King's Letter From Prison

I just finished reading two letters. Both letters were written in April 1963. The first entitled, “A Call for Unity”, was written by eight Alabama clergymen to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The second letter was Dr. King’s reply, entitled, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”.

Allow me to provide the background that warranted the writing of the letters. African Americans were living under some of the most horrendous conditions. Their churches and homes were being firebombed. Jim Crow laws prevented them from sharing with whites in various public settings - their sense of worth was denied.

Civil rights leaders peacefully protested the injustices of segregation. In order to protest, even peacefully, it was necessary to break Alabama’s segregation laws. In responding to this situation, the eight clergymen wrote to Dr. King. Their letter was “an appeal for law and order and common sense.”

They asked for the discontinuation of the protests. They cautioned that the demonstrations were providing opportunities for others to become violent. Hence, in order to avoid possible violence, discontinue the demonstrations; obey the law and resort to dialog with the authorities.

Dr. King’s response from the Birmingham City Jail should be read by everyone interested in civil discourse. The spirit and tone of the letter is a lesson in civility and Christian grace. As he came to the end of the ten-page document (single-space), he said, “If I have said anything in this letter that overstates the truth and indicates an unreasonable impatience, I beg you to forgive me. If I have said anything that understates the truth and indicates my having a patience that allows me to settle for anything less than brotherhood, I beg God to forgive me.”

Other than the tone of the letter, Dr. King’s response was well-reasoned, biblical and sensitive to needs of hurting people. Although he never challenged the good intentions of the clergymen, he clearly challenged their devotion to “order” at the expense of “justice”. In essence, the clergymen were asking that their peace be maintained, as peace was delayed and denied for others.

The clergymen believed Dr. King’s peaceful demonstrations were tantamount to extremism. To this charge, he reminded them that Jesus was an extremist for love. He called for a radical reaction to opposition – “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (Matthew 5:44 KJV).

As though that were not radical enough, Dr. King went on to cite the Old Testament prophet Amos. He was an extremist for justice when he said, “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream” (Amos 5:24).

For Dr. King, the issue was not merely being branded as extremist, “but rather, what kind of extremists we will be.” He went on to ask, “Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?”

Quoting St. Thomas Aquinas, Dr. King contended, “any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.” As such, all segregation laws were unjust – they damaged human personality. “Segregation gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority.”

Here we are, almost 57 years since those letters were written and no one cares to know the names of those clergymen. However, Dr. King’s name and contribution are known around the world – as a matter of fact, to be able to honor his birthday with a national holiday speaks volumes.

In an article on the meaning of the holiday, the King Center website states that “the King holiday honors the life and contributions of America’s greatest champion of racial justice and equality, the leader who not only dreamed of a color-blind society, but who also lead a movement that achieved historic reforms to help make it a reality.”

This week we commemorate Dr. King’s great dream of a vibrant, multiracial nation united in justice, peace and reconciliation; a nation that has a place at the table for children of every race and room at the inn for every needy child. We are called on this holiday, not merely to honor, but to celebrate the values of equality, tolerance and interracial sister and brotherhood King so compellingly expressed in his great dream for America.

As we celebrate this week, culminating with the federal holiday on Monday, January 20, we have much for which to be thankful, much has been accomplished in race relations in America. Let us stop looking to others and ask, what more can I do to help?

Morality & Law

Every law springs from a system of values and beliefs. In other words, every law is an instance of legislating morality. As a matter of fact, because a nation’s laws have teaching influence, law inescapably exerts a shaping effect over the beliefs, character, and actions of the nation’s citizens.

In his article, “Law and Morality” (Christian Research Journal - Volume 21, Number 3) Michael Baunam contends that “those who seek to separate morality from law are in pursuit both of the impossible and the destructive.”

That pursuit appears to be evident with the resurgence of the conversation on the Buggery Law in Jamaica. One newspaper headlined an article, “Buggery Splits Church...”. Both the Jamaica Evangelical Alliance and the Jamaica Council of Churches have been drawn into the conversation. That became necessary because two key leaders from both church bodies have made statements that seem to challenge government’s right to legislate an area of morality.

Does a government really have the right to legislate morality? All laws, regardless of their content or their intent, arise from a system of values, from a belief that some things are right and others wrong, that some things are good and others bad, that some things are better and others worse. For better or worse, every piece of legislation touches directly or indirectly on moral issues, or is based on moral judgments and evaluations concerning what it is we want or believe ought to be, what it is we want or believe we ought to produce and preserve.

Morality speaks of a system of behavior regarding standards of right or wrong behavior. The late Christian scholar C.S. Lewis defines morality as it relates to our behavior on three levels: (1) to ensure fair play and harmony between individuals; (2) to help make us good people to have a good society; and (3) to keep us in a good relationship with the power that created us. Based on this definition, it's clear that our beliefs are critical to our moral behavior.

However, moral behavior presupposes a standard by which that behavior is determined. C.S. Lewis believes that standard was set by our Creator. An historical overview of Jamaica’s buggery law would seem to suggest the same.

The British Buggery Act of 1533, from which Jamaica’s law immerged, was an Act of Parliament that was passed during the reign of Henry VIII. It was England’s first civil sodomy law. Prior to enacting this law, such offences were dealt with by the ecclesiastical or church courts. The 1533 Act defined buggery as “an unnatural sexual act against the will of God and man.”

Jamaica’s “Offences Against the Person Act” refers to buggery as “anal sex between a man and another man, a woman or an animal”. Contrary to popular belief, the Act is against ‘homosexual acts’ and not against homosexuality, which is sexual attraction to people of one’s own sex or gender. In other words, the Jamaican Act legislates against behavior, not attraction.

Consider the nature of civil law. Through the threat of force, these laws constrain or require actions. Such laws are not akin to scientific laws which describe the patterns found in nature. Civil laws prescribe behaviors. Some moral standard or moral vision lies behind all civil laws. They do not appear out of nothing, and they are not morally neutral.

Civil law will not make anyone good. Moral character cannot be legislated. But laws that are just make people less likely to do what is bad for society. And governments have an obligation to do what is right or good for society.

One of the central purposes of the government is to enforce the law. The government remains the prime custodian of people's values. Ethics and moral values have a great influence on the operation of the society. It is therefore true that the government exercises control over the society. This is true considering the task of enforcing laws.

Governments enforce civil laws against pedophilia, paraphilia and other deviant forms of sexual activity. When governments fail to enforce such just laws, citizens resort to their own system of justice. Such failure on the part of governments produce vigilante groups.

The Bible encourages us to pray for governments. Governments must protect citizens from evil and promote good, and we are even instructed to pay taxes for those purposes (Romans 13:4).

An Education in Civics

(by David Barton – WallBuilders)

The Inauguration of Donald Trump was remarkable in many ways, not the least of which was that six different individuals offered prayers, with four of those prayers ending in Jesus’ name and the other two openly quoting from the Bible. Ministers were once again allowed to pray according to the dictates of their own conscience, as originally intended by the US Constitution.

Another unique feature of his Inauguration was the large number of protesters present. Most were Millennials, and while some focused on single subjects, others were still protesting the general election results. Among the latter group, a common protest sign was, “Trump is not my president.” But that statement says more about our education system than it does about those who held the signs. It affirms the failure of American education in four areas: American history, government, Constitution, and truth.

First, the sign was intended to express their outrage over the fact that Hillary Clinton won the popular vote by 2.9 million votes but lost the presidency—an outcome they believed was unprecedented in the history of American elections. Only it wasn’t. The identical thing has happened in several other presidential elections. Shame on schools for not teaching basic American history and why such outcomes occur.

Second, the message on the sign was rooted in the protestors’ mistaken belief that America is a democracy. But we are not. Those who formed our government hated democracies and wisely protected us from them. For example, James Madison affirmed that “democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention [and] incompatible with personal security or the rights of property.”

Founder Fisher Ames warned, “A democracy is a volcano which conceals the fiery materials of its own destruction,” and John Adams lamented that democracies “never lasts long.” For thousands of years, democracies have consistently proved to be a source of lurking disaster—an unpredictable form of government where passions and selfishness can prevail over reason and deliberation.

America was therefore established as a constitutional republic—what John Adams described as “a government of laws and not of men.” Shame on schools for not teaching basic American government.

Third, the “Trump is not my president” sign affirmed their unawareness of how presidents are to be elected according to the Constitution—an election process that mirrors our federal bicameral system. For example, Wyoming has half-a-million citizens, but California has 39 million. So, in the US House, Wyoming gets only one Congressman while California gets fifty-three, and California will beat Wyoming on every vote in the House. 

But in the Senate, California gets only two Senators—the same as Wyoming; the representation is solely by state, and every state has equal voting strength with all others. This is a prominent feature in our federal system. A bill is not passed merely by the House, which reflects the popular vote; it also must be passed in the Senate, which reflects the vote by states.

The protesters believe that only the national popular vote matters. But even though Mrs. Clinton garnered the votes of most of the largest cities in America, she did not win the majority of the states, cities, or counties. In fact, Trump won 30 of the 50 states, more than 80% of America’s 3,141 counties, and an equally lop-sided percentage of its 35,000 cities. The protestors were unaware (as are most Americans) that the Constitution establishes an election system that balances diverse measurements.

Finally, the declaration that “Trump is not my president” establishes a personal opinion as the ultimate measure of right and wrong—that truth is whatever I believe or declare it to be. But the problem with this is that there are absolutes. Jump off the Empire State Building and see what happens. On the way down you may personally object to what is happening, or be offended by it, or even vehemently disagree with it, but none of that will change the results. There is no alternate reality - none.

It’s time that Americans demand that their schools once again teach American history (so students know that the popular vote winner does not always win the presidential election), American government (so they know we are a republic and not a democracy), the Constitution (so they understand our bicameral federal and election system), and absolute truth (that personal opinion must submit to truth and reality).

If we don’t make these changes, we will not want to imagine, much less experience, the horrifying results from Abraham Lincoln’s warning that “The philosophy of the schoolroom in one generation will be the philosophy of government in the next.”

(My thanks to WallBuilders and David Barton for allowing me to publish this article.)

MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.: His Letter from Prison

I just finished reading two letters. Both letters were written in April 1963. The first entitled, “A Call for Unity”, was written by eight Alabama clergymen to Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. The second letter was Dr. King’s reply, entitled, “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”.

Allow me to provide the background that warranted the writing of the letters. African Americans were living under some of the most horrendous conditions. Their churches and homes were being firebombed. Jim Crow laws prevented them from sharing with whites in various public settings - their sense of worth was denied.

Civil rights leaders peacefully protested the injustices of segregation. In order to protest, even peacefully, it was necessary to break Alabama’s segregation laws. In responding to this situation, the eight clergymen wrote to Dr. King. Their letter was “an appeal for law and order and common sense.”

They asked for the discontinuation of the protests. They cautioned that the demonstrations were providing opportunities for others to become violent. Hence, in order to avoid possible violence, discontinue the demonstrations; obey the law and resort to dialog with the authorities.

Dr. King’s response from the Birmingham City Jail should be read by everyone interested in civil discourse. The spirit and tone of the letter is a lesson in civility and Christian grace. As he came to the end of the ten-page document (single-space), he said, “If I have said anything in this letter that overstates the truth and indicates an unreasonable impatience, I beg you to forgive me. If I have said anything that understates the truth and indicates my having a patience that allows me to settle for anything less than brotherhood, I beg God to forgive me.”

Other than the tone of the letter, Dr. King’s response was well-reasoned, biblical and sensitive to needs of hurting people. Although he never challenged the good intentions of the clergymen, he clearly challenged their devotion to “order” at the expense of “justice”. In essence, the clergymen were asking that their peace be maintained, as peace was delayed and denied for others.

The clergymen believed Dr. King’s peaceful demonstrations were tantamount to extremism. To this charge, he reminded them that Jesus was an extremist for love. He called for a radical reaction to opposition – “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you” (Matthew 5:43-44).

As though that were not radical enough, Dr. King went on to cite the Old Testament prophet Amos. He was an extremist for justice when he said, “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream” (Amos 5:24).

For Dr. King, the issue was not merely being branded as extremist, “but rather, what kind of extremists we will be.” He went on to ask, “Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?”

Quoting St. Thomas Aquinas, Dr. King contended, “any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust.” As such, all segregation laws were unjust – they damaged human personality. “Segregation gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority.”

Here we are, almost 44 years since those letters were written and no one cares to know the names of those clergymen. However, Dr. King’s name and contribution are known around the world – as a matter of fact, to be able to honor his birthday with a national holiday speaks volumes.

In an article on the meaning of the holiday, the King Center website states that “the King holiday honors the life and contributions of America’s greatest champion of racial justice and equality, the leader who not only dreamed of a color-blind society, but who also lead a movement that achieved historic reforms to help make it a reality.”

Today we commemorate Dr. King’s great dream of a vibrant, multiracial nation united in justice, peace and reconciliation; a nation that has a place at the table for children of every race and room at the inn for every needy child. We are called on this holiday, not merely to honor, but to celebrate the values of equality, tolerance and interracial sister and brotherhood King so compellingly expressed in his great dream for America.

This year’s celebrations coincide with the ending of two terms of service by the first black president of the United States – what a tribute to Dr. King.

Peace on Earth?

The news headlines preceding Christmas 2016 were frightening – massacre in Germany, major threat averted in Australia, bombing in Syria, Libyan plane hijacked, and the list goes on. None of those events suggest that we are experiencing peace on earth.

Interestingly, the same could be said of the world in which Jesus was born. The philosophical and religious backgrounds of paganism in the first century left a sense of emptiness among many. For instance, belief in the reality of the ancient gods and goddesses of classical mythology resulted in widespread agnosticism.

Many sceptics deduced that the gods were originally men who had distinguished themselves either as warriors or benefactors of mankind, and who after their death were accorded divine honors.

What was aptly termed “the failure of nerve” characterized the moral and religious vacuum that many felt but could not overcome, despite the panaceas offered by a welter of competing teachers, philosophers, priests, astrologers and quacks.

Epictetus, a first century Roman historian and philosopher said of this era: “while the emperor may give peace from war on land and sea, he is unable to give peace from passion, grief and envy. He cannot give peace of heart, for which humanity yearns more than even for outward peace.” As emperor, Caesar Augustus ruled the nations, but could not conquer the human heart.

That was the religious and philosophical world into which Jesus came. That was the world which heard the angels say, “Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace to men on whom His favor rests” (Luke 2:14). So unlike today’s understanding of peace, the angels were not referring to the absence of war. They were declaring God's desire for harmonious relationships between men and nations.

Like with the Hebrew word shalom, peace means completeness, wholeness, health, welfare, safety soundness, tranquility, prosperity, perfectness, fullness, rest, harmony, the absence of agitation or discord. Shalom comes from the root verb shalom meaning to be complete, perfect and full.

That understanding of peace is so different from those who believe that assuming a posture of strength dissuades potential attacks, consequently leading to peace – the absence of war. But peace is much more than the absence of war.

In his letter to the Ephesians, Paul linked peace to a person, and not merely to an ideology. He contended, “for He (Jesus) is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility... (Ephesians 2:14).

Hundreds of years earlier, the prophet Isaiah predicted of the coming Messiah, that He would be sar shalom – Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). Jesus, who Christians believe is that Messiah, said to His disciples, “Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you...” (John 14:27). For this reason, Christians see Christmas as the arrival of the Prince of Peace.

Despite the isolated cases in history of using Christianity to incite and initiate wars, the Christian message is universally known as a message of peace.

Christianity influenced the abolition of slavery and infanticide. In addition, it is because of the Christian ethic that the outrage against euthanasia, sex trafficking and abortion persists.

Because Christians are expected to demonstrate the life of Christ as a lifestyle, we should constantly pursue peace. The biblical teaching is unambiguous, “... as far as it depends on you, live at peace with everyone” (Romans 12:18). Christmas provides tremendous opportunities to illustrate this truth.

In 2015, an estimated $373 billion was received for charities from Americans. About $119 billion of that amount went to religious charities – including churches and para church organizations. That is more than what is spent by the federal government on education or human services. Interestingly, most of that money was received within ten weeks before Christmas.

This fact reminds me that every hour, during this month of December, there is a performance of Handel’s Messiah somewhere in the world. Since the musical was premiered on April 13, 1742, the response around the world has been phenomenal.

George Frideric Handel personally conducted more than thirty performances of Messiah. The millions of dollars that Handel’s performances raised for charity led one biographer to note, "Messiah has fed the hungry, clothed the naked, fostered the orphan . . . more than any other single musical production in this or any country."

In essence, the proceeds have brought peace to many. It is that message of peace, about the Prince of Peace, that continues to bring wholeness and harmony to billions around the world. For this reason, there is no need for anyone to live in turmoil, knowing that God’s peace is available in the Christ of Christmas.

FAKE NEWS OR GOOD NEWS?

When I was a child, anything that was intended to mislead was called a lie – it was not the truth. Some have since described such lies as half-truths, and more recently as fake news.

According to the New York Times, fake news refers to fictitious articles, fabricated with the deliberate motivation to defraud readers. Generally, with the goal of profiting through “clickbait” (Internet content of a sensational or provocative nature, whose main purpose is to attract attention and draw visitors to a particular web page).

PolitiFact described fake news as “fabricated content designed to fool readers and subsequently made viral through the Internet to crowds that increase its dissemination”. While in Germany recently, President Obama referred to fake news as “active misinformation”.

It is so sad when one cannot trust the media, committed to trustworthy communication. It is like we need a campaign for good news. News that is wholesome and reliable.

In a culture plagued with fake news, Good News is always good. That was true for the shepherds in Bethlehem when they were told by an angel “I bring you good news of great joy…” At that period in history, shepherds stood at the bottom rung of the Palestinian social ladder. They shared the same status as tax collectors and dung sweepers.

In reporting the story of the birth of Jesus, Luke says that the shepherds were “living out in the fields nearby, keeping watch over their flocks at night” (Luke 2:8). As second class and untrustworthy Jews, no one expected them to host angelic messengers.

Near-Eastern Studies scholar, the late Dr. Joachim Jeremias, contended that shepherds were despised in everyday life. They were deprived of all civil rights. They could not fulfill judicial offices or be admitted in court as witnesses. According to Jeremias, “to buy wool, milk or a kid from a shepherd was forbidden on the assumption that it would be stolen property.”

One wonders, why would angels choose shepherds to announce the birth of Jesus? They could have opted for the religious or political elite of the day. It is obvious, even with the announcement of His birth, it would seem that the name of Jesus was never to be associated with snobbery and class prejudice - the good news was for everyone, not merely the elite.

The New Testament was clear in reporting the words of the angel – “I bring you good news of great joy that will be for all the people” (Luke 2:10). We are reading this information more than 2,000 years later, and can confirm that the good news of Jesus’ birth continues to have a global audience and impact.

Interestingly, the term “good news,” is a single compound word in Greek. It is the same word from which we get the English word gospel. Hence, the gospel is good news. For New Testament writers, this was more than a play on words. They actually believed, witnessed and passionately taught that the coming of Jesus was good news to the world.

Many of those New Testament eyewitnesses gave their lives in the process of sharing the message of good news to the world. Thankfully, millions have followed them in paying the ultimate price to share with others the message and mission of Jesus. The impact of that sharing is evident, not only in the size of Christian churches, but more so in the influence of Christian values in society.

Even a cursory study of the history of hospitals and health care will recognize the contribution of the Christian message. The same can be said of major universities and education on a whole, especially in the western world.

Despite attempts to deconstruct history by deleting the role of Christianity in many institutions, it is more than apparent that Christianity influenced the abolition of slavery and infanticide. In addition, it is because of the Christian ethic that the outrage against euthanasia and abortion persists.

Sometimes one wonders, where would civilization be today without Christian notions of compassion and forgiveness? In attempting to answer, simply peruse the history of institutions like the Boy Scout movement, YMCA, Credit Union, Salvation Army, Habitat for Humanity and so many others. Serious students of history in civil liberties, medicine, the arts, economics, science and the humanities, often express a sense of awe, because of the influence of Christianity in the birthing of these disciplines.

However, the good news of the birth of Jesus was not only intended to influence horizontal relationships. The birth was primarily intended to bring about vertical relationships with the God of heaven. Jesus Himself said, “I have come that you might have life, and have it to the full” (John 10:10). That fullness of life Jesus promised is both for now and eternity – that is good news.

Interestingly, the good news of Christmas is more than a once a year celebration. It is best reflected in a lifestyle, displayed throughout the year. Agreed, the Christmas season provides additional opportunities to care and share, but it does not stop there. It is a spirit that should influence us throughout the year.

“We the People?”

The phrase “WE THE PEOPLE” is in the very first sentence of the United States Constitution. The entire phrase reads, “We the people of the United States...”. It would seem obvious that the phrase was referring to citizens of the United States.

To determine the original intent of the framers of the Constitution, allow me to revisit the initial use of the phrase in 1787. It is believed that Founding Father James Wilson was the first to use the phrase. Wilson was one of six men who signed both the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. He was the first and most eloquent proponent at the Constitutional Convention. He argued that “the new government should be based on the will of the people and not some distant power made up of the rich and powerful.”

What was clear – the Constitution was not to be influenced by England, or any other country. It was to be a statement of the citizens and by the citizens. From this opening phrase, one can correctly deduce that it is the people who wield the power in this democratic republic.

In America, the power to govern comes from the people. Sometimes one wonders if some of our current narcissistic federal and local representatives should not be mandated to pursue ongoing education classes in American Civics.

Some folks may argue, then why didn’t Hillary Clinton win the election, didn’t she get about 400,000 more votes than Donald Trump? Don’t more votes represent the will of the people? Thankfully, majority vote is not the only criterion for presidency. In recent history, other candidates gained majority vote, more than Hillary Clinton, yet did not win the presidency.

If the majority vote were the sole criterion for victory, the votes of city states would always outnumber votes from rural states. In an attempt to avoid this abuse, the Founding Fathers established the Electoral College. The 538 votes of the college equitably represent states across the country. Whenever a candidate earns more than 270 votes, that candidate would have won the election. In order to earn 270 votes, a candidate would need to have majority votes in many states - in that way, representing big and small states.

Why the fuss? To ensure that the will of the people is represented and not abused. In essence, the electoral process seeks to ensure checks and balances – the will of the people must be guaranteed and protected.

In an earlier blog, I argued that the study of civics in America is under attack. I told the story of hundreds of students who walked out of classrooms around suburban Denver to protest a conservative-led school board proposal to focus history education on topics that promote citizenship, patriotism and respect for authority.

The youth protest in the state's second-largest school district followed a sick-out from teachers that shut down two high schools. Many students waved American flags and carried signs, including messages that read "There is nothing more patriotic than protest."

The school board proposal that triggered the walkouts in Jefferson County called for instructional materials that presented positive aspects of America and its heritage. The County would establish a committee to make sure materials "promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free-market system, respect for authority and respect for individual rights" and don't "encourage or condone civil disorder, social strike or disregard of the law."

When interviewed, a student demonstrator at Arvada High School, said that “the nation's foundation was built on civil protests, and everything that we've done is what allowed us to be at this point today. And if you take that from us, you take away everything that America was built upon."

That sounds like some of the rhetoric I am hearing since the recent presidential election. In a civil society, the most powerful form of protest is through the ballot box. That opportunity we had a few days ago. The will of the people was expressed within the laws of civil society.

The Bible refers to this type of protest as “rebelling against what God has instituted” (Romans 13:2) - civil government and order. I believe there are cases when civil protests are necessary, within the context of one’s First Amendment rights, but this is certainly not one of those cases. “We the people” have a rite to be responsible, but not rebellious.

Two Slivers of Hope

I am among the 82% of Americans who are disgusted with the current presidential campaign. Yes, I am eager for the campaign to end. I am sick of hearing quips like, “Clinton is a crook”, and “Trump is a creep”. One seasoned journalist described the campaign as “the most negative and ‘issue-less’ one of my career.”

Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are the two most unpopular presidential candidates in more than 30 years of ABC News/Washington Post polling. Among US adults, Hillary Clinton has a 56% unfavourability rating while Donald Trump has 63%. According to Gallup, Trump and Clinton are currently among the worst-rated presidential candidates of the last seven decades.

Amid my political despair, I came across two slivers of hope. The first was my introduction to The Presidential Leadership Scholars Program – I wish it were mandatory for all political candidates to graduate from this great six-month program.

According to the program’s website, “The Presidential Leadership Scholars program is designed for leaders from diverse backgrounds who share a commitment to facing society’s greatest challenges.

The program looks for participants who have the desire and capacity to take their leadership strengths to a higher level in order to help their communities and emboldens them with the practical skills needed to drive solution-oriented action.”

The program draws on the strengths and leadership initiatives of four affiliated presidential centers. By including a bipartisan roster of presidential centers – two Republican and two Democratic – and by enjoying the engagement of former presidents from both parties, the program creates a rare opportunity to instill in students a brand of principled leadership that transcends diverse backgrounds.

This executive-style education series creates a life-long network for Scholars from the business, public service, nonprofit, and military sectors and fosters opportunities for leaders to emerge ready to offer solutions to pressing national problems.

The Presidential Leadership Scholars program aims to build a strong and diverse alumni network that can put the lessons of cooperation and collaborative problem-solving to use in a variety of sectors and inspire a new kind of leadership.

I would hope that with this non-partisan professional program, America would never again have to nominate the cadre of political candidates we see in this 2016 cycle. Among alumni from this program, it is most unlikely to hear descriptions like crook and creep.

My second sliver of hope came during my studies, in preparation for preaching this weekend. I will be unpacking one of the key verses from the Old Testament book of Daniel. Daniel and his people were in captivity in Babylon. Unlike America, Babylon was a despotic autocracy. 

It was in that ungodly and cruel context the theme of the book of Daniel emerged – “the Most High God is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and sets over them anyone He wishes” (Daniel 5:21). It was in that context some of the clearest biblical statements of courage and fortitude emerged.

The prophet Jeremiah was addressing exiles in that context when he wrote, “Also, seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile. Pray to the Lord for it, because if it prospers, you too will prosper” (Jeremiah 29:7).

Like Babylon, America is religiously diverse, but not committed to the God of Abraham. We are becoming more interested in eclectic spirituality than in pursuing a biblical worldview – a system that affirms God as sovereign. Or, as expressed in my sermon topic for this weekend: “God Is In Charge Here”! Looking at America today through these lenses, gives me hope.

In his book, The Handwriting on the Wall, David Jeremiah contends, “Christians should be the calmest people on earth. We have no right to run around this world in frenzied activity, staying up and walking the floor at night, wondering what is going to happen. God in heaven rules the kingdoms of men.”

So be calm. By Tuesday, November 8, 2016 we will know who will be in the White House in January. However, prior to and after that time, our God will still be reigning “over the kingdoms of men...”.

I Intend to Vote!

Upon becoming a citizen of the United States, I knew I would earn the right to vote - that right I cherish. Especially now, considering that some 70% of Americans believe that the country is on the wrong track. My vote might just make the difference to stem this downward trend.

Agreed, the political climate is toxic. However, that toxicity is because of the personalities in the presidential race and not because of the issues at stake. To ignore the issues and focus almost exclusively on leadership traits is a distraction. From a recent survey, the American Psychological Association concluded that more than 50% of American adults view the 2016 election cycle as “a very or somewhat” significant source of stress.

Interestingly, the stress is not only among Americans. Stress and curiosity go beyond foreign policy and security. American policies on trade, immigration, the environment and even health care often carry implications for other nations.

I can make a difference and I intend to do so on Tuesday, November 8. However, as I prayerfully prepare myself to vote, I know that I cannot limit my thinking to the two presidential candidates. As far as I am concerned, both candidates lack the moral authority to lead America. To date, the variety of salacious disclosures will make it very difficult for either candidate to lead with integrity.

However, as I prepare to vote, I will be forced to vote for the candidate who best represents the positions which are important to me. I will vote for the candidate who supports the appointment of justices and judges who respect constitutional limits and the authority of states.

I am aware that the next president may select as many as four justices to the Supreme Court. These justices will decide on cultural issues that will affect me, my children and my grandchildren. Both presidential candidates have indicated the kind of persons they would like to serve on the Supreme Court – there is a stark ideological difference. In addition, the next president will appoint district and appellate judges throughout the nation.

As a person of color, I am very concerned that on average, 870 black babies are aborted every day in the United States. Did you know that, annually, abortion among black Americans causes more deaths than every other cause of death combined? Regardless of color, every life is sacred, and I will be voting for a presidential candidate that is sensitive to this concern.
My faith defines me and the Bill of Rights protects my right to practice my faith. I want to live according to the dictates of my conscience. I have no problem living in a religiously diverse culture. I want to be sure that all faith-based institutions are protected from government discrimination. Whichever presidential candidate protects these rights will get my vote.

The institution of marriage, defined as a union between a man and a woman, has served every culture for millennia. Both social scientists and theologians will agree that “the institution of marriage is the relationship that best provides for the most favorable exercise of human sexuality, the overall well-being of adults, and the proper socialization of children.” Agreed, other familial relationships meet similar needs. However, lifelong, monogamous marriage is the best option.

If the above is true, then why demonize this option? Researcher Glen Stanton is correct, “Marriage has no close rival. It stands independently above any other option: singleness, cohabitation, divorce and remarriage.” I am eager to vote for a candidate who shares my passion.

When my family and I came to this country 25 years ago, our privileges were limited by our overseas student status. I was determined to live within the immigration limits placed on us. I had a moral obligation to model to my children that we were a law-abiding family. In addition, I had a biblical obligation to display consistency in all areas of my life. We were deprived of luxuries, but maintained our integrity.

I want other immigrants to have a similar appreciation for the laws of the land. It was good to hear the officer say at my citizenship interview, “We are sorry it took so long, but welcome to America.” I plan to vote for a presidential candidate who respects the process of law and order when it comes to immigration. Everyone wins when we play clean. You now know why I intend to vote on November 8.

PREJUDICE!

He was dark-skinned and of Indian decent. He sat alone on the four-seater couch in the waiting room of the doctor’s office. He appeared stoic, but was well-dressed and was obviously awaiting service. Within minutes the man was joined by a white-skinned family – father, mother and early teenage daughter.

There was just enough space for everyone to sit on the couch. The young lady showed discomfort having to sit next to the Indian gentleman. She exchanged seats with her mother. Even with that change, the father seemed uncomfortable. He then chose to stand, leaving a vacant seat between his wife and the dark-skinned gentleman. Although silent, the family’s body language was very loud.

The family appeared relieved when a nurse invited them to see the doctor with whom they had an appointed. It became increasing uncomfortable when the nurse extended a similar invitation to the gentleman. While in his office, the doctor recapped the delight his staff felt, following the successful kidney transplant of their daughter.

However, that joy was short-lived as the doctor introduced the Indian gentleman as the kidney-donor who saved the life of the teenage daughter. The tension and embarrassing looks were obvious as the gentleman acknowledged the doctor’s introduction.

That online video ably illustrated the heinousness and ridiculousness of prejudice – a preconceived opinion not based on reason or actual experience. The word prejudice comes from the Latin word praejudicium - prae, meaning before and judicium, meaning judgment.

Prejudice usually implies an unfavorable prepossession and connotes a feeling rooted in suspicion, fear, or intolerance. It implies an unreasoned and unfair distortion of judgment in favor of or against a person or thing.

At the root of many of the national social problems we are facing at the moment is prejudice. Imagine someone feeling superior to another because of the color of their skin – how ridiculous.

In less than five minutes one can learn that variations in human skin color are adaptive traits that correlate closely with geography and the sun’s ultraviolet (UV) radiation. Melanin, the skin's brown pigment, is a natural sunscreen that protects tropical peoples from the many harmful effects of ultraviolet (UV) rays. Skin color has absolutely nothing to do with superiority. The same thing is true of ethnicity, texture of hair or physical features.

That kind of ignorance is at the core of our social problems – our ignorance continues to breed prejudice. Racism is one of the outcomes of this ignorance. Like in our opening story, while living with the kidney of a dark-skinned person, you stupidly consider yourself superior to that person.

In addressing the Athenians in Acts 17, Paul stressed, “from one man God made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and He determined the times set for them and the exact places where they should live” (Acts 17:26).

Paul knew that the Athenians prided themselves on their heritage from the soil of their native Attica – but this pride was ill-founded. They needed to know that all mankind was one in origin – all created by God and all descended from one common ancestor. Such enlightenment removed all imagined justification for the belief that Greeks were innately superior to barbarians.

The late F.F. Bruce was correct, “neither in nature nor in grace – neither in the old creation nor in the new, is there any room for ideas of racial superiority.” Race is not biological. It is a social construct. There is no gene or cluster of genes common to all blacks or all whites.

Hence, to ignore these truths is to act on a foundation of ignorance – and that feeds prejudice. For a while, step back and assess the carnage caused in America within the last week. Whereas some are blaming the availability others are blaming incendiary rhetoric from politicians.

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.

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.  

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. 

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.