'76 Blog

('76 Contributor) This evening, for the second time in a decade, I decided to add some of my own thoughts to our family's Seder.  I love to hear myself talk of course, but I’m completely unqualified for actual sermonizing.  Believe me, it’s a bit of a relief not to have a rabbi as a guest this year.  But I do follow the news occasionally (ok, compulsively) and that made me feel a few additions were called for.I gave my additions after we shared–abbreviated for the kids’ benefit – the story of Passover, how the Jews were enslaved in Egypt and how G-d came to our aid -- a story which is, of course, is about freedom -- and before we came to the portion of the Seder involving the three matzos on the table.  I began by asking: Why are there three?  One is are that there are three kinds of people – those who are unfree, those who don’t care about the freedom of others , and those who are free and work to help others become free.We are fortunate to live in a country where, for all our domestic political squabbling, freedom is still a central value.  For the Jewish people as a whole, we are able to count on the State of Israel as a beacon of freedom – sometimes the only safe haven for Jews in lands that oppress them.  And because of the shared centrality of liberty, Israel is America in the Middle East.Just as in the time of Moses and Pharaoh, there are many who don’t want the Jews to be free.  With respect to Israel, the first approach was military.  Israel has survived existential attacks including the Sinai War in 1956, the Six Day War in 1967, and the Yom Kippur War in 1973.Next came terrorism.  Nine years ago, as part of the second Intifada, Hamas launched a brutal attack at Netanya on a Passover Seder much like this one – a peaceful gathering of friends and loved ones – killing 30 people and injuring 140 others.  And if something in my remarks makes you angry let it be this:  Not even three weeks ago, the Palestinian Authority celebrated the attacks and awarded the family of mastermind Abbas Al-Sayed an official, festive plaque celebrating the anniversary of the attacks.  Of course, terrorism is ongoing.  Eleven days ago an Israeli school bus was shot with an anti-tank missile, and a month ago an Israeli family including a baby and two small children was brutally stabbed to death as they slept in a West Bank settlement.But what I want to talk about today is delegitimization.  Delegitimization is the organized –and you’d better believe it is organized – effort to undermine the moral standing of Jews and of Israel – including especially Israel’s right to exist, its right to exist as a Jewish state, and its right to defend itself and its citizens.  Golda Mier famously said, “Better a bad press than a good epitaph,” but today, survival as a member of the global community depends upon the acceptance of the global community.Of course, delegitimization is nothing new – in 1975, the UN passed an abominable resolution declaring that Zionism is racism.  But in recent years it has moved from a fringe tactic to a mainstream strategy.  Some of it is petty – like anti-Israel students at Columbia protesting the presence of Israeli hummus in the cafeteria.  Much of it is small scale – a campaign by the anti-war group Code Pink to boycott Ahava skincare products because they are made on a Jewish settlement in the West Bank – but clearly exhibit the double standard inherent in delegitimization – do CodePink’s leaders seriously believe it is a human rights violation to respond militarily to thousands of rockets being fired at civilians?  Would they feel the same way if Vancouver were shelling Seattle? Of course not, but somehow defending Jewish lives is less worthy.Twenty-first century delegitimization can be deadly serious.  Isn’t it something new and frightening when the government of Turkey supports the dispatch of a flotilla of armed radical Islamist fighters, some seeking martyrdom, with cargo to Hamas in Gaza with the purpose of providing a confrontation with Israel and calls it “humanitarian”?And of course I want to talk today about the Goldstone Report.  This was the document produced by the so-called United Nations Fact Finding Mission on the Gaza Conflict.  I say “so-called” because there was very little actual fact finding.  Taking you back, from 2005 through 2008, Palestinian – mostly Hamas – forces in Gaza had fired about 3,000 rockets at civilian targets in Israel.  At the end of 2009, Hamas launched “Operation Oil Stain,” firing 87 mortar shells, Katyusha and Qassam rockets at Israel in a single day.  The next day, then prime minister Ehud Olmert went on al-Aribiya television giving a final warning to Hamas to stop the shelling – this warning was answered with more Qassam rocket fire.  The Israeli military then initiated Operation Cast Lead against Hamas in Gaza, hoping to put an end to Hamas’ attacks on Israel’s innocent citizens.  After the end of hostilities, the UN Human Rights Commission – consisting of such even-handed pillars of human rights as Pakistan, Cuba, Algeria and Saudi Arabia, decided to “investigate” the conflict.  The truth of Israel’s conduct of its military operation, and I’m quoting here directly from the former head of British Forces in Afghanistan, is this: “During Operation Cast Lead, the Israeli Defense Forces did more to safeguard the rights of civilians in a combat zone than any other army in the history of warfare. Israel did so while facing an enemy that deliberately positioned its military capability behind the human shield of the civilian population. The truth is that the IDF took extraordinary measures to give Gaza civilians notice of targeted areas, dropping over 2 million leaflets, and making over 100,000 phone calls. Many missions that could have taken out Hamas military capability were aborted to prevent civilian casualties. During the conflict, the IDF allowed huge amounts of humanitarian aid into Gaza. To deliver aid virtually into your enemy's hands is, to the military tactician, normally quite unthinkable. But the IDF took on those risks.”  Perhaps no one should have been surprised, but the UN report, which came to be known as the Goldstone Report after the judge who led the team, had a different finding.  It was nothing short of a blood libel: that Israel specifically and purposefully targeted civilians for military strikes as a matter of policy.  Of course, that conclusion was false.  In fact, two weeks ago, Judge Goldstone himself retracted his finding that Israel targeted civilians.  But the damage is done.  The report shocked the world, and led many governments to take specific anti-Israel actions undermining Israel’s legitimate sovereign rights.  These bodies included the governments of the European Union, France, Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, China, Nigeria. Global NGOs such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch used the report as an excuse to ramp up their criticism of Israel.  The damage to Israel’s legitimacy is incalculable, and Hamas and other terrorists and enemies of freedom have pointed to the Goldstone report time and again to incite or justify violence. And, while the accusations bear the full imprimatur of the United Nations, the recanting was accomplished with nothing more than an op-ed in the Washington Post.  Indeed, the UN human rights council spokesman said, "the UN will not revoke a report on the basis of an article in a newspaper.”A great president once said, “freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction” - - and that was never more true than today for the Jewish people.  We must be the people of the third matzo – those who work for the freedom of others.YES – it matters that Columbia students have the choice to eat Israeli hummus.  YES – it matters that Jews in the West bank be free to sell skincare products.BUT YES YES YES –it matters that there is no moral equivalence between disciplined, restrained self defense and the brutal murder of infants asleep in their beds or children riding on school buses.  According to Isaiah,  “I heard the voice of the Lord saying, “Whom shall I send? And who will go for us?”  Isaiah responded, “Here am I. Send me!” But my answer is, send all of us. All I ask of you is to speak up.  Don’t let these dangerous, bigoted strategic slurs go unanswered.  Use your voice.  Say something.  Be firm.  Be loud. The freedom of the next generation depends upon it.

(CCU Student) Recently, I was able to attend the first public showing of “I Am”, a documentary film directed, conceived and funded by Tom Shadyac.  Mr. Shadyac was able to fund his film through his enormous success in directing blockbuster comedies such as; “Ace Ventura”, “The Nutty Professor” and “Bruce Almighty”.   The screening was shown at Denver University (free to all Colorado students) complete with a Q/A session with Tom Shadyac himself. What made a successful director choose such different and dangerous production? After a serious concussion, leading to severe bouts of depression and detachment, Tom Shadyac has decided to pursue a different type of film.  “I Am” is attempting to answer two questions, “What is wrong with our world? What can we do to fix it?” In solving these mysteries Shadyac employs the wisdom of scientists, academics and historians. The result is a documentary spliced with beautiful scenery, inspiring scientific research, apolitical & political arguments and quotes of Jesus Christ and Gandhi lumped together. The danger of this film comes from the base concept which Shadyac subscribes to… ‘We are perfectible; if every person just gets on board with an idea we can end humanities struggles and pains.’  As a Christian this concept is very dangerous.  I understand that we are fallen beings.  We are destined to fail.  But does this mean any attempt to improve the world is to be rejected?  No.  We are to do the best that we can on this earth with the understanding that any good we do, of our own creation, is not impermeable.  The only lasting deeds are those that are of Christ. What I fear of Shadyac’s mantra is that it more proficiently steers people away from Christ’s redemption than calls to immorality and depravity.  “I Am” and it’s ideologies fit perfectly in our world.  If one were to full heartedly subscribe to Shadyac’s progressive call to action, one will never be discouraged by the continued imperfections of the world do to sin, rather one will blame them on the fact that not everyone “gets it” as they do. Now to be fair, Shadyac is very sober and has a greater understanding of the world than much of his future audience, who will undoubtedly embrace his movie as the new ultimate blueprint for humanity.  Shadyac is very introspective, and his movement does focus on individual deeds, resistant of government intervention.  However, having gone to the screening, I was able to witness how quickly the audience at Denver University brushed over that point and persisted in asking how they could start getting everyone else to do this, and how to change everyone else, not for a moment assessing their own righteousness.  The company Shadyac employs in his pursuit of a perfect world is also worth noting.  Noam Chomsky, a true source of wisdom in this film; a man who claimed that Communist leader Mao did not really mean to kill any of the 76+ million Chinese that died under his reign.(Rummel)  Shadyac also turns to Howard Zinn, a documented communist. Zinn, despite being widely discredited and having stated in his celebrated book that, “if you have any kind of a social aim, if you think history should serve society in some way; should serve the progress of the human race; should serve justice in some way, then it requires that you make your selection on the basis of what you think will advance causes of humanity” Howard Zinn is shown in this movie as a Historian who knows best.  Shadyac rounds off his ‘unbiased’ political perspective with the liberal/progressive talk show host, Thom Hartmann. The world is not what God intended for it to be.  Instead of a place for Him to walk with man, sin has corrupted all of the earth.  To ignore the inherent nature of our sin and envision a utopian way of human existence void of God is quite reckless.  An attempt to create a “heaven on earth” by ignoring our nature of sin is a clear subtraction from the glory and salvation that we all need so desperately.  “I Am” makes a nearly convincing proposal for actually obtaining that utopia.  That is what makes this film the most dangerous fill of the year.   References ** Zinn, A People's History of the United States, p. 646 ** Rummel, R.J. "DEATH BY GOVERNMENT: GENOCIDE AND MASS MURDER." University of Hawaii. 1994. Web. 09 Feb. 2011. <http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/NOTE1.HTM>

 If you've somehow been in a Rip Van Winkle sleep and have awakened without knowing what season it is, you might catch on by seeing how niceness is suddenly directing traffic or how smiles surround us wherever we go. (Centennial Fellow) While making my way through a traffic jam the other day, I could not help being impressed by the various driver courtesies. Later, I encountered great gobs of gladness while poking around in a shopping mall. Then, on returning home and scouting out news on the Internet, I bumped into three tales of a giving spree. The stories were about red kettles, the Salvation Army donation containers you see in front of stores with a volunteer ringing a bell or maybe, like a sight I witnessed the other day, a bunch of happy little girls singing carols.  In Louisville, Ky., it's reported, someone dropped a South African Krugerrand worth $1,400 in one red kettle. In Fort Oglethorpe, Ga., the anonymous kettle gift came in the form of cashier checks. The amount was $5,500. It was cashier checks again in Joplin, Mo. There were five, wrapped in $1 bills and signed by Santa Claus. They added up to $100,000. A literary character named Fred, nephew of Ebenezer Scrooge in Charles Dickens' "A Christmas Carol," tells his uncle what underlies such acts, saying that Christmas is "a kind, forgiving, charitable, pleasant time; the only time I know of, in the long calendar of the year, when men and women seem by one consent to open their shut-up hearts freely and to think of people below them as if they really were fellow-passengers to the grave, and not another race of creatures bound on other journeys." Scrooge, we all know, is a bah, humbug kind of guy and isn't buying any, but then come the visiting ghosts, including that of Jacob Marley, his regretful, dejected, deceased former partner. Trying to buck him up, one online discussion of the story reminds us, Scrooge says to the old fellow that he was after all good at business. The death-refashioned Marley responds with Dickensian eloquence. "Mankind was my business," he cries.. "The common welfare was my business; charity, mercy, forbearance, and benevolence, were, all, my business. The dealings of my trade were but a drop of water in the comprehensive ocean of my business!" We all feel that way, don't we, that goodness to others is our business? You don't think so? Adam Smith, who wrote famously, powerfully and lastingly in the 18th century about the power of self-interest to benefit the common welfare in economic affairs, also wrote persuasively and importantly about sympathy for our fellow human beings as a virtually universal sentiment crucial to and forming the core of our morality. We want others to be happy, he says. James Q. Wilson, a superb social scientist of our own era, explores aspects of the idea in "The Moral Sense," arguing that sympathy is a key element in our moral apprehensions, serving as a powerful motivator in some instances, though weak or even absent in others. For most of us, I am convinced, it definitely is there. It is evident as one example in charitable giving that is higher per capita in American than anyplace else in the world, that has been picking up this year after a recessionary decline and that is especially pronounced during this special holy day season.  Even many outside the Christian faith seem to find themselves moved by the story of amazing grace and a humble birth that would bring vast new, loving possibilities into our lives. And with visions of doing unto others dancing in their heads, great numbers slow down in traffic so someone in front of them can change lanes, or drop a few dollars or even many thousands in a red kettle somewhere, scuttling through anonymity any accusation of merely seeking praise. Bah, humbug? No. Joy to the world. Jay Ambrose, formerly Washington director of editorial policy for Scripps Howard newspapers and the editor of dailies in El Paso, Texas, and Denver, is a columnist living in Colorado and a Centennial Institute Fellow. He can be reached at SpeaktoJay(at)aol.com.

“A prison cell, in which one waits, hopes - and is completely dependent on the fact that the door of freedom has to be opened from the outside, is not a bad picture of Advent."  Those words of Dietrich Bonhoeffer, a Christian prisoner and eventual martyr in Hitler's Germany, were the concluding line in remarks at a world religions panel on Dec. 10 by Ryan Murphy, CCU Assistant Professor of Christian Thought.  Addressing a convocation of faculty and staff two weeks before Christmas, Murphy pointed out that Advent is unique for the same reason Christianity itself is.  His talk began this way: One question we were each asked to address was: “What is the most serious misunderstanding of you by outsiders?”  It would have to be that Christianity is yet another variant of religion.... Why?  Because in Christianity we have a fundamentally different assessment of the human condition.  That’s what sets Christianity apart.   The assessment is not that vice is ignorance (as per the classical conception, Plato, etc.); it is not that we have corrupted our revelation, lost knowledge of God, and we required simply a better prophet, a more sound revelation, as per Islam, or Joseph Smith). What’s unique, is that Christianity posits that humankind is unable to bridge the gap between ourselves and God – not just ignorant of how, in which case further instruction would be necessary;  Not just unwilling, in which case a helpful example would be called for.   Unable.  In which case, if this gap is to be bridged, it will be bridged by God himself.    This is Anselm’s conviction – Man owes a debt he cannot pay, God wishes to pay a debt he does not owe – the elegant divine solution?  The God-Man.  God incarnate in the person of Christ, reconciling the world to himself.   Read the full text here. Ryan Murphy - This I Believe - 121010  And have a blessed Christmas, a liberating time in the highest and holiest sense of that word, a passage through that door of ultimate freedom of which Bonhoeffer wrote and Murphy spoke.      

Centennial Institute assisted Bill Armstrong, president of Colorado Christian University, in presenting a world religions panel for a half-day workshop of all CCU faculty and staff at the Lakewood campus on Friday, Dec. 10.  With a theme of "This I Believe," thought-leaders of Judaism, Christianity, Islam, and atheism offered summations of their faith and sparred amicably with each other in response to audience questions. The panel was one in a series of CCU Strategic Objectives Workshops, designed to help everyone in the community stay on track with the institution's 13 core values, spelled out here.  John Andrews, Centennial Institute director, said that three of those in particular would be served by the Dec. 10 program, including: *  Be seekers of truth  *  Honor Christ and share the love of Christ on campus and around the world;  *  Teach students to trust the Bible, live holy lives, and be evangelists.  The panel was moderated by Dr. Sid Buzzell, Dean of the CCU School of Theology.  The panelists were Rabbi Hillel Goldberg, editor of the Intermountain Jewish News; Ryan Murphy, CCU Assistant Professor of Christian Thought; Imam Karim Abuzaid of the Colorado Muslim Society; and Dan Barker, co-president of the Freedom From Religion Foundation in Madison, Wisconsin. For the opening round of comments, each panelist was asked to address some or all of the following questions: 1- What core beliefs define your overall faith or worldview? 2- What variations of belief characterize the major subgroups? 3- What is the most serious misunderstanding of you by outsiders? 4- What collective self-criticism could be made by you and fellow believers? 5- What is the most important ongoing contribution of your belief system to mankind's wellbeing? 6- Is your belief system more in coexistence, competition, or conflict with other systems? Ryan Murphy's position statement comparing and contrasting Christianity with the other three belief systems will be posted here in full, next week.  A complete video record of the program will be up on CCU.edu in January 2011. Below: CCU's Murphy, atheist Barker, and Rabbi Goldberg listen as Imam Abuzaid states, "We eagerly await the second coming of Jesus, who will return as a Muslim."

(CCU Faculty) In a speech on Nov. 7 during his recent trip India, President Obama stated: “The phrase jihad has a lot of meaning within Islam and is subject to a lot of different interpretations, but I will say that first Islam is one of the world's great religions.  More than a billion people practice Islam and an overwhelming majority view their obligations to a religion that reaffirms peace, fairness, tolerance. I think all of us recognize that this great religion, in the hands of a few extremists, has been distorted by violence.” President Obama’s assertion that Islam is a great religion demands further consideration.  Most importantly, what makes a religion “great”?  Before turning to that specific question, two caveats: first, President Obama delivered his speech just a few days before moving on to Indonesia, a Muslim nation.  In the political context, he may very well have simply been making an overture to the next stop on his Asia trip.  Second, this is not meant as a partisan questioning of Obama.  In a speech on September 17, 2001, President Bush stated: “The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam.  That's not what Islam is all about.  Islam is peace.”  A few days later, in a meeting with American Muslim leaders, Bush stated that “the teachings of Islam are the teachings of peace and good." Let’s return to our central question: what are the qualities of a “great” religion?  There are two approaches to this question: one from a Christian perspective and the other from a political one. First, consider the Christian approach to this.  Christian faith teaches that there is only one way to salvation and eternal connection to God: a personal faith in Jesus Christ.  Any religion that teaches otherwise is false.  Can a Christian recognize another religion as “great”?  If the followers of other religions are destined to eternity in hell and permanent separation from God, then the answer is obviously no. The second, geo-political, approach to considering whether Islam is great is a bit more complicated.  It is estimated that there are over between ¾ and 1 ½ billion Muslims in the world. If we were to measure greatness based solely on numbers, then with approximately 20% of the world’s population, Islam would be considered a “great” religion.  However, if we are simply using popularity as our standard, then we can agree that “popular” does not always coincide with “right” or “great”. If we look at the countries who have Islam as the official religion and those that are governed by Islamic rulers, there are approximately 25 countries.  When we add to that number those countries where Islam is the predominant religion, the number rises to 47.  Again, this suggests that Islam is indeed popular and influential in many countries.  But does popularity and influence translate into right and great? Does size and influence equate with greatness?  While it certainly does make the religion impactful, we obviously need to measure the impact to determine greatness.  No American can deny that racism was a widely held belief in American history, and that the racism that existed was significantly impactful on American culture.  However, we would certainly not describe it as “great”. Finally, we must consider what some of the political mandates of Islam and Sharia are so that we can better judge the impact.   The list of Muslim political mandates is often quite disturbing, including: the second class citizenship of non-believers, women  and homosexuals; a Fatwa against Salman Rushdie and of cartoonists who dare to draw Mohammad; the harboring, encouraging and sanctioning of violent terrorist attacks against innocent civilians; etc.  A study done by the Pew Research Center in 2005 of Muslims around the world found widespread support for terrorism and of Osama bin Laden.  For instance, Muslims in Jordan, Indonesia and Pakistan supported suicide bombings and violence against civilians at a rate of 57%, 15% and 25%, respectively.  For the same countries, confidence in bin Laden was 61%, 36% and 52%.  Does this behavior translate to a “great” religion? Not only is Islam associated with great wrongs, but the accomplishments of the faith also need to be questioned.  James 1:27 states: “Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world.” Are the deeds of Islam “great”?  When horrible natural disasters occur around the world, is Islam the first to respond?  When terror reigns, do they condemn?  When women are oppressed, do they step in and stop?  When people of other faiths dare to worship their God, do they fight for this right? President Obama owes the public an explanation of exactly what it is that makes Islam “great”.

If Scripture is authoritative, it should guide not only religion on Sundays, but politics, economics, and academics the other six days of the week.  That's the premise of the Saint Louis Statement, a position paper issued by some friends of mine.  They were concerned about the many Christian schools and churches that buy into relativist, collectivist, and leftist ideas in disregard of biblical teachings to the contrary.  We can all think of examples. (Colorado Christian University, sponsor of this blog, thankfully is not one of them; not in the least.)  The statement, entitled "The Bible, the Republic, the Economy, and the Academy," is posted here.  Those of us already listed as signers welcome comments and discussion, as well as anyone wishing to add his or her signature. 

('76 Contributor) We have been repeatedly and forcefully instructed to believe that, when the Left expounds the Muslims' right to build a mosque near Ground Zero, it's only about religious freedom.  Those who want to build that mosque really don't seek to offend Americans nor to hurt the families of the thousands whom their Muslim brethren murdered there only nine years ago.  It's only about religious freedom, see. Okay, then I have a suggestion.  To demonstrate their dedication to religious freedom, perhaps those mosque-builders could instead erect a non-denominational shrine where worshippers of all religions could celebrate their faith  Muslims, Jews, Christians, Unitarian/Universalists, Buddhists, Hindus, Jains, Sikhs, Taoists, Animists, Nihilists (do Nihilists celebrate?), everyone. How about it, guys?  What could more wholeheartedly reflect your fervor for religious freedom?  Show us.

(Townhall.com, April 2) Dear Grandson: I risk writing you this letter in order to pass along some censored history.  Today’s America of 2050, officially atheist by law, is a very different place from the “nation under God” of my boyhood in 2010.  When you take your first communion in Denver’s underground church on a spring morning once known as Easter, you need to know how this and other holy days disappeared from the American calendar. Our country at mid-century remains the envy of the world, still fairly prosperous and optimistic, still claiming to be the land of the free and the home of the brave.  But I’m sad to tell you that during my lifetime, “brave” and “free” have been redefined so as to disallow any reverence for that power whom our founders called the Creator. Christians and Jews have been made outlaws. So hide my letter with your Bible; both are illegal to possess.  It is only because your father and mother honor the civil-disobedience tradition of Martin Luther King and ignore the ban on Judeo-Christian writings that you can read the Scriptures at all.  How tragically does the noisy complacency of my parents back in the Bush and Obama years contrast with the quiet courage of your parents today.  Again we see how adversity brings out the best in the people of God, as all history teaches.  If believers had been more vigilant for freedom of conscience back in the Teens, judges wouldn’t have dared to rewrite the First Amendment as they did in the Tiernan case. Instead, young Timothy, your generation grows up in a spiritually-neutered culture that has swiftly taken over what was once the most devout nation on earth. Hence this year of 2050 is punctuated by Bunny Day and Kosher Day on what used to be called Easter and Passover – by Turkey Day and Santa Day in place of Thanksgiving and Christmas.  To silence all theistic echoes, even the secular holidays of Memorial Day and Independence Day have been renamed as Peace Day and Sparkler Day. The dominoes began falling with the election of a “Freedom from Religion” activist, Robert Tiernan, to the Colorado House in 2010.  Once in office, he played on the Catholic sex scandals, allegations of evangelical homophobia, and the anti-Israel mood to portray the God of the Bible as civilization’s worst enemy.  His bill branding the Gospels and the Torah as hate speech became law on Good Friday, 2012. A coalition led by broadcaster James Dobson, Archbishop Charles Chaput, and Rabbi Hillel Goldberg filed suit, denouncing the act as “tyranny worthy of Lenin or Nero.” But the U.S. Supreme Court upheld it. The majority opinion by Justice Keith Ellison, the Muslim former congressman newly appointed by President Obama, ruled that “religion” in the First Amendment excludes by definition every thought, word, and action that manifests intolerance toward any species whatsoever, or the planet itself. Legislation and court rulings piled on rapidly after that, first marginalizing, then stigmatizing, and finally criminalizing the followers of Jesus and Moses.  Islam was judicially certified as a “political system,” however, giving it indulgence and then preference – resulting in the Sharia-infected USA of today.  Buddhism and earth-worship also remained free, the one as a “philosophy,” the other as “science.” The times are grim, my boy.  Yet the faithful have survived worse.  This Easter, albeit in secrecy and danger, you kneel to a God who loved you enough to come here and die so you might live.  Your friend Aaron whispers at Passover his gratitude for a divine deliverance from bondage and death.  Down the centuries, neither Caesar nor Satan nor all our own sins have been able to halt these ancient devotions.  Nor shall they now.  Stay strong – Grandfather    

(CCU Faculty) Yesterday while picking up my son and his buddies from a local shopping center, I ran into a student of mine who is preparing to be a missionary to the Muslim world.  We briefly spoke about his experiences on a recent trip to the Middle East and his plans for the future.  While driving the teenage boys back to their respective homes, one of them asked why someone would want to convert Muslims into Christians.  My son’s buddies were not raised in Christian homes, but attend public high school, as does my son.  We try to use opportunities like this to share Christ with our kids’ non-Christian friends.  My response was that if Christianity was the true religion and one which promoted peace rather than violence, wouldn’t it be a good thing to convince others to believe in it.  My son’s friend told me that all religions were really the same, and that it wasn’t important which religion one believed in.  I then asked, if he had ever heard of a Methodist terrorist or a Presbyterian suicide bomber.  He answered that there must be some of them out there, which reminded me what they are teaching our children in their “politically correct” public schools. Are all religions really the same?  Are the teachings of Mohammad morally equivalent to that of Jesus?  Jesus said to turn the other cheek, while Mohammad taught retribution.  Jesus went peacefully to the cross, while Mohammad led jihads and conquered most of the Arabian Peninsula.  Christianity was spread peacefully by preaching, while Muslim armies conquered the Middle East, North Africa, Spain, central and south Asia.  Christian martyrs were thrown to the lions or burnt at the stake for their faith, while Muslim martyrs died in jihads against the infidel or blew themselves up in cafes and at weddings.  Hollywood can make movies like "The Last Temptation of Christ" and "The Life of Brian," Broadway can produce a play depicting a gay Jesus, an “Artist” can put a crucifix in urine, yet Christians respond with peaceful protests.  However Salman Rushdie wrote a few words in a book and got fatwas issued by Muslims world-wide, death threats forced him to live the rest of his life in hiding.  Why don’t these movie producers and “artists” treat Mohammad the same as they have Jesus?   In the wake of Rushdie’s words about Mohammad numerous bookstores were firebombed, as was a newspaper which supported Rushie’s freedom of expression.  The result was that few bookstores even carried the Rushdie book.  Even several British nationals in the Middle East were kidnapped, until the British government handed over the blasphemer. A press release from the Ayatollah Khomeini of Iran declared “Even if Salman Rushdie repents and become the most pious man of all time, it is incumbent on every Muslim to employ everything he has got, his life and wealth, to send him to Hell.”  Throughout the late 80s and early 90s hundreds died in Muslim violence against Rushie’s book.  The current Ayatollah and Supreme Leader of Iran recently reaffirmed to the world that the fatwa against Rushdie was still in force. When Danish cartoonists drew images of Mohammad in 2005, Muslims throughout the Middle East rioted and burnt down Danish embassies and western cultural centers, resulting in the deaths of over 100 people.  Many of the cartoonists now live in hiding.  Last month a Muslim assassin was captured by Danish police in the home of one of the cartoonists, attempting to break into the “panic room”, installed by the cartoonist for his own safety.  Theo van Gogh produced a documentary on the treatment of women in the Muslim world.  In response the imam of the largest mosque in The Hague declared him a ‘criminal bastard’ and called for divine retribution.  Shortly thereafter, while bicycling through the streets of Amsterdam, he was shot dead and beheaded by a Muslim man. Why is it that most Muslim countries have blasphemy laws, some even calling for the death penalty for defaming Islam, the Koran, or Mohammad?  Why is it that Muslims now demand blasphemy laws in Western countries?  Why have many of these formerly tolerant Western nations complied and now limit freedom of speech to their citizens, prosecuting them for “defaming Islam”?  Why is it that I will come under great criticism (not only by Muslims but also by Christians) for even writing this?  I have been told over the years by several of my foreign students, that my life would be in danger if I continued to teach about Islam the way I do. Even Muslims recognize the difference.  Several times I have heard Muslims say, “I am not a Christian who would turn the other cheek.”  One of my former students went into Military Intelligence and was assigned to interrogate Muslims incarcerated in the “War on Terror”.  He told me that several of his Muslim prisoners told him, that if he were a true Christian, he wouldn’t be in the army.  Several times I have been told by Muslims, that Christians are taught peace and submission while Muslims are taught war and conquest.  This was because Allah intended Muslims to rule over Christians.  Scholars often point to the different roles of the founders of these two religions.  Jesus led a small band of Jews, who were subdued by the mighty Roman Empire and put their hope in a spiritual kingdom.  Mohammad was the sheik of Medina, who raided caravans for their booty and became the ruler of a vast earthly domain, imposing his religion on its populace.  Those who continue to insist that there is no difference between these two religions are either deluded or attempting to delude others.