarcerated for having the belief of conscience that marriage is the union of one man and one woman, and she’s been ordered to stay there until she’s willing to change her mind, until she’s willing to change her conscience about what that belief is. This is unprecedented in American law.”
According to Kim Davis, “I never imagined a day like this would come, where I would be asked to violate a central teaching of Scripture and of Jesus Himself regarding marriage. To issue a marriage license which conflicts with God’s definition of marriage, with my name affixed to the certificate, would violate my conscience. It is not a light issue for me. I’m just a vessel God has chosen for this time and this place.” She added: “I’m no different than any other Christian. It was my appointed time to stand, and their time will come.”
Judge David Bunning, who ruled against Davis, argued his case compellingly. He said: "Our form of government will not survive unless we, as a society, agree to respect the US Supreme Court's decisions regardless of our personal opinions. Davis is certainly free to disagree with the court's opinion, as many Americans likely do, but that does not excuse her from complying with it. To hold otherwise would set a dangerous precedent."
In addition, Judge Bunning contends, "Davis repeatedly states that the act of issuing these licenses requires her to 'authorize' same-sex marriage. The form does not require the county clerk to condone or endorse same-sex marriage on religious or moral grounds. It simply asks the clerk to certify that the information provided is accurate and that the couple is qualified to marry under Kentucky law. Davis' religious convictions have no bearing on this purely legal inquiry. It is not a sign of moral or religious approval."
In other words, Davis was not asked to solemnize something with which she disagreed – she was not employed as a Minister of Religion. What if her job required her to certify legal entities like gambling establishments or night clubs? Would certifying such activities violate her Christian beliefs or conscience?
However, according to Davis, “God’s moral law conflicts with my job duties.” The clerk currently has a case in federal court seeking a religious liberty exemption, allowing her not to have to affix her name to same-sex marriage licenses.
The First Amendment to our US Constitution states, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” In America, the citizen has the freedom of religion; the state should not institute an atmosphere of freedom from religion.
For me, some questions must be answered, was Kim Davis imprisoned for the exercise of her religious views? Did the government create an atmosphere that would limit or prohibit Davis from practicing her religion?
The Religious Freedom Restoration ACT (RFRA), passed by Congress in 1993, establishes the principle that when someone complains that a federal law burdens his religious conscience, the government has an obligation to demonstrate that it has a compelling interest in applying the law.
Could “a compelling interest” be determined in Davis’ case? For Davis, this is a matter of religious liberty which is protected under the First Amendment. America’s history is filled with accommodations for people's religious freedom and conscience.
For example, the Supreme Court's much-debated Hobby Lobby ruling exempts private businesses from issuing health insurance that offers contraception services to employees if that violates the religious conscience of their owners.
Was Davis offered exemptions that accommodated her First Amendment rights? According to Ryan Anderson, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation, “Kentucky accommodates conscientious objectors for other types of licensing.” Why weren’t these “other types of licensing” extended to Davis?
Mat Staver, Head of the Liberty Counsel said “Davis has a very strong conscience and she’s just asking for a simple remedy, and that is, remove her name from the certificate and all will be well. That simple remedy has simply been ignored by the court and by the governor and that’s what should have been done.
Furthermore, I think it’s reprehensible that she’s in jail for this when a simple fix could have been easily handled.”
Kentucky Govenor Steve Beshear could issue an executive order and correct the problem, but he would not. Also, the legislature could pass a law removing clerks' names from the licenses, but it won't be in session until January. In the meantime, Kim Davis is languishing in jail.
This case reminds me of a few lines in Martin Luther King’s Letter from a Birmingham Jail: “I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him [or her] is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.”
Like Esther, Kim Davis believes she was elected as Clerk of Court “for such a time as this.” Esther requested of the Jews that they should fast while she prepared herself to stand before the king. In like fashion, we need to stand with Kim Davis. Rightly or wrongly, she is taking a stand for everyone who cherishes religious liberty against judicial tyranny.
Sunday, August 23, 2015
Apocalyptic Islam!
There is a difference between radical Islam and Apocalyptic Islam. Radical Islam is a militant, politically activist ideology whose ultimate goal is to create a worldwide community, or caliphate of Muslim believers. Adherents of Radical Islam insist on a literal and fundamentalist reading of the Qur’an. They resist progress in human rights, gender-equality and democratic reforms.
Apocalyptic Islam is different. It is not driven by political ideology as Radical Islam. Rather, it is a theological ideology with a specific emphasis on End Times or Eschatology. Islam believes that their messiah, known as the Mahdi, will come at any moment. According to Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, chairman of the Islamic Supreme Council of America: “The coming of the Mahdi is established doctrine for both Sunni and Shi’a Muslims, and indeed for all humanity.”
Both Shi’a and Sunni branches of Islam have different strategies to hasten the arrival of the Mahdi. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both main branches are committed to hasten the coming of the Mahdi. According to Shi’a Muslims, the Mahdi, also known as the Twelfth Imam, is a great spiritual savior.
There are many signs that will precede this Mahdi, “a general and very important sign is that he will come at a time when there is great confutation, intense disputes and violent deaths. When people are afflicted by disturbance and experiencing great fear. It is then that Imam Mahdi will be sent.”
As they work to expedite the coming of the Mahdi, ISIS members, representing Sunni Islam, devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way.
Furthermore, they believe that they are the vanguard, fighting a religious war, which Allah has determined will be won by the forces of true Islam. In an upcoming book, authors Berger and Stern explain that "violent apocalyptic groups, tend to see themselves as participating in a cosmic war between good and evil, in which moral rules do not apply."
Iran, representing Shiite Islam, uses a different strategy to prepare for the coming of the Mahdi. It was former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who attributed his role to that of a forerunner for the Mahdi. He believed he was told by the prophet Mohammed that he was “the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslim’s messiah by creating chaos throughout the world.”
Bernard Lewis, a professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University, warned in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece a few years ago that “President Ahmadinejad seems to believe that the hand of God is guiding him to trigger a series of cataclysmic events which could precipitate the return of the 12th Imam.” As a theocracy, Iran is uniquely poised to administer this apocalyptic role.
New York Times bestseller Joel Rosenberg contends that Iran’s purpose for wanting to build up its nuclear arms program is to be more equipped for the coming of the Mahdi. For Iran, the destruction of Israel, representing Judaism, and America, representing Christianity, is critical in its pre-Mahdi mission.
According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research Center, “in most countries in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, more than 750 million Muslims believe they will live to see the return of the Mahdi.”
When asked to comment on Apocalyptic Islam, Joel Rosenberg said, “For the first time in human history, we now are faced with two nation-states whose leaders are driven by an end-of-the-world [theology]. ISIS is trying to build the end-of-the-world kingdom, or caliphate, for the Mahdi to come and rule. They are not waiting, like the Iranians are, to build genocidal weapons. ISIS is trying to bring about genocide of the infidels right now.”
Egyptian born Dr. Michael Youssef told the Christian Post recently, "To be quite honest, I am not really afraid as much from jihadists as I am fearing that the evangelical church is losing its moorings on the biblical authority for all kinds of different reasons. The challenge from Islam can only be met by a strong Christian church, rather than a weak and indecisive, spineless Gospel preaching."
Like Muslims, Christians believe we are living in the end times. However, the instructions from our Commanding Officer, Jesus Christ, is to ensure that we share the message of salvation with the entire world. We are “to occupy until He comes.” In other words, we prepare for His coming with vigilance, not violence.
Apocalyptic Islam is different. It is not driven by political ideology as Radical Islam. Rather, it is a theological ideology with a specific emphasis on End Times or Eschatology. Islam believes that their messiah, known as the Mahdi, will come at any moment. According to Shaykh Muhammad Hisham Kabbani, chairman of the Islamic Supreme Council of America: “The coming of the Mahdi is established doctrine for both Sunni and Shi’a Muslims, and indeed for all humanity.”
Both Shi’a and Sunni branches of Islam have different strategies to hasten the arrival of the Mahdi. Both branches of Islam believe a period of global turmoil must precede the coming of their Mahdi. Both main branches are committed to hasten the coming of the Mahdi. According to Shi’a Muslims, the Mahdi, also known as the Twelfth Imam, is a great spiritual savior.
There are many signs that will precede this Mahdi, “a general and very important sign is that he will come at a time when there is great confutation, intense disputes and violent deaths. When people are afflicted by disturbance and experiencing great fear. It is then that Imam Mahdi will be sent.”
As they work to expedite the coming of the Mahdi, ISIS members, representing Sunni Islam, devoutly believe that they are fighting in a cosmic war in which they are on the side of good, which allows them to kill anyone they perceive to be standing in their way.
Furthermore, they believe that they are the vanguard, fighting a religious war, which Allah has determined will be won by the forces of true Islam. In an upcoming book, authors Berger and Stern explain that "violent apocalyptic groups, tend to see themselves as participating in a cosmic war between good and evil, in which moral rules do not apply."
Iran, representing Shiite Islam, uses a different strategy to prepare for the coming of the Mahdi. It was former Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad who attributed his role to that of a forerunner for the Mahdi. He believed he was told by the prophet Mohammed that he was “the chosen one to hasten the return of the Muslim’s messiah by creating chaos throughout the world.”
Bernard Lewis, a professor emeritus of Near Eastern studies at Princeton University, warned in a Wall Street Journal opinion piece a few years ago that “President Ahmadinejad seems to believe that the hand of God is guiding him to trigger a series of cataclysmic events which could precipitate the return of the 12th Imam.” As a theocracy, Iran is uniquely poised to administer this apocalyptic role.
New York Times bestseller Joel Rosenberg contends that Iran’s purpose for wanting to build up its nuclear arms program is to be more equipped for the coming of the Mahdi. For Iran, the destruction of Israel, representing Judaism, and America, representing Christianity, is critical in its pre-Mahdi mission.
According to a 2012 report by the Pew Research Center, “in most countries in the Middle East and North Africa, South Asia and Southeast Asia, more than 750 million Muslims believe they will live to see the return of the Mahdi.”
When asked to comment on Apocalyptic Islam, Joel Rosenberg said, “For the first time in human history, we now are faced with two nation-states whose leaders are driven by an end-of-the-world [theology]. ISIS is trying to build the end-of-the-world kingdom, or caliphate, for the Mahdi to come and rule. They are not waiting, like the Iranians are, to build genocidal weapons. ISIS is trying to bring about genocide of the infidels right now.”
Egyptian born Dr. Michael Youssef told the Christian Post recently, "To be quite honest, I am not really afraid as much from jihadists as I am fearing that the evangelical church is losing its moorings on the biblical authority for all kinds of different reasons. The challenge from Islam can only be met by a strong Christian church, rather than a weak and indecisive, spineless Gospel preaching."
Like Muslims, Christians believe we are living in the end times. However, the instructions from our Commanding Officer, Jesus Christ, is to ensure that we share the message of salvation with the entire world. We are “to occupy until He comes.” In other words, we prepare for His coming with vigilance, not violence.
Tuesday, August 18, 2015
Boys and Girls!
In announcing the arrival of our seventh grandchild, our son and his wife engaged in an online discussion with friends about the gender of the child. That kind of gender chatter is fast becoming outdated. The online discussion assumed two genders – male and female. However, in this evolving season of gender neutrality, some activists believe that there are many more types of genders to consider.
Gender neutrality, which incorporates gender-blindness, is opposed to distinguishing people by gender. The idea is to remove any form of gender discrimination in any form of activities and or services provided. Advocates of this view use a purple circle to symbolize gender neutrality. The colored circle is a mixture of colors traditionally used to represent males and females.
It was sensitivity to this gender neutrality culture that prompted Target Stores, the nation’s third-largest retailer, to announce that they will be joining the movement – Target has begun removing signs labeling “boy” and “girls” in multiple departments. The retailer will no longer distinguish between items for boys and items generally preferred by girls.
Target’s website states: “Right now, our teams are working across the store to identify areas where we can phase out gender-based signage to help strike a better balance. For example, in the kids’ Bedding area, signs will no longer feature suggestions for boys or girls, just kids. In the Toys aisles, we’ll also remove reference to gender, including the use of pink, blue, yellow or green paper on the back walls of our shelves. You’ll see these changes start to happen over the next few months.”
All this gender neutral rhetoric is consistent with views held by some sociologists. They contend that gender roles are based on norms or standards, created by society. For instance, masculine roles are usually associated with strength, aggression and dominance.
This school of thought contends that gender socialization begins at birth and occurs through four stages – family, education, peer groups and the media. In other words, much of the behavior we associate with gender is really learned and not inherent or naturally acquired.
Advocates believe, to think otherwise would be to entertain a sexist worldview with prejudiced beliefs that value males over females. Furthermore, advocates believe this stereotypical thinking leads to discrimination, oppression and violence for not adhering to society’s traditional gender roles.
Hogwash – why don’t we take such social theories and apply them to sporting events. For millennia we allow gender distinction in sports because we recognize the differences in strengths between male and female athletes. Such accommodation is guided by biological factors, not sociological.
I agree that some behaviors are designated as appropriate for male or female. However, one cannot ignore that hormonal differences play a significant role in gender differences. This would explain some of the aggression in men.
In her 1989 PhD dissertation at Northwestern University, Psychotherapist Charlotte Smith mapped brain electrical activity and found that women and men process information in different parts of the brain. Other studies confirm that men are naturally more curious and women more attentive to people and social relationships.
John Gray was correct when he wrote, Men Are from Mars, Women Are From Venus. Here Gray provides a practical and proven way for men and women to communicate better by understanding and respecting the differences between them. Gray believes that by pretending that men and women are from different planets can help us to deal with the opposite sex in a loving and accepting way, leading to better relationships.
Gender differences were designed, not learned. I still believe “God created man (mankind) in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27).
There are three different Hebrew words in this verse that help us to understand what took place – they are translated; humankind, male and female. The words are not only different, but the meaning of each word is so different that no word can be used interchangeably.
For millennia, researchers have concluded that the behavioral differences between boys and girls are inherent. The behaviors are consistent with hormonal differences. In addition, many of the learned behaviors, are consistent with the hormonal differences inherent in boys and girls.
Agreed, preferences for colors like pink and blue are learned. However, the same cannot be said of athletic prowess, the capacity to nurture and other caring or aggressive behaviors.
God made us different!
Gender neutrality, which incorporates gender-blindness, is opposed to distinguishing people by gender. The idea is to remove any form of gender discrimination in any form of activities and or services provided. Advocates of this view use a purple circle to symbolize gender neutrality. The colored circle is a mixture of colors traditionally used to represent males and females.
It was sensitivity to this gender neutrality culture that prompted Target Stores, the nation’s third-largest retailer, to announce that they will be joining the movement – Target has begun removing signs labeling “boy” and “girls” in multiple departments. The retailer will no longer distinguish between items for boys and items generally preferred by girls.
Target’s website states: “Right now, our teams are working across the store to identify areas where we can phase out gender-based signage to help strike a better balance. For example, in the kids’ Bedding area, signs will no longer feature suggestions for boys or girls, just kids. In the Toys aisles, we’ll also remove reference to gender, including the use of pink, blue, yellow or green paper on the back walls of our shelves. You’ll see these changes start to happen over the next few months.”
All this gender neutral rhetoric is consistent with views held by some sociologists. They contend that gender roles are based on norms or standards, created by society. For instance, masculine roles are usually associated with strength, aggression and dominance.
This school of thought contends that gender socialization begins at birth and occurs through four stages – family, education, peer groups and the media. In other words, much of the behavior we associate with gender is really learned and not inherent or naturally acquired.
Advocates believe, to think otherwise would be to entertain a sexist worldview with prejudiced beliefs that value males over females. Furthermore, advocates believe this stereotypical thinking leads to discrimination, oppression and violence for not adhering to society’s traditional gender roles.
Hogwash – why don’t we take such social theories and apply them to sporting events. For millennia we allow gender distinction in sports because we recognize the differences in strengths between male and female athletes. Such accommodation is guided by biological factors, not sociological.
I agree that some behaviors are designated as appropriate for male or female. However, one cannot ignore that hormonal differences play a significant role in gender differences. This would explain some of the aggression in men.
In her 1989 PhD dissertation at Northwestern University, Psychotherapist Charlotte Smith mapped brain electrical activity and found that women and men process information in different parts of the brain. Other studies confirm that men are naturally more curious and women more attentive to people and social relationships.
John Gray was correct when he wrote, Men Are from Mars, Women Are From Venus. Here Gray provides a practical and proven way for men and women to communicate better by understanding and respecting the differences between them. Gray believes that by pretending that men and women are from different planets can help us to deal with the opposite sex in a loving and accepting way, leading to better relationships.
Gender differences were designed, not learned. I still believe “God created man (mankind) in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them” (Genesis 1:27).
There are three different Hebrew words in this verse that help us to understand what took place – they are translated; humankind, male and female. The words are not only different, but the meaning of each word is so different that no word can be used interchangeably.
For millennia, researchers have concluded that the behavioral differences between boys and girls are inherent. The behaviors are consistent with hormonal differences. In addition, many of the learned behaviors, are consistent with the hormonal differences inherent in boys and girls.
Agreed, preferences for colors like pink and blue are learned. However, the same cannot be said of athletic prowess, the capacity to nurture and other caring or aggressive behaviors.
God made us different!
Monday, August 10, 2015
The Faiths of the Debaters
Agreed, today’s headline was borrowed from David Holmes’ book, The Faiths of the Post-War Presidents.
In this volume Holmes looks at the role of faith in the lives of the twelve presidents who have served since the end of World War II. Like Holmes, I share the view that the faith of presidents shapes their character and their character shapes their politics.
With that in mind it is therefore important for us to become aware of the faiths of the debaters, each seeking to become the president of the United States. From information gathered, most of last Thursday’s Republican debaters claim to be Christians.
Former President Dwight Eisenhower was correct in saying that “we are a religious people.” Every potential president knows this and declares his religious leanings very early in campaigning. President Obama understood this and severed ties with the church with which he was a member for more than twenty years. He agreed with his advisors that the anti-American rhetoric at the church would hurt his run for president.
Among some conservatives, it was felt that Mitt Romney’s association with the Mormon Church, often viewed as a cult, damaged his presidential chances in 2012. Decades earlier, the question of John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s Roman Catholicism animated the 1960 election. Many felt his allegiance to the Pope could undermine his allegiance to the Constitution of the United States.
One could now understand the reasoning behind Chase Norton’s Facebook question to the debaters: “What is God saying to you about running for President?” Each candidate, when asked the question, expressed his opinion and exposed his personal religious commitment.
For Texas Senator Ted Cruz, he felt “blessed to receive a word from God every day” as he read the Bible. Cruz also used the occasion to share how he came to faith in Jesus Christ in 1975. The story of his father, now a pastor, was equally interesting.
Donald Trump was not asked to respond to the Facebook question. However, as the Republican front runner, I thought it would be interesting to explore his journey of faith. In 2012, he told the Christian Broadcasting Network that he attended the First Presbyterian Church in Queens, New York. He was also a member of Marble Collegiate Church, a Reformed Church in America congregation and once the pulpit of the late Norman Vincent Peale.
When asked about a personal faith in Christ, during a Question & Answer session at the Family Leadership Summit in Iowa, Trump admitted that he had never sought forgiveness for his sins. However, he further admits that he goes to church when he can – but always at Christmas, Easter and “when there’s a major occasion – I’m a Sunday church person.”
In his contribution to the Facebook question, Wisconsin’s Governor Scott Walker declared, “It is only by the blood of Jesus Christ that I’ve been redeemed from my sins.” Like Cruz, Walker is the son of a pastor and has been exposed to evangelical Christianity from his childhood.
Before the debate even kicked off, retired neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson, tweeted this to his followers: “May the Lord guide my words tonight, let His wisdom be my thoughts.” In his book Gifted Hands, Carson describes being baptized as a boy by the pastor of Detroit’s Burns Seventh-Day Adventist Church. At the age of 12 he told the pastor of another Adventist church that he had not completely grasped his first baptism and was baptized again.
Carson, a former Director of Neurosurgery at Baltimore’s Johns Hopkins Hospital once said, “Quite frankly, as a neurosurgeon, there’s a lot of emphasis on technical ability, but I believe that that’s something that can be taught, but wisdom comes from God and I think that it’s something that you have to seek.”
The fact that almost every presidential candidate talks about a personal faith in Christ is a healthy sign. Such a faith suggests a commitment to the ethical demands of the Scriptures and the faith community to which they are committed. Although not elected as religious leaders, presidents are expected to console and lift citizens to heights greater than themselves. Christians are well disposed to these demands.
In addition to David Holmes’ book, to which I alluded earlier, I would strongly encourage readers to contact Religion News Service for additional information on the faith of the debaters.
In this volume Holmes looks at the role of faith in the lives of the twelve presidents who have served since the end of World War II. Like Holmes, I share the view that the faith of presidents shapes their character and their character shapes their politics.
With that in mind it is therefore important for us to become aware of the faiths of the debaters, each seeking to become the president of the United States. From information gathered, most of last Thursday’s Republican debaters claim to be Christians.
Former President Dwight Eisenhower was correct in saying that “we are a religious people.” Every potential president knows this and declares his religious leanings very early in campaigning. President Obama understood this and severed ties with the church with which he was a member for more than twenty years. He agreed with his advisors that the anti-American rhetoric at the church would hurt his run for president.
Among some conservatives, it was felt that Mitt Romney’s association with the Mormon Church, often viewed as a cult, damaged his presidential chances in 2012. Decades earlier, the question of John Fitzgerald Kennedy’s Roman Catholicism animated the 1960 election. Many felt his allegiance to the Pope could undermine his allegiance to the Constitution of the United States.
One could now understand the reasoning behind Chase Norton’s Facebook question to the debaters: “What is God saying to you about running for President?” Each candidate, when asked the question, expressed his opinion and exposed his personal religious commitment.
For Texas Senator Ted Cruz, he felt “blessed to receive a word from God every day” as he read the Bible. Cruz also used the occasion to share how he came to faith in Jesus Christ in 1975. The story of his father, now a pastor, was equally interesting.
Donald Trump was not asked to respond to the Facebook question. However, as the Republican front runner, I thought it would be interesting to explore his journey of faith. In 2012, he told the Christian Broadcasting Network that he attended the First Presbyterian Church in Queens, New York. He was also a member of Marble Collegiate Church, a Reformed Church in America congregation and once the pulpit of the late Norman Vincent Peale.
When asked about a personal faith in Christ, during a Question & Answer session at the Family Leadership Summit in Iowa, Trump admitted that he had never sought forgiveness for his sins. However, he further admits that he goes to church when he can – but always at Christmas, Easter and “when there’s a major occasion – I’m a Sunday church person.”
In his contribution to the Facebook question, Wisconsin’s Governor Scott Walker declared, “It is only by the blood of Jesus Christ that I’ve been redeemed from my sins.” Like Cruz, Walker is the son of a pastor and has been exposed to evangelical Christianity from his childhood.
Before the debate even kicked off, retired neurosurgeon Dr. Ben Carson, tweeted this to his followers: “May the Lord guide my words tonight, let His wisdom be my thoughts.” In his book Gifted Hands, Carson describes being baptized as a boy by the pastor of Detroit’s Burns Seventh-Day Adventist Church. At the age of 12 he told the pastor of another Adventist church that he had not completely grasped his first baptism and was baptized again.
Carson, a former Director of Neurosurgery at Baltimore’s Johns Hopkins Hospital once said, “Quite frankly, as a neurosurgeon, there’s a lot of emphasis on technical ability, but I believe that that’s something that can be taught, but wisdom comes from God and I think that it’s something that you have to seek.”
The fact that almost every presidential candidate talks about a personal faith in Christ is a healthy sign. Such a faith suggests a commitment to the ethical demands of the Scriptures and the faith community to which they are committed. Although not elected as religious leaders, presidents are expected to console and lift citizens to heights greater than themselves. Christians are well disposed to these demands.
In addition to David Holmes’ book, to which I alluded earlier, I would strongly encourage readers to contact Religion News Service for additional information on the faith of the debaters.
Sunday, August 2, 2015
Sports & Prayer
The Jamaicans in our local church were pleased to see the bulletin item - JAMAICA IN SOCCER FINAL. The item appeared the Sunday Jamaica was scheduled to meet Mexico, following their 2-1 victory against the United States.
Apart from the novelty of having a sporting event featured in a church bulletin, one may question what does religion have to do with sports. Thankfully, our church was not praying for Jamaica to win, although that was desired, we were praying for some of the other benefits derived from sports.
We were praying for “a clean game, without injuries and an honorable display of sportsmanship.” Although Jamaica lost the game, that prayer was answered. Somewhere along the line we have been led to believe that sporting activities were designed only to identify champions. Consequently, we are taught to demonize opponents, in that they are there to obstruct us from becoming champions.
Sometimes I wish I could hear the prayers of competing teams. Are they both asking the same God to help them win? Such thinking trivializes prayer. Praying before or during a sporting event should be bigger than “Lord, help us to win.”
Because of the recently completed Women’s World Cup in Canada and the CONCACAF Gold Cup in America, allow me to use soccer as a case study in our reflections on Sports and Prayer. Here are some reasons why players and fans need to pray.
Soccer has its moments of stress and anxieties. One such anxiety comes with the taking of penalties. Studies confirm that this unplanned event is one of the most stressful in the 90 minute game. Business Insider reports that on average, in a penalty, a soccer ball travels at about 70 mph. With the penalty spot just 36 feet from the goal, that means it will take the ball less than half a second to reach the net. That gives the goalkeeper about 700 milliseconds to look which way the ball is going, decide which way to jump and move his body in that direction.
In addition, there is the emotional weight of the team, the fans and the nation one is representing. In the case of penalty shoot-outs, the outcome of the game could also be determined by the success of the goalkeeper or penalty kicker. Prayer does relieve much of that stress.
Although not the most dangerous sport, serious injuries have taken place on the soccer field. Players have suffered concussions, broken bones, dislocations and varying sorts of career-ending injuries. The ripple effects of such injuries affect many, including the player, his sporting fraternity and his family.
The likelihood of injury introduces the whole subject of safety – not just the safety of the players, but also the fans. Stadiums have collapsed killing fans, riots have broken out among fans and various forms of disorder have taken place among unruly fans. Actually, crowd control is no easy task. Imagine, in an emergency, having to evacuate 60,000 persons within a limited period of time and through limited exits. Personally, I pray for safety at soccer games.
Ongoing studies by sport psychologists confirm that an athlete’s spiritual and religious beliefs seem to promote deeper meaning to their athletic successes, failures, struggles and disappointments. In essence, the religious beliefs of the athlete is closely linked to his/her motivation to play.
One way Christian athletes can respond to the self-focused, self-indulgent way of thinking that is so pervasive in competitive sports, is to define sports participation as a religious encounter. One researcher found that some Christian athletes often used prayer in sports to “give glory to God”. The researcher cited one athlete who used the verse, “whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, but for the Lord, not for man” (Colossians 3:23), as his motivation in sports.
Despite the disdain shown to Christian athletes by many in the media, there is a growing interest in sports and religion within some institutions. One such institution is York St. John University in York, England. At York there is an academic research Center for the Study of Sport and Spirituality, which encourages a multi-disciplinary approach to sport and spirituality.
The existence of organizations like Christians in Sports, The Fellowship of Christian Athletes and The Center for Sport and Jewish Life in America, further illustrate the growing interest and importance of the interaction between sport and religion.
So, when we see athletes pray, or when we pray for athletes, our prayers should be much more than “Lord, help us to win.” Our prayers should instead focus on tempering attitudes among those who win and those who did not win. Like one team, we should be praying, “May we put into practice all that we have learnt in our training, and bring to mind all the skills and planning from our preparation times.”
Apart from the novelty of having a sporting event featured in a church bulletin, one may question what does religion have to do with sports. Thankfully, our church was not praying for Jamaica to win, although that was desired, we were praying for some of the other benefits derived from sports.
We were praying for “a clean game, without injuries and an honorable display of sportsmanship.” Although Jamaica lost the game, that prayer was answered. Somewhere along the line we have been led to believe that sporting activities were designed only to identify champions. Consequently, we are taught to demonize opponents, in that they are there to obstruct us from becoming champions.
Sometimes I wish I could hear the prayers of competing teams. Are they both asking the same God to help them win? Such thinking trivializes prayer. Praying before or during a sporting event should be bigger than “Lord, help us to win.”
Because of the recently completed Women’s World Cup in Canada and the CONCACAF Gold Cup in America, allow me to use soccer as a case study in our reflections on Sports and Prayer. Here are some reasons why players and fans need to pray.
Soccer has its moments of stress and anxieties. One such anxiety comes with the taking of penalties. Studies confirm that this unplanned event is one of the most stressful in the 90 minute game. Business Insider reports that on average, in a penalty, a soccer ball travels at about 70 mph. With the penalty spot just 36 feet from the goal, that means it will take the ball less than half a second to reach the net. That gives the goalkeeper about 700 milliseconds to look which way the ball is going, decide which way to jump and move his body in that direction.
In addition, there is the emotional weight of the team, the fans and the nation one is representing. In the case of penalty shoot-outs, the outcome of the game could also be determined by the success of the goalkeeper or penalty kicker. Prayer does relieve much of that stress.
Although not the most dangerous sport, serious injuries have taken place on the soccer field. Players have suffered concussions, broken bones, dislocations and varying sorts of career-ending injuries. The ripple effects of such injuries affect many, including the player, his sporting fraternity and his family.
The likelihood of injury introduces the whole subject of safety – not just the safety of the players, but also the fans. Stadiums have collapsed killing fans, riots have broken out among fans and various forms of disorder have taken place among unruly fans. Actually, crowd control is no easy task. Imagine, in an emergency, having to evacuate 60,000 persons within a limited period of time and through limited exits. Personally, I pray for safety at soccer games.
Ongoing studies by sport psychologists confirm that an athlete’s spiritual and religious beliefs seem to promote deeper meaning to their athletic successes, failures, struggles and disappointments. In essence, the religious beliefs of the athlete is closely linked to his/her motivation to play.
One way Christian athletes can respond to the self-focused, self-indulgent way of thinking that is so pervasive in competitive sports, is to define sports participation as a religious encounter. One researcher found that some Christian athletes often used prayer in sports to “give glory to God”. The researcher cited one athlete who used the verse, “whatever you do, work at it with all your heart, but for the Lord, not for man” (Colossians 3:23), as his motivation in sports.
Despite the disdain shown to Christian athletes by many in the media, there is a growing interest in sports and religion within some institutions. One such institution is York St. John University in York, England. At York there is an academic research Center for the Study of Sport and Spirituality, which encourages a multi-disciplinary approach to sport and spirituality.
The existence of organizations like Christians in Sports, The Fellowship of Christian Athletes and The Center for Sport and Jewish Life in America, further illustrate the growing interest and importance of the interaction between sport and religion.
So, when we see athletes pray, or when we pray for athletes, our prayers should be much more than “Lord, help us to win.” Our prayers should instead focus on tempering attitudes among those who win and those who did not win. Like one team, we should be praying, “May we put into practice all that we have learnt in our training, and bring to mind all the skills and planning from our preparation times.”
Monday, July 27, 2015
Planned Parenthood
A new estimate published by the National Right to Life Committee indicates that there have been an estimated 55 million abortions since the Supreme Court handed down its 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision allowing virtually unlimited abortions. This number means that there are more than 3,300 abortions daily and 140 abortions per hour, every hour in the United States.
Most of these abortions were done by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, commonly shortened to Planned Parenthood, the U.S. affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. According to its website, Planned Parenthood is “America's most trusted provider of reproductive health care.”
Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood’s history is not as impressive as its website. The vision of Margaret Sanger, one of the two founders of the movement paints a picture of a racist with clear intentions to systematically exterminate black people in America.
In an interview with the New York Times (1923), Sanger said, “Birth control is not contraception indiscriminately and thoughtlessly practiced. It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks – those human weeds (blacks) which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.”
Sanger established her first full-service “clinic” in Harlem in 1929. Why Harlem, New York - that’s where a lot of the black people, she often referred to as “human weeds”, lived. Sanger described it as “an experimental clinic established for the benefit of the colored people.” In this case, she defined “benefit” as the overall reduction of the black population.
On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States. This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions – 30% of abortions done.
Although this information is known by civil rights leaders and politicians, no one attempts to abort the largest abortion provider in this country. Instead, Planned Parenthood receives more than $500 million annually from tax payers – that means it receives an average of $1.5 million a day to conduct its business.
In order to augment its income as a not-for-profit organization, Planned Parenthood now sells body parts from babies.
Recently, Planned Parenthood was caught in a firestorm of well-deserved controversy after two undercover videos, released by the Center for Medical Progress, seem to implicate them in horrific crimes against the unborn. The videos show two top Planned Parenthood executives discussing the best methods to extract baby body parts intact, and haggling with undercover investigators over the prices of these body parts – how disgusting.
Whereas Planned Parenthood calls the organs of murdered babies “fetal tissue,” they call unborn babies “clumps of cells” until labeling their organs as “human” helps their bottom line. And they call their murder of millions “quality family planning.”
Most the body parts are sold to Stem Express, a California-based biomedical company that provides “qualified research laboratories with human cells, fluids, blood and tissue products for the pursuit of disease detection and cure.”
There are a number of things that upset me about the disgusting practices of Planned Parenthood. From its inception, the founder showed a disregard for a group of persons, seen as “defective stocks and human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.” That racist premise was the foundation of the movement.
In responding to the recent sale of body parts, Planned Parenthood wants us to believe that this is a good business practice. No, this is repulsive, sickening and ghastly. After looking at the Consolidated Balance Sheets for 2014, Planned Parenthood does not need to sell body parts to augment income. The company is a victim of its gruesome practices.
Thankfully, the company’s attitude to abortion is not the same to a wide variety of human services. I would love to see many of those services retained, but under a different banner. The stench and the sigma of a sordid history must be removed. Until that happens, I will support the move to defund Planned Parenthood.
In attempting to close the door on disgusting practices, Christians must ensure that we do not close our compassion to “the least of these”, to whom Jesus referred.
Most of these abortions were done by Planned Parenthood Federation of America, commonly shortened to Planned Parenthood, the U.S. affiliate of the International Planned Parenthood Federation. According to its website, Planned Parenthood is “America's most trusted provider of reproductive health care.”
Unfortunately, Planned Parenthood’s history is not as impressive as its website. The vision of Margaret Sanger, one of the two founders of the movement paints a picture of a racist with clear intentions to systematically exterminate black people in America.
In an interview with the New York Times (1923), Sanger said, “Birth control is not contraception indiscriminately and thoughtlessly practiced. It means the release and cultivation of the better racial elements in our society, and the gradual suppression, elimination and eventual extirpation of defective stocks – those human weeds (blacks) which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.”
Sanger established her first full-service “clinic” in Harlem in 1929. Why Harlem, New York - that’s where a lot of the black people, she often referred to as “human weeds”, lived. Sanger described it as “an experimental clinic established for the benefit of the colored people.” In this case, she defined “benefit” as the overall reduction of the black population.
On average, 1,876 black babies are aborted every day in the United States. This incidence of abortion has resulted in a tremendous loss of life. It has been estimated that since 1973 Black women have had about 16 million abortions – 30% of abortions done.
Although this information is known by civil rights leaders and politicians, no one attempts to abort the largest abortion provider in this country. Instead, Planned Parenthood receives more than $500 million annually from tax payers – that means it receives an average of $1.5 million a day to conduct its business.
In order to augment its income as a not-for-profit organization, Planned Parenthood now sells body parts from babies.
Recently, Planned Parenthood was caught in a firestorm of well-deserved controversy after two undercover videos, released by the Center for Medical Progress, seem to implicate them in horrific crimes against the unborn. The videos show two top Planned Parenthood executives discussing the best methods to extract baby body parts intact, and haggling with undercover investigators over the prices of these body parts – how disgusting.
Whereas Planned Parenthood calls the organs of murdered babies “fetal tissue,” they call unborn babies “clumps of cells” until labeling their organs as “human” helps their bottom line. And they call their murder of millions “quality family planning.”
Most the body parts are sold to Stem Express, a California-based biomedical company that provides “qualified research laboratories with human cells, fluids, blood and tissue products for the pursuit of disease detection and cure.”
There are a number of things that upset me about the disgusting practices of Planned Parenthood. From its inception, the founder showed a disregard for a group of persons, seen as “defective stocks and human weeds which threaten the blooming of the finest flowers of American civilization.” That racist premise was the foundation of the movement.
In responding to the recent sale of body parts, Planned Parenthood wants us to believe that this is a good business practice. No, this is repulsive, sickening and ghastly. After looking at the Consolidated Balance Sheets for 2014, Planned Parenthood does not need to sell body parts to augment income. The company is a victim of its gruesome practices.
Thankfully, the company’s attitude to abortion is not the same to a wide variety of human services. I would love to see many of those services retained, but under a different banner. The stench and the sigma of a sordid history must be removed. Until that happens, I will support the move to defund Planned Parenthood.
In attempting to close the door on disgusting practices, Christians must ensure that we do not close our compassion to “the least of these”, to whom Jesus referred.
Sunday, July 19, 2015
Immigrants!
Our first request to migrate to the United States was turned down. The immigration department feared, as graduate students, we would become a liability to America. It was a church that came to our rescue. Recently I reminded the New York congregation of their compassionate gesture almost 25 years ago.
For decades, churches have had to balance compassion and immigration - especially among illegal immigrants. Christians are expected to show care to everyone, especially to the less fortunate. The writer to the New Testament book of Hebrews stated clearly: “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it.”
Honestly, I have been blessed as an immigrant. Trinidad and Tobago first opened the doors to my grandparents from Barbados, later the country did the same for my mother as an infant from St. Vincent. Jamaica opened her borders to me as a student, and 42 years later I call a Jamaican my wife.
One can therefore understand my sensitivities to immigration issues in the United States – possibly the most ethnically diverse country in the world. Agreed, for security and national identity, we must secure our borders and put equitable laws in place.
The recent random, heartless murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco by a five-time illegal alien deportee, who benefited from the city’s sanctuary policy has law-abiding Americans, law enforcement officials and political opportunists of all stripes up in arms.
Many are equally annoyed by churches across the country that are brazenly thumbing their noses at immigration laws. For instance, in Northeast Portland, Oregan, the Augustana Lutheran Church is shielding illegal alien Franscisco Aguirre-Velasquez, after he committed drunk driving and drug crimes and violated deportation laws.
In Chicago, illegal alien Elvira Arellano settled at the United Methodist Church of Adalberto for a year before finally being ejected back to Mexico. Last year, the serial law-breaker somehow returned to the Windy City to protest her status “in the shadows.”
Like in my case, it is one thing to show compassion to legal immigrants, legitimate refugees and to persons who were abused and mistreated. It is quite another matter to conspire against orderly immigration laws.
The mixture of compassion and politics leave the church confused. Is there another way to address unfair immigration laws? According to the Bible, compassion is not optional. Early in Jewish history, the Hebrews were reminded: "You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 22:21).
Hundreds of years later, at the time of King Solomon, there were about 150,000 non-Jews in Israel (2 Chron. 2:17) or about a tenth of the country’s total population. As is usual today, most of these were unskilled workers (1 Chron. 22:2; 2 Chron. 8:7-8).
However, the question remains, what should be the church’s attitude to illegal immigrants today? I have found Chawkat Moucarry’s volume, The Prophet and the Messiah: An Arab Christian’s Perspective on Islam and Christianity to be most helpful. In this volume, Dr. Moucarry suggests at least three things:
Watchfulness – we must always keep in mind the danger of nationalism, whose victims would be minority groups living within the borders of nations. The practice of “ethnic cleansing”, the rise of extreme right-wing theories and inter-tribal warfare remind us that this danger is real and current.
At the global level the more powerful nations need to be on guard against exploiting poorer and weaker ones, and as Christians we should play our part in encouraging governments to develop international relations founded on principles of solidarity and equity.
Clear-mindedness and Tolerance - Christians should know better than others what really separates people from one another: the hardest barriers to break down are not geographic, political, economic or cultural, but spiritual. For instance, two Americans can be much more foreign to one another than a Mexican and an American who share the same faith in Jesus.
Evangelism - By sharing our lives and not just our words, immigrants will see that Jesus Christ really is unique: unique because of His life, His teaching, His love, His death and His resurrection. He is also unique because He alone can reconcile us to ourselves, to our neighbor and to our God: "For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, 'everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved’” (Romans 10:12-13).
For decades, churches have had to balance compassion and immigration - especially among illegal immigrants. Christians are expected to show care to everyone, especially to the less fortunate. The writer to the New Testament book of Hebrews stated clearly: “Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for by this some have entertained angels without knowing it.”
Honestly, I have been blessed as an immigrant. Trinidad and Tobago first opened the doors to my grandparents from Barbados, later the country did the same for my mother as an infant from St. Vincent. Jamaica opened her borders to me as a student, and 42 years later I call a Jamaican my wife.
One can therefore understand my sensitivities to immigration issues in the United States – possibly the most ethnically diverse country in the world. Agreed, for security and national identity, we must secure our borders and put equitable laws in place.
The recent random, heartless murder of Kate Steinle in San Francisco by a five-time illegal alien deportee, who benefited from the city’s sanctuary policy has law-abiding Americans, law enforcement officials and political opportunists of all stripes up in arms.
Many are equally annoyed by churches across the country that are brazenly thumbing their noses at immigration laws. For instance, in Northeast Portland, Oregan, the Augustana Lutheran Church is shielding illegal alien Franscisco Aguirre-Velasquez, after he committed drunk driving and drug crimes and violated deportation laws.
In Chicago, illegal alien Elvira Arellano settled at the United Methodist Church of Adalberto for a year before finally being ejected back to Mexico. Last year, the serial law-breaker somehow returned to the Windy City to protest her status “in the shadows.”
Like in my case, it is one thing to show compassion to legal immigrants, legitimate refugees and to persons who were abused and mistreated. It is quite another matter to conspire against orderly immigration laws.
The mixture of compassion and politics leave the church confused. Is there another way to address unfair immigration laws? According to the Bible, compassion is not optional. Early in Jewish history, the Hebrews were reminded: "You shall not wrong a stranger or oppress him, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt” (Exodus 22:21).
Hundreds of years later, at the time of King Solomon, there were about 150,000 non-Jews in Israel (2 Chron. 2:17) or about a tenth of the country’s total population. As is usual today, most of these were unskilled workers (1 Chron. 22:2; 2 Chron. 8:7-8).
However, the question remains, what should be the church’s attitude to illegal immigrants today? I have found Chawkat Moucarry’s volume, The Prophet and the Messiah: An Arab Christian’s Perspective on Islam and Christianity to be most helpful. In this volume, Dr. Moucarry suggests at least three things:
Watchfulness – we must always keep in mind the danger of nationalism, whose victims would be minority groups living within the borders of nations. The practice of “ethnic cleansing”, the rise of extreme right-wing theories and inter-tribal warfare remind us that this danger is real and current.
At the global level the more powerful nations need to be on guard against exploiting poorer and weaker ones, and as Christians we should play our part in encouraging governments to develop international relations founded on principles of solidarity and equity.
Clear-mindedness and Tolerance - Christians should know better than others what really separates people from one another: the hardest barriers to break down are not geographic, political, economic or cultural, but spiritual. For instance, two Americans can be much more foreign to one another than a Mexican and an American who share the same faith in Jesus.
Evangelism - By sharing our lives and not just our words, immigrants will see that Jesus Christ really is unique: unique because of His life, His teaching, His love, His death and His resurrection. He is also unique because He alone can reconcile us to ourselves, to our neighbor and to our God: "For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, 'everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord will be saved’” (Romans 10:12-13).
Saturday, April 4, 2015
Did It Really Happen?
On October 21, 1997, the Lee County School Board in Florida voted 3 to 2 to adopt the National Council on Bible Curriculum in Public Schools program. The ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and People for the American Way were quick to bring a lawsuit against the School Board. The lawsuit contended that the planned course would present the Bible as history – and that would be unconstitutional.
In a split decision, U.S. District Judge Elizabeth Kovakevich said that the School Board can implement a course based on the Old Testament, but may not teach a planned companion course based on the New Testament.
In her twenty-page ruling, the Judge said she had been convinced by the school’s argument that the Old Testament course was “ostensibly designed to teach history and not religion.” But she ruled out teaching the New Testament as history, saying that she “finds it difficult to conceive how the account of the resurrection or of miracles could be taught as secular history.” The judge’s ruling leaves us with a major question: Can the resurrection of Jesus be viewed as an historical event?
As a term, history may refer to what actually happened, or it may refer to an historian’s interpretation of what actually happened. The historian does not have to believe what happened, but is obligated to report what happened.
In attempting to determine what happened, historians ask questions about location and witnesses to the alleged events. They look for corroborative evidence. They examine archaeological findings in their quest to answer the big question, did it happen?
Judge Kovakevich suggests that such tests cannot be applied to the resurrection of Jesus. In essence, she finds it difficult to conceive that Jesus could rise from the dead. If that is her position, then she is not interested in investigating the event of the resurrection. Rather, she is expressing her inability to conceive of such an event.
Matt Perman makes the point that a method commonly used today to determine the historicity of an event is "inference to the best explanation." William Lane Craig describes this as an approach where we "begin with the evidence available to us and then infer what would, if true, provide the best explanation of that evidence." In other words, we ought to accept an event as historical if it gives the best explanation for the evidence surrounding it.
When we look at the evidence, the truth of the resurrection emerges very clearly as the best explanation. There is no other theory that even comes close to accounting for the evidence. Therefore, there is solid historical grounds for the truth that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
No one is asking the historian to explain the process of resurrection – that is the job of the theologian. However, we are asking the historian to respond to the Christians’ claim of an empty tomb. Following His death, Jesus was placed in a tomb, a common practice at that time. Three days later, Christians’ claim that the tomb was empty.
In order to avoid theft, the authorities actually secured the tomb in which Jesus was placed. Yet the tomb was found empty. The announcement of an empty tomb was not made in another city some years later. Rather, it was made in the same vicinity where Jesus was killed, a few days later. If the claim of resurrection was false, then why didn’t the authorities simply identify a sealed tomb?
Interestingly, it was in order to respond to an empty tomb, the Jews attempted to bribe the guards that were on duty to protect the tomb. The case of bribery would not have been necessary if the tomb was not empty.
Furthermore, the story of the empty tomb was not legend. There is clear evidence that within seven years after the alleged resurrection, the story began to be documented. Normally, it would take decades before a story is considered to be a legend. This story was documented within the lifetime of eye witnesses.
One finds it very strange that the tomb of Jesus was never venerated as a shrine. This is striking because it was the 1st century custom to set up a shrine at the site of a holy man's bones. There were at least 50 such cites in Jesus' day. Since there was no such shrine for Jesus, it suggests that his bones weren't there.
Following his conversion, Paul, a strong opponent of Christianity, made it very clear: “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless, and so is your faith...” (1 Corinthians 15:14).
Scholars may debate the process of resurrection. However, there should be no debate about the fact of resurrection – the empty tomb continues to provide historical evidence that something phenomenal happened following the death of Jesus.
In a split decision, U.S. District Judge Elizabeth Kovakevich said that the School Board can implement a course based on the Old Testament, but may not teach a planned companion course based on the New Testament.
In her twenty-page ruling, the Judge said she had been convinced by the school’s argument that the Old Testament course was “ostensibly designed to teach history and not religion.” But she ruled out teaching the New Testament as history, saying that she “finds it difficult to conceive how the account of the resurrection or of miracles could be taught as secular history.” The judge’s ruling leaves us with a major question: Can the resurrection of Jesus be viewed as an historical event?
As a term, history may refer to what actually happened, or it may refer to an historian’s interpretation of what actually happened. The historian does not have to believe what happened, but is obligated to report what happened.
In attempting to determine what happened, historians ask questions about location and witnesses to the alleged events. They look for corroborative evidence. They examine archaeological findings in their quest to answer the big question, did it happen?
Judge Kovakevich suggests that such tests cannot be applied to the resurrection of Jesus. In essence, she finds it difficult to conceive that Jesus could rise from the dead. If that is her position, then she is not interested in investigating the event of the resurrection. Rather, she is expressing her inability to conceive of such an event.
Matt Perman makes the point that a method commonly used today to determine the historicity of an event is "inference to the best explanation." William Lane Craig describes this as an approach where we "begin with the evidence available to us and then infer what would, if true, provide the best explanation of that evidence." In other words, we ought to accept an event as historical if it gives the best explanation for the evidence surrounding it.
When we look at the evidence, the truth of the resurrection emerges very clearly as the best explanation. There is no other theory that even comes close to accounting for the evidence. Therefore, there is solid historical grounds for the truth that Jesus Christ rose from the dead.
No one is asking the historian to explain the process of resurrection – that is the job of the theologian. However, we are asking the historian to respond to the Christians’ claim of an empty tomb. Following His death, Jesus was placed in a tomb, a common practice at that time. Three days later, Christians’ claim that the tomb was empty.
In order to avoid theft, the authorities actually secured the tomb in which Jesus was placed. Yet the tomb was found empty. The announcement of an empty tomb was not made in another city some years later. Rather, it was made in the same vicinity where Jesus was killed, a few days later. If the claim of resurrection was false, then why didn’t the authorities simply identify a sealed tomb?
Interestingly, it was in order to respond to an empty tomb, the Jews attempted to bribe the guards that were on duty to protect the tomb. The case of bribery would not have been necessary if the tomb was not empty.
Furthermore, the story of the empty tomb was not legend. There is clear evidence that within seven years after the alleged resurrection, the story began to be documented. Normally, it would take decades before a story is considered to be a legend. This story was documented within the lifetime of eye witnesses.
One finds it very strange that the tomb of Jesus was never venerated as a shrine. This is striking because it was the 1st century custom to set up a shrine at the site of a holy man's bones. There were at least 50 such cites in Jesus' day. Since there was no such shrine for Jesus, it suggests that his bones weren't there.
Following his conversion, Paul, a strong opponent of Christianity, made it very clear: “And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless, and so is your faith...” (1 Corinthians 15:14).
Scholars may debate the process of resurrection. However, there should be no debate about the fact of resurrection – the empty tomb continues to provide historical evidence that something phenomenal happened following the death of Jesus.
Sunday, March 29, 2015
He Chose Not to Fight for His Freedom
Clients expect their defense attorneys to make them look good. Whereas clients who are guilty expect leniency, clients who are innocent expect total exoneration. Unless for some unknown reason, innocent clients usually fight for their freedom.
The Easter story is the story of an innocent man who chose not to fight for his freedom. He had the resources to fight and He chose not to do so. In telling the story, Matthew quotes Jesus as saying, “Do you think I cannot call on my Father and He will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matthew 26:53).
Considering that a Roman legion had 6,000 soldiers, Jesus was claiming that he had access to at least 72,000 angels to protect Him from Roman crucifixion, one of the worst forms of capital punishment in the history of mankind. In his gospel, Luke contends that one such angel provided strength to Jesus before He was arrested by the Roman authorities (Luke 22:43). In other words, rather than provide release from the trial, the angel provided ability to cope with the trial.
Both the Jewish and Roman trials were mockeries and travesties of justice. Attorney Steven Allen analyzes these trials in his book, The Illegal Trial of Christ. Here he examines both Jewish and Roman civil and religious law and exposes the violations that occurred during Jesus’ arrest and trial. The trials were held in the wrong place, at the wrong time, by the wrong people and with the wrong witnesses. Yet Jesus never fought for a retrial.
Earlier in His ministry, attempts were made to kill Jesus. This is how John described one of those attempts: “At that point some of the people of Jerusalem began to ask, ‘Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill?’... At this they tried to seize Him, but no one laid a hand on Him, because His time had not yet come” (John 7:25-30).
John’s comment, “...His time had not yet come”, gives the impression that the death of Jesus was prearranged. Peter, one the disciples of Jesus, was convinced that the death of Jesus was no accident, it was prearranged. In his sermon on the Day of Pentecost, Peter said, “This Man [Jesus] was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge...” (Acts 2:23).
Interestingly, some 700 years before the death of Jesus, the prophet Isaiah predicted that the promised Messiah would experience a tragic death. The prophet went as far as to say that the promised Messiah would be pierced (Isaiah 53:5). However, Isaiah did not say who was the Messiah to whom he was referring. Many Jews are still awaiting the arrival of that Messiah.
Unlike the Jews who are awaiting the arrival of the Messiah, Jesus contended that He was the Messiah. Following His death and resurrection, Jesus said to His disciples, “...everything must be fulfilled that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). It was because of His claim to be the Messiah, first century Jews sought to kill Him (Luke 22:66-71).
As far as Jesus was concerned, the authorities killed the Messiah, and that killing was consistent with what was expected to happen to the Messiah. Therefore, to avoid the crucifixion would be to deny a messianic requirement. Jesus was no insurrectionist, as the authorities contended, in order to justify their murderous act - He died as was expected of the Messiah.
That being the case, one must now answer the question, why was it necessary for the Messiah to die? The apostle Paul, a Jewish convert to Christianity, answers that question in one of his letters: “...that Christ [Messiah] died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3). His use of the word Scriptures here is in reference to the Hebrew Bible.
In other words, Paul is contending that according to the Hebrew Bible, Jesus died for the sins of the people. Could Paul have been referring to the words of Isaiah? “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:6).
Because Jesus was aware that His cruel death was consistent with His messianic role, it made sense not to seek a retrial or to avoid the consequences. He was aware that He was dying because of “our iniquities and our transgressions.” In addition, Jesus was aware that “by His wounds we would be healed.”
For this reason Jesus could shout triumphantly from the cross. His statement, “IT IS FINISHED” was similar to the shout of an athlete as he crosses the finish line. For Jesus, the mission was a victory, not a tragedy. That victory is what we claim when we commit our lives to Him – He died for me. I am so glad He did not seek a retrial.
The Easter story is the story of an innocent man who chose not to fight for his freedom. He had the resources to fight and He chose not to do so. In telling the story, Matthew quotes Jesus as saying, “Do you think I cannot call on my Father and He will at once put at my disposal more than twelve legions of angels?” (Matthew 26:53).
Considering that a Roman legion had 6,000 soldiers, Jesus was claiming that he had access to at least 72,000 angels to protect Him from Roman crucifixion, one of the worst forms of capital punishment in the history of mankind. In his gospel, Luke contends that one such angel provided strength to Jesus before He was arrested by the Roman authorities (Luke 22:43). In other words, rather than provide release from the trial, the angel provided ability to cope with the trial.
Both the Jewish and Roman trials were mockeries and travesties of justice. Attorney Steven Allen analyzes these trials in his book, The Illegal Trial of Christ. Here he examines both Jewish and Roman civil and religious law and exposes the violations that occurred during Jesus’ arrest and trial. The trials were held in the wrong place, at the wrong time, by the wrong people and with the wrong witnesses. Yet Jesus never fought for a retrial.
Earlier in His ministry, attempts were made to kill Jesus. This is how John described one of those attempts: “At that point some of the people of Jerusalem began to ask, ‘Isn’t this the man they are trying to kill?’... At this they tried to seize Him, but no one laid a hand on Him, because His time had not yet come” (John 7:25-30).
John’s comment, “...His time had not yet come”, gives the impression that the death of Jesus was prearranged. Peter, one the disciples of Jesus, was convinced that the death of Jesus was no accident, it was prearranged. In his sermon on the Day of Pentecost, Peter said, “This Man [Jesus] was handed over to you by God’s set purpose and foreknowledge...” (Acts 2:23).
Interestingly, some 700 years before the death of Jesus, the prophet Isaiah predicted that the promised Messiah would experience a tragic death. The prophet went as far as to say that the promised Messiah would be pierced (Isaiah 53:5). However, Isaiah did not say who was the Messiah to whom he was referring. Many Jews are still awaiting the arrival of that Messiah.
Unlike the Jews who are awaiting the arrival of the Messiah, Jesus contended that He was the Messiah. Following His death and resurrection, Jesus said to His disciples, “...everything must be fulfilled that is written about Me in the Law of Moses, the Prophets and the Psalms” (Luke 24:44). It was because of His claim to be the Messiah, first century Jews sought to kill Him (Luke 22:66-71).
As far as Jesus was concerned, the authorities killed the Messiah, and that killing was consistent with what was expected to happen to the Messiah. Therefore, to avoid the crucifixion would be to deny a messianic requirement. Jesus was no insurrectionist, as the authorities contended, in order to justify their murderous act - He died as was expected of the Messiah.
That being the case, one must now answer the question, why was it necessary for the Messiah to die? The apostle Paul, a Jewish convert to Christianity, answers that question in one of his letters: “...that Christ [Messiah] died for our sins according to the Scriptures” (1 Corinthians 15:3). His use of the word Scriptures here is in reference to the Hebrew Bible.
In other words, Paul is contending that according to the Hebrew Bible, Jesus died for the sins of the people. Could Paul have been referring to the words of Isaiah? “But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed” (Isaiah 53:6).
Because Jesus was aware that His cruel death was consistent with His messianic role, it made sense not to seek a retrial or to avoid the consequences. He was aware that He was dying because of “our iniquities and our transgressions.” In addition, Jesus was aware that “by His wounds we would be healed.”
For this reason Jesus could shout triumphantly from the cross. His statement, “IT IS FINISHED” was similar to the shout of an athlete as he crosses the finish line. For Jesus, the mission was a victory, not a tragedy. That victory is what we claim when we commit our lives to Him – He died for me. I am so glad He did not seek a retrial.
Sunday, March 22, 2015
Body Snatching!
Body snatching is the secret unearthing of dead bodies from graveyards. A common purpose of body snatching, in England during the 19th century, was to sell the bodies for dissection or anatomy lectures in medical schools.
In my home-state Florida, body snatching is a crime. The law states, “A person who willfully and knowingly disturbs the contents of a tomb or grave commits a felony of the second degree.” A conviction for such a crime can result in a prison term of up to fifteen years and a fine of not more than $10,000.
From ancient times, tombstones and coffins contained inscriptions warning offenders not to interfere with the contents. Tampering with the dead was a dishonor to the memories of the dead. In addition, the habit encouraged the practice of necromancy – communicating with the dead. The Bible’s description of witchcraft and sorcery in the Old Testament includes necromancy.
In the New Testament, after the death of Jesus, the Jewish authorities found a new reason to enforce this ban of tampering with dead bodies. The Jewish authorities realized that the tomb where the body of Jesus had been placed was empty – His body could not be found.
Therefore, according to the New Testament record the Jewish authorities devised a plan to bribe the soldiers who were on duty to guard the tomb. The soldiers were to testify that “His disciples came during the night and stole Him away while we were asleep” (Matthew 28:13).
The Roman soldiers accepted the bribe, thus implicating the disciples of Jesus. However, nowhere in history do we read where the disciples were charged for stealing the dead body of Jesus. Obviously, such a charge would require the prosecution to produce as irrefutable evidence the stolen body. There was evidence of an empty tomb, but not a stolen corpse.
In his volume, New Testament History, the late Professor F.F. Bruce tells the story of Roman Emperor Claudius and his edict to forbid tampering with dead bodies. This edict was issued within fifteen years after the resurrection of Jesus:
“It is my pleasure that sepulchers and tombs, which have been erected as solemn memorials of ancestors or children or relatives, shall remain undisturbed in perpetuity... Let no one disturb them on any account. Otherwise it is my will that capital sentence be passed upon such person for the crime of tomb-spoilation.”
That edict of the Roman Emperor Claudius has been housed in the Cabinet des Médailles in France since 1878. The inscription is said to have been “sent from Nazareth” to Paris. The writing-style on the inscription belongs to the earlier half of the first century.
The date and the source of the inscription leave unanswered a few important historical questions. For example, why would the Emperor of a region covering one million square miles be so interested in establishing an edict for a region covering six square miles? And that question leads logically to another - was there a presumed incident of body snatching in that area to warrant such an edict?
Students of Church History discern significance in the fact that the Roman Emperor’s edict coincided with a period of much growth in Christianity. Nazareth was the area in which Jesus, the founder of Christianity was raised.
Further, the primary message of Christianity was that Jesus was raised from the dead. Positive analysis in regard to this is that the corpse of Jesus had been stolen by the disciples. The Jewish authorities were in effect more deeply troubled by those facts than historically assumed – the facts that the tomb was empty and that the body could not be found.
What options could best explain that profound predicament? Was the charge of theft by the disciples possible? Clearly, such a charge is fanciful. The disciples were so scared of the authorities, why would they so foolishly implicate themselves? Such a stealing charge would constitute a serious crime, attracting even a death sentence.
As a matter of fact, why didn’t the authorities arrest them if they felt the disciples committed a crime?
In addition, the crucifixion had taken place in Jerusalem, some eighty miles away from Nazareth. Would they have disposed of the corpse in Jerusalem or travel with it for a few days in the Near Eastern hot temperatures? Preposterous!
What would seem to be the best option is the one recorded in the most reliable document of ancient literature – the New Testament. The New Testament writers contend that Jesus, who was crucified, came back to life on the third day following His death.
The New Testament writers further contend that for forty days the resurrected Jesus was seen by hundreds of persons in a variety of settings – in small groups, in personal encounters and even on one occasion by more than 500 persons at the same time.
Logically then, if those records were incorrect, why weren’t they challenged? Or, why did the authorities not locate the corpse and arrest the disciples for body snatching? Nothing like that was necessary because the evidence of the resurrected Jesus was overwhelming and irrefutable.
The resurrected Jesus was seen and heard for more than five weeks after the Roman authorities certified his death and burial. The Apostle Peter testified concerning the truth of such powerfully persuasive facts when he declared “God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact” (Acts 2:32)
In my home-state Florida, body snatching is a crime. The law states, “A person who willfully and knowingly disturbs the contents of a tomb or grave commits a felony of the second degree.” A conviction for such a crime can result in a prison term of up to fifteen years and a fine of not more than $10,000.
From ancient times, tombstones and coffins contained inscriptions warning offenders not to interfere with the contents. Tampering with the dead was a dishonor to the memories of the dead. In addition, the habit encouraged the practice of necromancy – communicating with the dead. The Bible’s description of witchcraft and sorcery in the Old Testament includes necromancy.
In the New Testament, after the death of Jesus, the Jewish authorities found a new reason to enforce this ban of tampering with dead bodies. The Jewish authorities realized that the tomb where the body of Jesus had been placed was empty – His body could not be found.
Therefore, according to the New Testament record the Jewish authorities devised a plan to bribe the soldiers who were on duty to guard the tomb. The soldiers were to testify that “His disciples came during the night and stole Him away while we were asleep” (Matthew 28:13).
The Roman soldiers accepted the bribe, thus implicating the disciples of Jesus. However, nowhere in history do we read where the disciples were charged for stealing the dead body of Jesus. Obviously, such a charge would require the prosecution to produce as irrefutable evidence the stolen body. There was evidence of an empty tomb, but not a stolen corpse.
In his volume, New Testament History, the late Professor F.F. Bruce tells the story of Roman Emperor Claudius and his edict to forbid tampering with dead bodies. This edict was issued within fifteen years after the resurrection of Jesus:
“It is my pleasure that sepulchers and tombs, which have been erected as solemn memorials of ancestors or children or relatives, shall remain undisturbed in perpetuity... Let no one disturb them on any account. Otherwise it is my will that capital sentence be passed upon such person for the crime of tomb-spoilation.”
That edict of the Roman Emperor Claudius has been housed in the Cabinet des Médailles in France since 1878. The inscription is said to have been “sent from Nazareth” to Paris. The writing-style on the inscription belongs to the earlier half of the first century.
The date and the source of the inscription leave unanswered a few important historical questions. For example, why would the Emperor of a region covering one million square miles be so interested in establishing an edict for a region covering six square miles? And that question leads logically to another - was there a presumed incident of body snatching in that area to warrant such an edict?
Students of Church History discern significance in the fact that the Roman Emperor’s edict coincided with a period of much growth in Christianity. Nazareth was the area in which Jesus, the founder of Christianity was raised.
Further, the primary message of Christianity was that Jesus was raised from the dead. Positive analysis in regard to this is that the corpse of Jesus had been stolen by the disciples. The Jewish authorities were in effect more deeply troubled by those facts than historically assumed – the facts that the tomb was empty and that the body could not be found.
What options could best explain that profound predicament? Was the charge of theft by the disciples possible? Clearly, such a charge is fanciful. The disciples were so scared of the authorities, why would they so foolishly implicate themselves? Such a stealing charge would constitute a serious crime, attracting even a death sentence.
As a matter of fact, why didn’t the authorities arrest them if they felt the disciples committed a crime?
In addition, the crucifixion had taken place in Jerusalem, some eighty miles away from Nazareth. Would they have disposed of the corpse in Jerusalem or travel with it for a few days in the Near Eastern hot temperatures? Preposterous!
What would seem to be the best option is the one recorded in the most reliable document of ancient literature – the New Testament. The New Testament writers contend that Jesus, who was crucified, came back to life on the third day following His death.
The New Testament writers further contend that for forty days the resurrected Jesus was seen by hundreds of persons in a variety of settings – in small groups, in personal encounters and even on one occasion by more than 500 persons at the same time.
Logically then, if those records were incorrect, why weren’t they challenged? Or, why did the authorities not locate the corpse and arrest the disciples for body snatching? Nothing like that was necessary because the evidence of the resurrected Jesus was overwhelming and irrefutable.
The resurrected Jesus was seen and heard for more than five weeks after the Roman authorities certified his death and burial. The Apostle Peter testified concerning the truth of such powerfully persuasive facts when he declared “God has raised this Jesus to life, and we are all witnesses of the fact” (Acts 2:32)
Sunday, March 15, 2015
Hoax or History?
Muslims do not believe Jesus died as the Bible claims He did. The Qur’an explicitly states (4:157-159): “And for their saying, ‘Verily we have slain the Messiah, Jesus the son of Mary, an Apostle of God.’ Yet they slew him not, and they crucified him not, but they had only his likeness.”
In commenting of this text, Baidawi, a highly esteemed thirteenth-century Muslim jurist and exegete said: “It is related that a group of Jews reviled Isa [Jesus]...then the Jews gathered to kill him. Whereupon Allah informed him [Jesus] that he would take him up to heaven. Then Isa said to his disciples, ‘which one of you is willing to have my likeness cast upon him, and be killed and crucified and enter Paradise?’”
This claim of the non-death of Jesus is an argument of history, not only theology. The claim is alleging that the New Testament is wrong to state that Jesus was killed by means of crucifixion – Jesus did not die on the cross. Muslims believe someone else died in His place. Among other things, the Islamic claim is a challenge to the accuracy and credibility of the New Testament record.
The implications of this no-death claim is too serious to go unnoticed. Apart from challenging the credibility of the New Testament, the view is suggesting that all Christian doctrines that are based on Christ’s death on the cross are false, in that there was no death on the cross. In addition, the Christian claim of the resurrection is a hoax, in that there can be no resurrection if there were no death.
Furthermore, all the Old Testament references to the death of Jesus were misinterpreted. Added to these would be all the references to the death of Jesus, following the death of Jesus. In essence, the Christian Bible is unreliable, in that it records an event that did not take place. Some Muslims explain this dilemma by suggesting that the Early Church adjusted the records to fit their theology.
However, other than Christian writers, non-religious historians reported on the death of Jesus. Housed in the British Museum is a document entitled, “the letter of Mara Bar Serapion.” In this letter, written about thirty years after the death of Jesus, Mara asks, “what advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King?”
Even the Jewish Babylonian Talmud states, “On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu (of Nazareth), let everyone knowing aught in his defense come and plead for him. But they found naught in his defense and hanged him on the eve of Passover.”
In spite of the overwhelming evidence to support the death of Jesus, Islam is not the only ones supporting the non-death theory. As early as the second century, Gnostic Basilides denied the death of Jesus. He taught that at the crucifixion, Jesus changed form with Simon of Cyrene who had carried the cross. The Jews, mistaking Simon for Jesus, nailed him [Simon] to the cross. Basilides contended that Jesus stood by deriding their error before ascending to heaven.
In the third century, Mani of Persia taught that the son of the widow of Nain, whom Jesus raised from the dead, was put to death in Jesus’ place.
Many Muslim scholars cite the Gospel of Barnabas to support the Qur’anic teaching that Jesus did not die as told in the New Testament. Ironically, those who cite this sixteenth-century source, think they are quoting from the Letter of Barnabas, written in the first half of the second century. Whereas the Letter of Barnabas affirmed the death of Jesus and was considered to be among the most important post-New Testament writings, the same cannot be said of The Gospel of Barnabas.
The Gospel of Barnabas contends that Judas Iscariot was substituted for Jesus (Section 217). This view has been adopted by many Muslims, since so many of them believe that someone else was substituted on the cross for Jesus. Interestingly, most religious scholars will concur that The Gospel of Barnabas is a fake.
From my research, no credible historical source would challenge the crucifixion of Jesus. Many would debate the significance of His death – but not the fact of His dying on a cross.
Apart from the clear and frequent references to the death of Jesus in the New Testament, extra-biblical Jewish and Roman testimonies affirm that Jesus died. For instance, Tacitus’ Annals speak of “Christ, who was executed under Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius.”
In the second century Justin Martyr referred to the “Acts of Pontius Pilate” under whom “nails were fixed in Jesus’ hands and feet on the cross...” Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, wrote that “there was a wise man who was called Jesus ...Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die.”
We need not deny the death of Jesus – to do so would be to deny what actually happened. Unlike other deaths, the death of Jesus does not mean defeat. Rather, the death of Jesus means victory. That is why He gave a victory shout from the cross.
In commenting of this text, Baidawi, a highly esteemed thirteenth-century Muslim jurist and exegete said: “It is related that a group of Jews reviled Isa [Jesus]...then the Jews gathered to kill him. Whereupon Allah informed him [Jesus] that he would take him up to heaven. Then Isa said to his disciples, ‘which one of you is willing to have my likeness cast upon him, and be killed and crucified and enter Paradise?’”
This claim of the non-death of Jesus is an argument of history, not only theology. The claim is alleging that the New Testament is wrong to state that Jesus was killed by means of crucifixion – Jesus did not die on the cross. Muslims believe someone else died in His place. Among other things, the Islamic claim is a challenge to the accuracy and credibility of the New Testament record.
The implications of this no-death claim is too serious to go unnoticed. Apart from challenging the credibility of the New Testament, the view is suggesting that all Christian doctrines that are based on Christ’s death on the cross are false, in that there was no death on the cross. In addition, the Christian claim of the resurrection is a hoax, in that there can be no resurrection if there were no death.
Furthermore, all the Old Testament references to the death of Jesus were misinterpreted. Added to these would be all the references to the death of Jesus, following the death of Jesus. In essence, the Christian Bible is unreliable, in that it records an event that did not take place. Some Muslims explain this dilemma by suggesting that the Early Church adjusted the records to fit their theology.
However, other than Christian writers, non-religious historians reported on the death of Jesus. Housed in the British Museum is a document entitled, “the letter of Mara Bar Serapion.” In this letter, written about thirty years after the death of Jesus, Mara asks, “what advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King?”
Even the Jewish Babylonian Talmud states, “On the eve of Passover they hanged Yeshu (of Nazareth), let everyone knowing aught in his defense come and plead for him. But they found naught in his defense and hanged him on the eve of Passover.”
In spite of the overwhelming evidence to support the death of Jesus, Islam is not the only ones supporting the non-death theory. As early as the second century, Gnostic Basilides denied the death of Jesus. He taught that at the crucifixion, Jesus changed form with Simon of Cyrene who had carried the cross. The Jews, mistaking Simon for Jesus, nailed him [Simon] to the cross. Basilides contended that Jesus stood by deriding their error before ascending to heaven.
In the third century, Mani of Persia taught that the son of the widow of Nain, whom Jesus raised from the dead, was put to death in Jesus’ place.
Many Muslim scholars cite the Gospel of Barnabas to support the Qur’anic teaching that Jesus did not die as told in the New Testament. Ironically, those who cite this sixteenth-century source, think they are quoting from the Letter of Barnabas, written in the first half of the second century. Whereas the Letter of Barnabas affirmed the death of Jesus and was considered to be among the most important post-New Testament writings, the same cannot be said of The Gospel of Barnabas.
The Gospel of Barnabas contends that Judas Iscariot was substituted for Jesus (Section 217). This view has been adopted by many Muslims, since so many of them believe that someone else was substituted on the cross for Jesus. Interestingly, most religious scholars will concur that The Gospel of Barnabas is a fake.
From my research, no credible historical source would challenge the crucifixion of Jesus. Many would debate the significance of His death – but not the fact of His dying on a cross.
Apart from the clear and frequent references to the death of Jesus in the New Testament, extra-biblical Jewish and Roman testimonies affirm that Jesus died. For instance, Tacitus’ Annals speak of “Christ, who was executed under Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius.”
In the second century Justin Martyr referred to the “Acts of Pontius Pilate” under whom “nails were fixed in Jesus’ hands and feet on the cross...” Josephus, the first-century Jewish historian, wrote that “there was a wise man who was called Jesus ...Pilate condemned him to be crucified and to die.”
We need not deny the death of Jesus – to do so would be to deny what actually happened. Unlike other deaths, the death of Jesus does not mean defeat. Rather, the death of Jesus means victory. That is why He gave a victory shout from the cross.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)