A couple of weeks ago, I asked the following questions after reports surfaced about the US military burning Bibles sent to Afghanistan.

I’m curious – will there be riots in the streets over this? Will there be an investigation of who gave the order, and apologies to offended Christians like happened when it was falsely reported that a Koran may have been desecrated at Gitmo? Or since Christians don't riot or issue fatwas, will the US government simply ignore the offense given? And will the liberals who expressed outrage that soldiers might share the Gospel with Muslims express their revulsion at this act of official desecration of Christian religious texts by the US government?

ABCNews reporter Jake Tapper is covering the story now, and offers this question.

On May 5, Army spokeswoman Major Jennifer Willis told Reuters that at Bagram Air Force Base in Afghanistan "the Bibles shown on Al Jazeera's clip were, in fact, collected by the chaplains and later destroyed. They were never distributed."

Today, Christian Broadcasting's David Brody says "the Bibles were burned because the rules on the base say that all garbage is burned at the end of the day. But just asking here; if the U.S. Military seized a stack full of Korans, would they be burned? You think that might cause a little outrage in the Muslim world?"

Indeed, how quickly would a court martial ensue for those involved in burning a stack of Korans?

Seems to me that the time has come for us to move from the notion of turning the other cheek and instead consider that it may be time to look to the words of Christ found in Luke 22:36.

“But now, he who has a money bag, let him take it, and likewise a knapsack; and he who has no sword, let him sell his garment and buy one.”

After all, our own government has seen fit to burn the book accepted as Scripture by the overwhelming majority of Americans in order to curry favor with the enemies of America.

And I'm opening comments on this one, so folks can respond here if they wish.

Posted by: Greg at 11:00 AM | Comments (27) | Add Comment
Post contains 374 words, total size 3 kb.

I wonder, though, precisely what sort of Islam will be taught at this university.

A group of American Muslims, led by two prominent scholars, is moving closer to fulfilling a vision of founding the first four-year accredited Islamic college in the United States, what some are calling a "Muslim Georgetown."

Advisers to the project have scheduled a June vote to decide whether the proposed Zaytuna College can open in the fall of next year, a major step toward developing the faith in America.

Imam Zaid Shakir and Sheik Hamza Yusuf of California have spent years planning the school, which will offer a liberal arts education and training in Islamic scholarship. Shakir, a California native, sees the school in the tradition of other religious groups that formed universities to educate leaders and carve a space in the mainstream of American life.

And may I say that this last point could be the most important. Will we begin seeing the development of a Muslim leadership born, raised, and educated in an environment of American religious pluralism who are therefore open to that way of life? Or are we going to see the development of a radical elite educated in this country, who are trying to mainstream the worst that Islam has to offer (as exemplified by American Muslims convicted of jihadi terrorist activities)? I am hoping for the former, which I believe would benefit both America and Islam.

Posted by: Greg at 11:18 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 244 words, total size 2 kb.

I know I see one.

Why are they gathering?

On Sunday mornings, when many of their contemporaries are taking their seats in church pews, a group of young parents mingle in the living room of a suburban home while their children run around playing games.

This congregation of Triangle residents has no creed or ceremony, just a desire to get together and offer each other support for rearing children without religion. Taking their cue from a primer of the same name, they call themselves Parenting Beyond Belief, and they meet nearly every Sunday, in a city park, an indoor playground or in people's homes.

But to what end are they gathering?

[T]hey share a disdain for organized religion and a desire to rear their children with the tools to think for themselves.

Now wait – they are gathering with the goal of raising their children to believe a certain way. And yet they then claim that they want the children to “think for themselves.” Odd – when one of the children asks a question that indicates they are thinking in a manner at variance with what their parents believe, how do they respond?

For example, when 6-year-old Evan Spiering announced one day that "God created the world," his father, Todd Spiering, answered, "Grandpa believes that. Some people believe other things."

But wait – why are they undermining what young Evan apparently thinks? Don’t they want him to “think for himself”? Seems to me that they really want Evan to hold to their own beliefs, rather than formulate his own.

But then again, since when have atheists been particularly consistent. As another article points out, inconsistency is inherent in how they approach the entire issue of God.

And then there's the question of why atheists are so intent on trying to prove that God not only doesn't exist but is evil to boot. Dawkins, writing in "The God Delusion," accuses the deity of being a "petty, unjust, unforgiving control freak" as well as a "misogynistic, homophobic, racist ... bully." If there is no God -- and you'd be way beyond stupid to think differently -- why does it matter whether he's good or evil?

Not only that – if they actually believe there is no God, then arguing over the nature of God is the equivalent of debating the color of a leprechaun’s blood. What it really comes down to, then, is that most such folks actually believe in God, but want a reason to refuse to follow.

This all reminds me of one of my friends in college who claimed to be an atheist because her aunt discontinued cancer treatment after prayerfully deciding that ending a painful and fruitless treatment was “accepting God’s will”. I’ll never forget the logically inconsistent argument – “If God’s will was for my aunt to die, then I refuse to believe in God any longer!” So maybe I shouldn’t be surprised by the development of what can only be described as “atheist Sunday school” for small children.

Posted by: Greg at 11:13 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 514 words, total size 3 kb.

This, my friends, is troubling – and not because of the fact that it honoring the faith of those responsible for 9/11, but because it is setting aside a day to honor any faith.

Hawaii’s state Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill Wednesday to celebrate “Islam Day” _ over the objections of a few lawmakers who said they didn’t want to honor a religion connected to Sept. 11, 2001.
Â…The resolution to proclaim Sept. 24, 2009, as Islam Day passed the Senate on a 22-3 vote. It had previously passed the House.
The bill seeks to recognize “the rich religious, scientific, cultural and artistic contributions” that Islam and the Islamic world have made.

Now hold on – will there be a Judaism Day? How about a Christianity Day? Buddhism Day? Scientology Day? Jedi Knight Day (hey – the British recognize Jedi Knights as a religion for census purposes)? And where are the usual crew of secularists raising a red flag over this state recognition of religion?

Posted by: Greg at 01:31 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 169 words, total size 1 kb.

I never thought I would be as ashamed of my country as I am at this moment. This is positively disgraceful.

Bibles in Afghan languages sent to a U.S. soldier at a base in Afghanistan were confiscated and destroyed to ensure that troops did not breach regulations which forbid proselytizing, a military spokeswoman said.

* * *

Military officials have said the bibles were sent through private mail to an evangelical Christian soldier by his church back home. The soldier brought them to the bible study class where they were filmed.

Confiscated and destroyed? Why not simply returned to the sender? Why resort to book burning in order to suppress the free exercise of religion on the part of both American soldiers and the citizens of Afghanistan?

There’s another country that destroys contraband Bibles in order to protect Islam by guaranteeing that Muslims do not hear the Gospel and are therefore not tempted to exercise their human right to freely change their religion. That country is Saudi Arabia – I wrote about that a couple of years ago.

I’m curious – will there be riots in the streets over this? Will there be an investigation of who gave the order, and apologies to offended Christians like happened when it was falsely reported that a Koran may have been desecrated at Gitmo? Or since Christians don't riot or issue fatwas, willthe US government simply ignore the offense given? And will the liberals who expressed outrage that soldiers might share the Gospel with Muslims express their revulsion at this act of official desecration of Christian religious texts by the US government?

I wonder -- in the next report of countries that suppress the religious liberty of their people, will the US State Department now include the United States as an offender rather than a champion of religious liberty?

Posted by: Greg at 09:47 AM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 328 words, total size 2 kb.

1 hi all body , purchasing pamelor, 26538, zidovudine, vfuyk, Epivir, 6602, Cefaclor, %DD,

Posted by: Feldene at Mon Oct 5 08:55:06 2009 (Y+1uB)

2 hi gays , weekly weight loss, 84306, herbs for weight loss, yxuhw, antidepressant weight loss, ), high fiber weight loss, pbc,

Posted by: workout for weight loss at Mon Oct 12 19:08:13 2009 (NYD1G)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

And I, for one, donÂ’t see a problem with a Christian minister telling Christian soldiers to obey the Great Commission given by Jesus Christ.

In a video obtained by Al Jazeera and broadcast Monday, Lieutenant-Colonel Gary Hensley, the chief of the US military chaplains in Afghanistan, is seen telling soldiers that as followers of Jesus Christ, they all have a responsibility "to be witnesses for him."

"The special forces guys - they hunt men basically. We do the same things as Christians, we hunt people for Jesus. We do, we hunt them down," he says.

"Get the hound of heaven after them, so we get them into the kingdom. That's what we do, that's our business."

The translated Bibles appear to be the New Testament. According to Al Jazeera, US soldiers "had them specially printed and shipped to Afghanistan." On the tape, one soldier describes how his church in the US helped raise money for the bibles. Al Jazeera reports that "What these soldiers have been doing may well be in direct violation of the US Constitution, their professional codes and the regulations in place for all forces in Afghanistan." The US military officially forbids "proselytising of any religion, faith or practice.

As I see it, the terrorist supporters at A-Jazeera may have it exactly backwards. Chaplains are not forbidden to preach the Gospel, and soldiers retain the right to practice their faith. Indeed, any attempt to restrict either would constitute a serious violation of the US Constitution – and for the US government to seek to restrict sharing the Gospel with locals in Afghanistan or any other country constitutes a material cooperation with the violation of human rights.

Posted by: Greg at 08:31 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 295 words, total size 2 kb.

A rather interesting dichotomy – perhaps based upon the notion that malefactors should suffer the consequences of their misdeeds,

The more often Americans go to church, the more likely they are to support the torture of suspected terrorists, according to a new survey.

More than half of people who attend services at least once a week -- 54 percent -- said the use of torture against suspected terrorists is "often" or "sometimes" justified. Only 42 percent of people who "seldom or never" go to services agreed, according to the analysis released Wednesday by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life.

White evangelical Protestants were the religious group most likely to say torture is often or sometimes justified -- more than six in 10 supported it. People unaffiliated with any religious organization were least likely to back it. Only four in 10 of them did.

Gee, I wonder what they would make of my position – that the jihadis should be subject to any and all interrogation methods until we wring the last shred of information from their brains and then summarily executed with a single shot to the back of the head, using a bullet that has been dipped in bacon grease.

Posted by: Greg at 01:50 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 219 words, total size 1 kb.